Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/Deleted/July 2005

July 1st

Category:Photo-request stubs (no template)

Template was deleted after a vote on tfd several months ago, but no-one thought to get rid of the category. Grutness...wha? 1 July 2005 00:33 (UTC)

• We could speedy delete it, as it makes a pair with the template. --Sn0wflake 1 July 2005 00:56 (UTC)
• Delete. Unused. --TheParanoidOne 1 July 2005 05:18 (UTC)
• Speedy deleted. Empty category which contains only the discussion of its deletion; template already deleted by means of WP:TfD --Sn0wflake 2 July 2005 15:48 (UTC)

Category:Mariah Carey stubs (no template)

As below, except this one is empty. No articles, no template, nada. Grutness...wha? 1 July 2005 00:33 (UTC)

• Delete. Again. --Sn0wflake 1 July 2005 00:54 (UTC)
• Delete this for sure. — The Storm Surfer 1 July 2005 04:38 (UTC)
• Delete. Unused. --TheParanoidOne 1 July 2005 05:18 (UTC)
• Delete Nabla 2005-07-01 23:09:42 (UTC)
• Delete While a general category for Mariah Carey related articles may be appropriate, there is not indication that there is any need for a stub category on the topic. --Allen3 ^talk July 2, 2005 22:53 (UTC)
• Delete Lectonar 4 July 2005 12:44 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete, surely? This is an empty category. --TheParanoidOne 6 July 2005 16:25 (UTC)
  • Good point - empty for nearly a week... Speedy it is. Grutness...wha? 7 July 2005 09:31 (UTC)

Category:Radio stubs (no template)

Template function was changed, category was renamed - old category name wasn't deleted. Grutness...wha? 1 July 2005 00:33 (UTC)

• Delete. Unused. --TheParanoidOne 1 July 2005 05:18 (UTC)
• Delete. Recycle this empty container. Courtland July 1, 2005 22:36 (UTC)

Delete redirect {{Mormonstub}}

This currently redirects to {{LDS-stub}} and has been orphaned.
Courtland July 1, 2005 22:47 (UTC)

Rename Category:Uoy-stub to Category:University of York stubs (or delete outright, with {{Uoy-stub}})

For obvious reasons. -- grm_wnr Esc 1 July 2005 08:44 (UTC)

• Rename. The template could also do with a rename. Do we even need this category and template? Grutness...wha? 1 July 2005 09:17 (UTC) See below
• Rename to that which is both understandable and pronouncable. Courtland July 1, 2005 22:35 (UTC)
• Delete. I know the proposal concerns renaming, but I don't see the use of such a narrow subject having its own stub category. Plus, Uoy sound funny. :) In any case, consider my vote as a rename in case nobody else agrees with the deletion. --Sn0wflake 2 July 2005 22:52 (UTC)
  • Delete. I'm with you on this one Sn0wflake. I don't see much use for it, either, especially if the suggestion of separate university stubs for the UK and US goes ahead. Grutness...wha? 3 July 2005 00:01 (UTC)
• I'm joining the delete team, changed the title accordingly. -- grm_wnr Esc 3 July 2005 16:32 (UTC)
• Delete. Insufficient number of stubs (at least currently) to warrant a seperate stub type. Also very limited scope. --TheParanoidOne 6 July 2005 16:28 (UTC)

Category:Mariah Carey Stubs (no template)

How many of these damn categories are there? These all belong in things like album-stub, musician-stub, or (in several cases) on vfd. If every recording artist got as many stub categories as Mariah Carey seems to have, then we'd have to start listings like "Stub types - page A-Aac", "Stub types - page Aad-Aaf" and so on. Hypercategorisation at its most ridiculous. Grutness...wha? 1 July 2005 00:44 (UTC)

• Delete, per reason given on the other Mariah Carey stub category. --Sn0wflake 1 July 2005 00:54 (UTC)

• Keep What is your problem in attacking these categories? And many artists like Prince, Britney Spears, and Janet Jackson have their own categories too. I can understand you having problems with the other category, but this category really needs to stay to categorize major articles associated with Mariah Carey OmegaWikipedia 1 July 2005 01:43 (UTC)
  • You clearly have no idea of the way stub categories work or are organised. No artists - not even Elvis Presley or the Beatles - have their own stub categories. It's unneccessary. These items are perfectly well covered in other stub categories. You can have a Mariah Carey category - I've no trouble with that - but there is no need for a Mariah Carey stub category. Grutness...wha? 1 July 2005 05:17 (UTC)
  • The fact that Prince et al have their own categories is irrelevant to this discussion. Stub templates/categories are the purpose of this page. --TheParanoidOne 1 July 2005 05:35 (UTC)
• Delete. Hedley 1 July 2005 21:57 (UTC)
• Delete, as per Grutness. Recat as {{musician-stub}}. Nabla 2005-07-01 23:08:58 (UTC)
• Delete, use a regular category, obsessive-fan-dude. A2Kafir 2 July 2005 20:28 (UTC)
• Delete While a general category for Mariah Carey related articles may be appropriate, there is not indication that there is any need for a stub category on the topic. --Allen3 ^talk July 2, 2005 22:52 (UTC)
• Delete, also Lectonar 4 July 2005 12:45 (UTC)
• Delete as per above. --TheParanoidOne 6 July 2005 16:22 (UTC)
• Delete...for all reasons stated above. And, yes, a few of these (mostly the bios of the Glitter characters) belong on VfD. --FuriousFreddy 7 July 2005 13:50 (UTC)

