Wikipedia talk:Stub types for deletion/Jul-Dec2008

For discussion about creation of stub types or the hierarchy of stub categories, see WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals. [ Please click this link to start a new topic.]''

Notification templates
I've finally got round to making a suite of templates for notifying the creators of unproposed stub types that their creations have been either sent to SfD or reported on WSS/D. Have a look at Sfdnotify1, Sfdnotify2 and Wssdnotify and tell me what you think. It';s likely someone with more technical skill could parameterise the sfd ones so that only one template is needed, but I'll leave that to someone more skilled than I am. Grutness...wha?  01:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Closing sfds
Hi all - I've noticed a couple of different techniques being used for closing sfds, and wonder if there needs to be some standardisation (it's a minor thing, especially in the second case, but I'd be interested in anyone else's views).

Firstly, I usually subst the sfd top and sfd bottom templates; some other editors don't. Should these always be subst'ed? They're pretty high-use (currently transcluded on some 350 pages), so I'd think it would be a good idea.

Secondly, where does the sfd top go - above the header or below it? I tend to prefer putting it above, the same as on Afd, but again some editors tend to put it below the header. If there are good reasons for putting it below I'd be more than willing to change.

Grutness...wha?  01:09, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm a little late to this discussion, but here are my thoughts: I don't subst, but I probably should.  It's a hard habit to break.  =)  I usually put sfd top below the header because to me, it seems clearer to read.  Also, it makes editing a breeze.  And I definitely agree that we should decide on a standard way of closing things.  ~ Amalas  rawr  =^_^=  20:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

T3 "speedies" of unused, upmerged stub templates
Over at WT:CSD there's yet another instance of the seemingly-interminable debate about presumptive deletion of unused templates. It appears that this CSD-T3 tagging "effort" has again extended to include stub templates -- I'd understood that the main tagger had previously agreed to at exclude these, at least, but evidently no longer. I'm extremely resistant to the idea of running around tagging these as "transclusionless", since where a stub category is populated by several stub templates, it's in principle possible that any one of these might become transclusionless at any point in time, without becoming "needless". If any of you have any thoughts on this, please share them at that page. Alai (talk) 16:49, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Possible problem template
Not entirely sure what to do with this one: Attica-expand. It's formed like a stub template, and acts like a stub template, but it's an expand template... should it be brought here or to tfd? See also a related query at WP:WSS/P. Grutness...wha?  02:31, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Category:Stub types for deletion templates
Consistent with the other categories at Category:Deletion templates, I created Category:Stub types for deletion templates. -- Suntag  ☼  18:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

up for renaming at CFD
Note this: Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_October_17. If this change goes ahead, we should probably change the stub categories to match. Grutness...wha?  23:20, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

and its subtypes
Not sure why, but we seem to buy into the program/programme problem with several of our TV categories. The permcats generally use "series" - shouldn't we? Grutness...wha?  05:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Wrong Structure
The photograph on the Tarn Tarn Sahib page is not of Tarn Taran Sahib. It is a closeup of the entrance to the Harmandir Sahib. Tarn Taran does not have a Gold overlay like Harmandir Sahib. I have photographs of Tarn Taran that I took in Feb 08 which may be used if desired. I would also be willing to expand the stub —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.139.62.85 (talk) 19:56, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Go for it. If you can fix it, fix it. This isn't connected with Stub types for deletion, though, so there was no need to mention this here. A better place to discuss it would be Talk: Tarn Tarn Sahib. Grutness...wha?  23:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Links to a never-created stub type
I'm wondering if I should list template:Wałcz-geo-stub? It's used in about 60 articles right now, but was never actually created (articles were all created by User:Kotbot). Does that make sense or should it be proposed first? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:35, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I suggest it be proposed at WP:WSS/P will probably be speediable. Waacstats (talk) 16:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)