Closing admin's note: I listed the contents of this category prior to emptying on OmegaWikipedia's talk page -- grm_wnr Esc 8 July 2005 13:41 (UTC)

July 2nd

Delete {{Nickelodeon stub}}

This was a redirect to {{Nickelodeon-stub}}. It is orphaned and no longer has a target as a redirect; therefore it is ... useless.
Courtland July 1, 2005 22:44 (UTC)

• Speedy delete. Redirect to non-existent page. Nabla 2005-07-01 23:13:35 (UTC)
• "Redirects can be immediately deleted if they have no useful history and they refer to non-existent pages." (from WP:CSD). I think this qualifies. Grutness...wha? 2 July 2005 12:32 (UTC)

Category:Hasidic-related_stubs (no template)

It would appear the corresponding stub template has already been deleted. Category has no articles and content states "This will be deleted as the stub template is." (written April 12). --Tabor 2 July 2005 22:44 (UTC)

• This can also be Speedy deleted - empty and deprecated. Grutness...wha? 2 July 2005 23:59 (UTC)
  • Done. Grutness...wha? 4 July 2005 06:48 (UTC)

Category:Whedonverse stubs

Orphan category, evidently associated with {{Whedon-stub}}, which is now a redirect to {{Buffyverse-stub}}. Should redirected stubs maintain a separate category? --Tabor 2 July 2005 23:03 (UTC)

• This can be Speedy deleted - empty and deprecated. Grutness...wha? 2 July 2005 23:59 (UTC)

Rename of {{Egypt-stub}}

Suggested by User:Joy on WP:WSS/C. Currently this refers to ancient Egypt, whereas most "Country-stub" names refer to general stubs about a particular country (a category which Egypt could probably use). To pave the way for that, though, this needs renaming. Joy suggested {{Ancient-Egypt-stub}}, but I'm inclined to prefer {{Egyptology-stub}}. Suggestions welcome. Grutness...wha? 2 July 2005 02:15 (UTC)

• Seems sensible and appropriate to me ~~~~ 2 July 2005 09:08 (UTC)
• Rename and use {{Ancient-Egypt-stub}}. --Sn0wflake 2 July 2005 15:51 (UTC)
• I just used that yesterday and I began thinking it could have a better name. Two names came to my mind: {{Ancient-Egypt-stub}} and {{Egypt-hist-stub}}. As it would be a child of both Egypt and Hist stubs I prefer the second. The only problem would be that it includes both modern and ancient Egypt history. Is that a big problem? Do we have/expect a lot of modern Egypt stubs? If not than this would be a more standard name (thus easier to remember); if yes than I'm neutral about the two suggestions so far (Egyptology and Ancient-Egypt), as they are both standard forms, but I slightly frefer the first for having a single word. Nabla 2005-07-02 19:19:30 (UTC)
• Rename to {{Ancient-Egypt-stub}}. While I may not be sure what egyptology deals with, Ancient Egypt makes perfect sense to me. Conscious 3 July 2005 07:35 (UTC)
• Just use both, pick one for the template and make a redirect, I don't see a problem. --Joy [shallot] 3 July 2005 13:06 (UTC)
  • Good suggestion. And which one is the redirect and which one the direct link isn't that important. I'm in favour of that. Grutness...wha? 4 July 2005 06:46 (UTC)
    • I'm all for {{ancient-egypt-stub}} as direct link; {{egyptology}} sounds to unwieldy, so redirect this Lectonar 4 July 2005 12:43 (UTC)
• Rename to Ancient-Egypt-stub. -Sean Curtin July 5, 2005 23:28 (UTC)
• Rename to ancient Egypt to match the existing category and stub text. Looking at it superficially, to me it seems that Egyptology is a subset of Ancient Egypt. Though for our purposes, they may as well be the same thing (ie. x vs the study of x). --TheParanoidOne 6 July 2005 19:22 (UTC)

July 3rd

Delete redirect {{Drug-stub}} (no category)

The debate about using "Drug-stub" vs. "Treatment-stub" went on a while ago and was lain to rest for that time. It perhaps has come back; User:Happyfeet10 created this on 19 May 2005 without creating a category to go along with it. I did not bother to put this on WP:WSS/C as a found stub but went ahaed and have already re-stubbed everything labeled with the template to the various places where they fit among the current stub types. There might be the need for something to cover recreational drug use-related articles, but this isn't the stub to do it with; the mix of articles labeled with it showed well its ambiguity. Please consider whether this template should be kept or deleted or renamed/recycled. Courtland July 3, 2005 18:47 (UTC)

• Comment. Since you re-categorised whatever was using this it gets hard to know what was the mix of articles and thus to have an informed opinion. Anyway, the names do look prone to be confused. If there is a need for a "Drug-stub"-like stub the name(s) should be clarified. --Nabla 2005-07-06 12:48:20 (UTC)

{{Developer-stub}} and {{MSDN-stub}} (no category)

identical stubs, neither of which has a category, neither of which has ever been used as far as I know, both of which have badly formed HTML, neither of which has a category... Ironically the article on MSDN is a stub, but doesn't use either of these templates. Probably readily covered by Windows-stub. And "Developer-stub" is incredibly badly named (I was tempted to add it to Metol). We don't need either of them. Grutness...wha? 3 July 2005 00:18 (UTC)

• Delete. --Nabla 2005-07-06 12:38:50 (UTC)
• Comment. I would gladly vote to delete these horrible things as they currently stand. However I wouldn't mind a reworked developer-stub to cover software developers. The closest option currently is {{compu-bio-stub}}. The stub name sounds promising, but the category and stub text both refer to "Computer specialists". If you're the developer of Application X, you're a developer. Hardly a computer specialist.
  Though perhaps {{programmer-stub}} might cater for this and prevent people from adding it to ... photographic chemicals ;) --TheParanoidOne 6 July 2005 19:34 (UTC)
• Comment - why not just reword the message on the compu-bio-stub template to include specialists, developers, and programmers? Grutness...wha? 9 July 2005 04:47 (UTC)
  • That is certainly an option. But it would also require a change of the category name. I'll try and have a look and see what kind of effect opening up the scope to "Computer people stubs" will have on the category. --TheParanoidOne 9 July 2005 11:05 (UTC)
• Delete as per Grutness. Circeus 12:21, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Paranormal stubs (no template)

Appears to be accidental duplicate of Category:Parapsychology stubs. Author blanked it after realizing it was a duplicate. --Tabor 3 July 2005 00:47 (UTC)

• Comment: Would this qualify as a speedy? Grutness...wha? 4 July 2005 06:42 (UTC)
• Personally, I would prefer Template:Para-stub to refer to paranormal phenomena than to parapsychology specifically. Either reword para-stub and merge and delete Category:Parapsychology stubs into this category, or delete Category:Paranormal stubs. -Sean Curtin July 5, 2005 23:27 (UTC)
  • Actually, paranormal is possibly a better name, come to think of it - it could then be used for a wider range of related subjects. It may be better going the other direction ("Paranormal phenomena stubs" might be even better). Grutness...wha? 7 July 2005 04:56 (UTC)
• Merge and delete Circeus 12:22, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

July 4th

{{Meteorology-stub}}

I created this stub template when I was new to wikipedia for the Bureau of Meteorology article , without knowing that there was already an equivalent stub category, {{climate-stub}}. No articles link to it as of now, so I don't see the point of keeping the stub category. Graham 4 July 2005 13:08 (UTC)

• (moved this to the correct place) Delete or redirect. This also may be another speedy. Orphaned, and nominated by creator. There's no category for it, but it oddly links into the main Meteorology category. Alternatively, we could turn it into a redirect to climate-stub. Grutness...wha? 4 July 2005 13:38 (UTC)

Rename Category:Historical stubs → Category:History stubs

The vast majority of stub categories have noun names, and this adjectival name is particularly poor, as it make it sound as though these are just a bunch of old stub articles, rather than stubs about history. I suggest a rename. Grutness...wha? 4 July 2005 06:40 (UTC)

• Rename, but there are many other adjectival stub category names... Do we have to take them all through here or establish a guideline and rename them all without further discussion? -- grm_wnr Esc 4 July 2005 07:57 (UTC)
  • I don't think it's really necessary to change the lot wholesale, but ones which sound ambiguous or ungrammatical - like this one - are probably fair game. Grutness...wha? 4 July 2005 09:58 (UTC)
    • I agree that "Historical Stub" sounds awkward in that it implies the stub itself is a part of History rather than the content. While that is unlikely to throw anyone off, changing it still seems a good idea. Maadio 5 July 2005 02:13 (UTC)
• Rename. --Sn0wflake 6 July 2005 17:51 (UTC)
• Rename. --TheParanoidOne 6 July 2005 19:37 (UTC)
• Rename. Robert McClenon 21:20, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
• Rename Circeus 00:34, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
• Rename alfrin 20:24, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Found this comment on Category:Stub categories for deletion:

---

I think Category Historical stubs is worth keeping. Ann O'nyme 04:50, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

---

-- grm_wnr Esc 23:43, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

July 5th

{{Folk-stub}} / Category:Folklore and legend stubs

As stated on WP:WSS/': {{Folk-stub}} is a new one that seems to almost exactly duplicate the existing {{myth-stub}}. It also has a very poorly worded template: "This legendary folklore is a stub." (I bet it's the article, rather than the folklore, that's the stub!). The only article it was on is Bilocation which had an amazing five stub templates on it (despite our guidelines of "no more than two") - christianity-stub, para-stub, Newage-stub, Folk-stub, and - inexplicably - Iceland-geo-stub. It now has para-stub and myth-stub... The template name's not brilliant, either. Further, if myth-stub was going to be split, then splitting it between "mythology" and "folklore and legends" would not make for an easy, clear-cut division. Far better by culture, I would suspect. Grutness...wha? 5 July 2005 02:12 (UTC)

• Myth-stub desperately needs splitting, but this distinction is not very helpful. Delete or redirect. -Sean Curtin July 5, 2005 23:23 (UTC)

{{Forteana-stub}} / Category:Forteana stubs

Barely used. Redundant with Template:Para-stub (paranormal-related stubs). -Sean Curtin July 5, 2005 23:23 (UTC)

• Delete. Little used, and overlap with existing stub type. Non-intuitive (at least to me) name. OK, para might not be all that intuitive either, but at least the stub text expands the word. --TheParanoidOne 6 July 2005 19:44 (UTC)
• Oh get rid of the thing. Please. Grutness...wha? 9 July 2005 10:39 (UTC)
• Delete. Despite being a keen Fortean, I don't see the need for a specialist stub. Paranormal may not have exactly the same meaning, but it's close enough. — PhilHibbs | talk

July 6th

{{Slang-stub}} (no specific category to delete)

used on no articles. Duplicates {{Vocab-stub}}. Simply feeds into Category:Slang.

• Sombody has recently removed this stub from articles because I've used it to tag several articles in the last couple of days. I'm sure that there are easily 50-100 stubs that are slang, not including the slang that in other areas like internet slang. BlankVerse ∅ 09:40, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
  • I removed it from the one solitary article that was in its "what links here" list (Munchies, IIRC), because I thought it should have gone somewhere with a specific category, and it was as much a vocab-stub as a slang-stub). If you stubbed more than one, then someone else must have moved the others. If you think it's worth keeping, then feel free to add (*keep) next to this section title, though - there are enough stub types on this list that even if half of them are wanted by someone there will still be five to take over to tfd next week. Grutness...wha? 14:43, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Comment: "What links here" shows 7 articles at present. -- grm_wnr Esc 6 July 2005 12:50 (UTC)

• Delete. Slang per se belongs on Wiktionary not here. When the expression is expandable to a full article, it is so because it is related to some other field. The few still in this cat could easily go to Sex-, Law-, Compu-, etc. - Nabla 2005-07-08 01:49:44 (UTC)

July 7th

{{Transformers-stub}} / Transformer stubs

The following is from WP:WSS/C:

Oh dear. This is a bit of a mess. It seems to have been done by a new user who doesn't yet fully understand how templates and categories work.

• Created today and added to WP:WSS/ST today (as {{Transfomer-stub}}, so you won't get to the template from there) by User:MistaTee.
• Template contains just a link to an article.
• Category contains zero items.
• Category contains text that would typically appear in the stub template.

--TheParanoidOne 29 June 2005 20:31 (UTC)

• What's more, it was used on two articles, one of which definitely wasn't a stub (I've null-edited the other so at least it's in the category now). I'm adding a delete vote to this call. Grutness...wha? 7 July 2005 09:21 (UTC)
• crap Delete Lectonar 7 July 2005 10:08 (UTC)
• Delete as per my comments above. I left a comment of the person's talk page but they didn't comment at WP:WSS/C. I've left another one regarding this nomination, but I don't expect anything to come of it. --TheParanoidOne 7 July 2005 20:18 (UTC)
• Delete the existing template, but there is use for a Transformers stub. Many Transformers-related articles, particularly those about characters with minor or non-existing cartoon roles, are very short. {{toys-stub}} or {{cartoon-stub}} is too general to cover them. — JIP | Talk 8 July 2005 11:03 (UTC)
  • Couldn't minor characters be merged in with more substantial articles? --TheParanoidOne 8 July 2005 12:20 (UTC)
    • Thay could and, IMO, they should, as per Wikipedia:Fiction. - Nabla 2005-07-08 13:33:55 (UTC)
• Delete. — PhilHibbs | talk 12:48, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

July 8th

{{professor-stub}} / Category:Professor stubs

Copied across from WP:WSS/C:

Both created by User:JarlaxleArtemis today and added to Category:People stubs. Category contains approximately 30 articles. --TheParanoidOne 09:03, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This stub was mentioned in Archive 8. --TheParanoidOne 09:08, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

...it is a very unfortunate name, since the title varies from country to country (here in NZ, it is one step below head of department, and about five above lecturer - I believe the opposite is the case in the US). In any case, anything it covers would almost certainly be covered by {{academic-bio-stub}}, surely? Grutness...wha? 09:25, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Indeed. In fact, I think that was the conclusion reached in the archived discussion. --TheParanoidOne 09:47, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As a sidenote, I tried to nominate the hardly used Category:Professors (it has some names in it, but compared to everybody who could theoretically qualify, it's nothing) and its subcategories for deletion a while ago, but failed to convince anybody of its utter uselessness (of which I am still convinced). Academics are better categorized according to academic disciplines, and the same organizational principle is valid for bio-stubs. Uppland 19:31, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - for the reasons given above. Academic-bio-stub does the same job better. Grutness...wha? 8 July 2005 08:49 (UTC)
• Delete. Uppland 8 July 2005 17:01 (UTC)
• Delete in favor of academic-bio-stub etc. --Joy [shallot] 10:36, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

July 9th

Canada province geo redirects (relisted)

...meaning {{Canada-AB-geo-stub}}), {{Canada-BC-geo-stub}}, {{Canada-ON-geo-stub}} and {{Canada-QC-geo-stub}}. The first two were nominated by Courtland a week ago, and didn't get any votes apart from a keep from Grutness, who later changed to abstain. I was about to delete these two, when I noticed the other two. I'm relisting them for further comments on all four of them , since there is little sense in keeping one half and not the other. The old discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/Not deleted/July 2005. No vote myself, but I think delete from Courtland can be assumed. -- grm_wnr Esc 20:15, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete all of them! I don't see who in their right mind would use such complicated templates name, even though the redirects made sense. Circeus 00:41, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. They aren't being used, and we have serviceable templates already in {{Ontario-geo-stub}} et al. Mindmatrix 17:38, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: The original proposal is explained here, and as can be seen there was enthusiasm for these being the main names for the stubs, although I argued against it because the codes aren't widely known by non-Canadians. I'm equivocal as to whether these stay or go (I far prefer the Province-geo-stub format) - but has someone seen fit to tell the Canada WikiProject about the proposed deletions? Grutness...wha? 06:34, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: I would also argue for the deletion of {{BrColumbia-geo-stub}}; when I sorted the Canada-geo-stubs, I used {{BritishColumbia-geo-stub}} exclusively. Note that the latter currently redirects to the former. Mindmatrix 17:38, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Heh. meanwhile, I would argue for the deletion of {{BritishColumbia-geo-stub}}, since I use {{BrColumbia-geo-stub}} exclusively. It's unambiguous and shorter. I'm very happy that the longer name redirects to the shorter!. Grutness...wha? 01:27, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • I, of course, agree with Mindmatrix. Who would intuitively use an unknown, neologistic abbreviation like BrColumbia? The commonly used name for the province in speech and print is BC. It has been argued that this is ambiguous, though I don't know with what. If so, BritishColumbia is the only other logical choice. Does it really matter if they both exist and direct to the same stub notice, though? DoubleBlue (Talk) 08:09, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Perhaps that's so in Canada, but I've only ever heard it referred to as British Columbia, which is normally written Br. Columbia. Hence the stub name. But BritishColumbia does also exist as a stub name, and I;m quite happy to see both kept. Grutness...wha? 12:15, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
• Weak delete. I don't know that anyone would use these one as there's not a big advantage in typing the redirect template as Ontario and Alberta are actually less typing than Canada-XX and it's quite true that the American-style postal abbreviations are not well-known in Canada (or elsewhere). DoubleBlue (Talk) 08:09, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • If someone can argue that they would use them or they are part of a project for standard redirects, I would change to keep. I can see how typing {{PrinceEdwardIsland-geo-stub}} or {{NewfoundlandandLabrador-geo-stub}} would be a pain. DoubleBlue (Talk) 08:15, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
    • I think a good argument for the deletion can be found in the original discussion about making them. We were quite merrily about to make Canada-QB-geo-stub and Canada-AL-geo-stub until someone pointed out that we had the abbreviations wrong! As to the two cases you mentioned, both have obvious shortenings PEI and Newfoundland, although the latter may cause some protests. In the case of PEI it's highly unlikely that a category will be needed, at least in the short term - there are currently only six stubs from there. (Note that discussion on a N&L stub and a Maritimes stub for NS, NB and PEI is currently underway at WP:WSS/C - please feel free to join the discussion! Grutness...wha? 08:23, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete No articles.inigmatus 21:56, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

July 10th

Rename Category:Academic-bio-stub → Category:Academic biography stubs

"Academic biography stubs" is admittedly clunky, but at least less so than the current, which left me blinking after I put the template on an article. I wouldn't object at all to something better. —Cryptic (talk) 02:00, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

• Rename In this case, I think you can just ask an admin directly. Circeus 14:04, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
• It should be renamed that way, but you need assistance either from a bot (ugly) or from someone with SQL access in order to be able to update the hundreds of old category listings. --Joy [shallot] 21:32, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Actually, since the cat is added through the stub tempalte {{academic-bio-stub}}, there is no need for admin access to change it. Circeus 21:19, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
  • I've written some javascript to simplify the null edits, so that's not a problem. Since I nominated this, though, I'm waiting on someone else to change the template. —Cryptic (talk) 05:47, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

{{biz-stub}} / Category:Business stubs / redirect {{business-stub}}

Didn't we just delete this? Yes, {{business-stub}} has been recreated, this time as a redirect to the month-old {{biz-stub}}, which is actually formed correctly and even has a non-empty and existing category. But still... I'm not speedying business-stub, because if we keep biz-stub it's quite justified. On the other hand, we deleted it and didn't clean it up, so I guess it's not needed under another name as well. For that reason I'm listing it here right away and not under "Newly-discovered stubs". -- grm_wnr Esc 01:36, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

I'd have started by redirecting biz-stub to business-stub, then deleting the horrible biz-stub. But as it's already been deleted and we've got other stubs that do the same job, then deleting the lot is far better. Someone should have a word with the creator of this thing, too. There were five stubs with this template, but they were all econ-stubs or corp-stubs. Grutness...wha? 06:23, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

• Merge with business-stub Move biz to business-stub. My vote will be to keep business-stub if and only if more than 10 articles can be found to support it. Otherwise, my vote is to abstain on business-stub. inigmatus 21:58, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep business-stub and merge "biz-" into it. More than 10 will be then. mikka (t) 18:01, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep business-stub and merge "biz-stub". Do need a stub for business concepts. WpZurp 18:32, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

July 11th

{{Fire Emblem-stub}} (no category)

Moved from WP:TFD. Dragons flight 05:58, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

This stub notice applies to no known articles except fire emblem cruft that should be merged with the main game page, as there is very little info about (most of) the individual characters in the game as opposed to some other series.--Zxcvbnm 02:51, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Delete--Zxcvbnm 02:51, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

• Ridiculous - delete. Currently used on seven articles, but you wouldn't know it, because there is no category. Name is malformed, too. BTW, this wasn't on sfd-current - it is now. Grutness...wha? 06:10, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, niche. --Sn0wflake 07:34, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delte; even considered all the different games of fire emblem which currently exist, there is simply not enough growing potential for this stub-category; we don't even have something like a D&D or Final Fantasy stub Lectonar 08:37, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Well... actually... since you mentioned it... {{Final Fantasy-stub}}. --Sn0wflake 08:50, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
• Do not delete, there is category. That stub template was made for a reason. It was not just used in individual characters. It was also used in archetypes and classes. There are possible categories in Fire Emblem. I am the one who started the main Fire Emblem article and brought Fire Emblem to Wikipedia. I am the main editor of the Fire Emblem category of Wikipedia. Decimus Tedius Regio Zanarukando 05:59, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Do we really need this? Some of the classes, as valkyrie, general,swordmaster, even dancer... are not exclusively ued by Fire Embelm, but are sort of endemic to role-playing/gaming in general Lectonar 08:37, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Thx, I seem to be losing the overview (or my mind?) here, sorry about that...but now I want my {{D&D-stub}};-) Lectonar 09:43, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Two comments - 1) DTRZ's comments sound like those of another wikipedian who doesn't realise the difference in usage or criterion for creation between standard categories and stub categories; 2) over at WP:WSS/C there is a small discussion about the daftly named FR-stub about the usefulness of an RPG-stub. If that is formally proposed and created it may be of use as a replacement for both FR-stub and Fire Engine-stub or whatever it's called, as well as providing your D&D stubs with somewhere to go. :) Grutness...wha? 10:05, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - WTF is Fire Emblem, and why should I care? — PhilHibbs | talk 12:42, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • See here, and as for why you should care: why should you vote? :) Lectonar 12:14, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

---

NOTE: For some reason, the votes above had been divided up into "mentioned objections" (all of which were votes for deletion and therefore not objections at all) and "mentioned counter-objections" (one of which was a vote to keep, and therefore an objection, and the other two of which were simply comments). For the sake of lucidity, I have put the votes back into a more understandable order (i.e., the same way all the other votes on SFD, CFD, VFD and TFD are arranged). Grutness...wha? 12:39, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

{{Irc-stub}}/ Category:IRC stubs

Only contains one article and has very low likelihood of expanding. --YixilTesiphon 02:15, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

• 4 articles, actually. --TheParanoidOne 05:40, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
• Still a likely candidate for deletion though. BTW - I just moved this to the right place on the page, added the category name and added the sfd template to it, and altered sfd-current. Please follow the instructions at the top of the page! The category, BTW, does not have any parent categories, and the wording at the top of it is strange, to say the least. Grutness...wha? 12:12, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • I couldn't seem to find said category. And, it was July 10 here when I posted it...(I cannot get Wikipedia to cooperate with me on editing here. I have to submit everything twice or thrice.) --YixilTesiphon 14:17, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
    • Sorry for being a grouch. Seems there are a lot of entries on this page that have had to be tidied up lately, that's all. I'm afraid you copped the cumulative grumpiness from that :/ Grutness...wha? 23:55, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete or Merge Although I think it is better to delete than to merge. --Exir Kamalabadi | Contributions 03:56, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and move articles to parent. Circeus 21:21, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

July 14th

{{anti-semitism-stub}}

Created over two months ago, and never used. No category either. Grutness...wha? 11:20, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. — PhilHibbs | talk 12:38, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. This stub template isn't used. In addition the definition of Anti-semitism is sometimes disputed and the use of this template could lead to some POV. 500LL 13:40, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
• DeleteCirceus 12:20, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete alfrin 20:26, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

{{Halifax College-stub}} (no category)

Totally unneccessary. If every college gets its own stub, well never keep up. How many stubs could one college have, anyway? Note too that the University of York stub type was deleted recently - Halifax College is but one college in that university. Strangely, the edit histories are different. it might be worth looking around to see if any other U.o.Y. colleges have their own stub categories... Grutness...wha? 08:05, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete I think stubs should have some sort of universality. The more granular a stub becomes, the more useless it becomes. Denni☯ 19:00, 2005 July 17 (UTC)
• Delete. Most of the articles this is on are likely to end up being deleted, anyway. -Aranel ("Sarah") 00:02, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, narrow scope. --Sn0wflake 00:07, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Unnecessary level of granularity. --TheParanoidOne 05:45, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Lectonar 06:36, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Stub is to specific, next alfrin 20:22, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Rugby stubs

For some reason this was created for stubs for the separate sports of Rugby union and Rugby league. There are no articles and all this category does is to hold Category:Rugby union stubs and Category:Rugby league stubs subcategories. These subcats are well used but are already subcats of Rugby union and Rugby league respectively, you can already access Category:Rugby union stubs and Category:Rugby league stubs with two clicks from Category:Rugby and so this won't change if this stub cat bites the dust.GordyB 08:15, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

• This is an artefact of the time when both sports were covered by one stub. someone must've forgotten to delete this when it was changed... should be no problem now (may even be a speedy delete) Grutness...wha? 08:49, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

• Oddly Category:Rugby union stubs predates it by a long time though Category:Rugby league stubs does not.GordyB 09:34, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

• Basically, there was rugby-stub (mostly league). Someone else created rugbyunion-stub. So rugby-stub was changed to rugbyleague-stub and the few RU articles which had had the rugby-stub template were reassigned. And it looks like it was me who forgot to have this category deleted (blush). See [[1]] for full gory (and confusing) details. Grutness...wha? 11:32, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

July 15th

Category:Computer Specialist Stubs

On WP:CFD this would be a speedy rename candidate to Category:Computer specialist stubs, I presume it is here, too... --Joy [shallot] 16:36, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Well... 144 article is a lot. If anybody has the pacience to actually recat them all, go ahead and vote delete. --Sn0wflake 05:50, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Actually this is not an issue of manual labor. A single SQL query could accomplish the rename in one fell swoop. However, it requires someone with access to the database. --Joy [shallot] 11:21, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

...in which case, there's no reason for me not to support the proposed change (assuming you can find someone who can do the SQL business). Grutness...wha? 07:40, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

• obvious Rename Circeus 21:24, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Rename. --Kbdank71 14:09, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Sorry, didn't see this was old business. As this is already listed at CfD and there are no objections here, I'll take care of it there. --Kbdank71 14:11, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

July 18th

{{AR-geo-stub}} (redirect)

While we've been busily trying to remove all the ISO digraphs from country names, for fear of confusion, onvernight someone decided to create this as a redirect to Arizona Arkansas Aruba Armenia {{Argentina-geo-stub}}. Grutness...wha? 01:30, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

while I am working on content and everybody in Argentina knows AR because it is the TLD of that country some people think US-geo-stub is fine and AR is not. Do you want to help editors of Argentine geography? Arizona and Arkansas can only be ideas of US-centric people as can be seen in company articles where it is common to write Cityname, TX. This is not US wikipedia. argentina is a long word, has lot of geographic features .... Aruba is nothing compared with that. I changed it into redirect, afaik it's better for performance Tobias Conradi (Talk) 01:50, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Amazing! I'm almost constantly being accused of being anti-US on Wikipedia - you're the first person ever to do the opposite! AR is known by everyone in Argentina... and by virtually no-one elsewhere. Of course we want to help editors of Argentinna's geography - therwise we wouldn't have made the perfectly reasonable Argentina-geo-stub. As for TX, note that we use "Texas-stub", not "TX-stub", since we don't use the ISO codes in stub sorting unless there can be no doubt about what's being referred to. And using redirects is never better for performance. That's why so many of them end up on sfd. Nine letters isn't so long - consider that we also have names NorthCarolina-geo-stub, deliberately so as to avoid using codes that are predominantly only known in one country. Grutness...wha? 05:20, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I would not like to type Argentina every time I create a stub. What is wrong with redirect? It's not some funny code, it's actually ISO 3166-1 - see there, where this standard is used Tobias Conradi (Talk) 01:56, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

That's what copy and paste was created for. May I also draw your attention to the comment at the top of the page When voting, please try to give a more substantial reason than simply "I like it/find it useful" or "I dislike it/don't find it useful" Grutness...wha? 00:45, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

To Tobias Conradi: I cannot help but feel that you are are acting on some bad faith on this matter. "I would not like to type Argentina every time I create a stub". I mean, seriously, you are implying that the guidelines the project has been used for so long should be dropped just because you don't feel like typing nine letters? Please use a little more tact here. --Sn0wflake 22:35, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. It does not even save nine letters, only seven! Nabla 01:58, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, uselessly confusing and ambiguous. Circeus 21:28, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per above. --TheParanoidOne 05:49, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

July 21st

rename of Category:Cayman stubs

Not crocodiles, but the Cayman Islands. Assuming this slim category is kept (which I'm ambivalent about) I propose renaming to Category:Cayman Islands stubs to reduce ambiguity. Grutness...wha? 00:52, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

• Rename. Since the official name includes Islands. Nabla 01:54, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
• A simple case of renameCirceus 21:30, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Rename, as suggested. --TheParanoidOne 05:42, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

July 23rd

{{VRC-Stub}} / Virtual reality community stubs

Created by Sgeo on 27th Dec 2004. Used by only two articles at time of article creation (27 Dec 04 and 12 Feb 05). --TheParanoidOne 12:01, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

• (Late entry, but maybe we don't have to relist it then) Delete, near empty and never was full, and very (too?) specific. -- grm_wnr Esc 22:44, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

July 27th

{{acc-stub}}

On 24th July, User:Renata3 moved {{accounting-stub}} to {{acc-stub}} because "Accounting is just too long." (See my talk page for the complete reasoning). I have reversed this and acc-stub now remains as a redirect. It is not used by any articles, so can/should be deleted. I have not added sfd-t to the template as it will screw up redirecting, if used. --TheParanoidOne 21:51, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

That can be fixed - simply turn it into a "faux-redirect" - have a look at the way I've altered can-stub. Either that or put sfd-t on the talk page. Oh, and I agree - delete it. (If anyone is wondering about its potential for ambiguity, an accident/disaster stub is listed in the current proposals at WP:WSS/C) Grutness...wha? 02:53, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Ah, that's good. I took the first route. --TheParanoidOne 05:30, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Delete, unnecessary, potentionally ambiguous. --Mairi 20:00, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

{{Star Fox-stub}}

Created by User:Tedius Zanarukando in June 2005. Feeds into Nintendo stubs (which has its own stub). "What links here" says it's used by 7 articles, some of which (eg James McCloud) don't appear to be stubs.

• Delete because: Too narrow scope. Insufficient number of stub articles to justify its creation. --TheParanoidOne 05:33, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete; see also {{Fire Emblem-stub}} Lectonar 06:31, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
• Replace with {{Nintendo-stub}}.
• Delete and replace with Nintendo stub. Thunderbrand 16:16, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, use the Nintendo stub. Andre (talk) 00:03, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

July 28th

Category:Accounting-related stubs

the following has been moved from CFD Grutness...wha? 11:22, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Redundant with Category: Accounting stubs which follows the format of all the other stub categories. I am in process of adding accounting stubs to the later category. Please be patient :) Renata3 18:42, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

• There is no stub-template asosiated with this category, it's empty and un-used as far as I can tell. Delete, unless SfD also deals with orphanded stub categories. --Sherool 19:26, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
  • It does, and should be taken there. If it's a template or category relating to stubs, orphaned or not, it gets dealt with by sfd. Grutness...wha? 23:30, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
    • In that case I withdraw my previous vote, and agree it should be sent to SfD. --Sherool 23:42, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Deprecated and orphaned. Grutness...wha? 11:22, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per above. --TheParanoidOne 19:27, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Category:News trade stubs

the following has been moved from CFD Grutness...wha? 11:22, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

"News trade" is a little-used term at best. The general "News trade" category and template have already been deleted. The article has been redirected, I think to "News media". Maurreen 07:32, 25 July 2005 (UTC) (Forgot to sign here earlier.)

• Delete. Maurreen 18:04, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
• To SfD I think. If not then delete. -Splash 15:57, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: This one is an odd one. This was presumably a previous target of the deleted jornalism-stub AND news-stub, which has long been associated with Category:Newspaper stubs. There are still 19 un-re-edited stubs lurking in here, though. (empty it and delete it) Grutness...wha? 11:22, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

{{can-stub}}

unused, badly-worded redirect to {{Canada-stub}}. Not needed. Grutness...wha? 04:25, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete ambiguous redirect. --TheParanoidOne 05:32, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
• Can it as ambiguous. Susvolans (pigs can fly) 11:45, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep it. Faster to use then Canada-stub. --Mb1000 17:38, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, as per nominator Nabla 20:27, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
• Since it is a merge, I just think a delete is just fine. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 22:05, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

{{parasite-stub}}

Created in mid-May, and an orphan (has been used on one or two articles, tops, in that time, but currently unused). Cuts across the stubbing of living organisms by kingdom and/or order (e.g., plant-stub, invertebrate-stub, bacteria-stub). Not particularly useful - delete. Grutness...wha? 03:40, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as per above. --TheParanoidOne 05:32, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
• Get rid of it, to complex Circeus 21:39, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

July 29th

{{monorail-stub}}

Created by an anon in May 2005. Used in zero articles. Redlink category. --TheParanoidOne 22:40, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Make the template a redlink too. Grutness...wha? 11:27, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, narrow scope. --Sn0wflake 15:46, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Circeus 21:40, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

Peacegroup-stub

Extremely narrow stub group; almost inherently POV. --Scimitar ^parley 16:39, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as per above. Not even a "real" stub type as it has no associated category. Only used on one article. --TheParanoidOne 19:33, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Replace the template on the article with org-stub. Grutness...wha? 01:17, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

July 30th

{{ent-stub}} (t/l)

Walking trees? Entomology? No, entertainment. This stub has no category attached (not even a non-stub category), is an orphan, and is covered by a wide array of more precise stub types. I say delete. Grutness...wha? 08:29, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Ambiguous. Vague. Not a walking tree in sight. It has nothing going for it. --TheParanoidOne 09:45, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, I would have never guessed this one, even if I were trying quite hard. --Sn0wflake 15:44, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

"Eradicate any ambiguously named templates. BlankVerse ∅ 21:29, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

{{nbc-stub}}

Used on only two articles. Inconsistently named (nbc for template, NBC for category). Narrow scope (though this one could be argued against by the existence of a {{PBS-stub}}). --TheParanoidOne 10:13, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete
  • (User:Circeus forgot to sign - Grutness...wha?)
• Keep. I was planning on deleating this template (which I had made), but if we were to put this on articles relating all-and-out to the NBC network, that would be fine; we could put this on all of the many NBC related articles that are stubs. For instance Alexandra Cabot (Law & Order: SVU Character) is one, otherwise delete.

Comment: Law and order:SVU is only shown on NBC in the U.S. - does it also get a stub category for each station it's shown on in other countries? I would have thought it more effective to split TV shows up by genre, the same way that books are split. Grutness...wha? 03:52, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

July 31st

{{Vietnam-War-stubs}}

Unused redirect. Badly formed name. --TheParanoidOne 10:34, 31 July 2005 (UTC)