| advertise add site services publishers database health videos | ![]() | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
Dr. Richard Hainer: April 2007 hainermd.blogspot.com | Boulder's Pediatric Center: April 2007 thepediatriccenter.net | Story Time- ROR: April 2007 aapca3.org | WCRC | April 2007 e-newsletter wcrc.org |
[edit] April 1[edit] Rename Cat:Western African politician stubs → Cat:West African politician stubs
The result of the debate was rename
[edit] April 2[edit] {{Kamen-rider-stub}} / Cat:Kamen Rider stubs
The result of the debate was rename to KamenRider-stub
PLEASE stop confusing the issue! Okay - I now change the initial nomination, since you've moved the template from one incorrect name to another incorrect name:
Next time, wait before adding further confusion. Moving the template from one incorrect name to another incorrect name just creates even more work! Grutness...wha? 06:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] {{Central Asia-stub}}
The result of the debate was speedy delete
[edit] April 3[edit] Template:SEPTA-stub
The result of the debate was keep
The template was created with the fair use image Image:SEPTA.png included, which I recently removed as per WP:RFUI. No other transit authority has their own template for stubs (to my knowledge), and each tagged article (see Category:SEPTA stubs) should be categorized for its type of service (train, tram, bus, etc.) and not by its transit authority. The currently tagged articles should be retagged with {{metro-stub}}, {{tram-stub}}, etc. Crashintome4196 02:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cat:Mainland China company stubs
The result of the debate was delete
Comment Cat:Mainland China geography stubs is already up for deletion since March 2 and while it hopefully will be closed soon, it hasn't yet. However, looking closer at the nomination, it's clear that Huaiwei meant to nominate Cat:Mainland China company stubs which Privacy created out of process to push his POV. So I'm putting the above comments in a sandy brown box, since they aren't really relevant to the intended nomination. Caerwine Caer’s whines 00:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC) Delete as an attempt to change the category of a stub type without going through SFD. Caerwine Caer’s whines 00:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] {{Narcotic-stub}}
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] April 4[edit] {{Entourage-Stub}} / Cat:Entourage stubs
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] Cat:IRA stubs
The result of the debate was speedy delete
[edit] {{Future-stub}} / Cat:Future article stubs
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] {{IT-swimming-bio-stub}} / Cat:Italy swimming biography stubs
The result of the debate was delete cat, rename/upmerge template
[edit] April 5[edit] Cat:Estonian football biography stubs
The result of the debate was upmerge
[edit] April 6[edit] Cat:People's Republic of China company stubs
The result of the debate was delete cat, create PRC-company-stub to feed into Chinese company stubs
[edit] April 7[edit] {{Zoology-med-stub}} / Cat:Zoological medicine stubs → {{Veterinary-med-stub}} / Cat:Veterinary medicine stubs
The result of the debate was rename
Seems a reasonable suggestion - {{veterinary-med-stub}} and Cat:Veterinary medicine stubs would make more sense, considering the cope of the zoological medicine and veterinary medicine articles. TYhe current category also has the wrong permcat parent (Cat:Animal anatomy, a subcat of - surprise, surprise - Cat:Veterinary medicine). Grutness...wha? 23:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC) Comment from stub creator - I initially proposed this stub and after covering enough ground with it and articles needing retagging, went ahead and created it. I initially changed it from {{vet-med-stub}} owing to the issues with the word vet (Medicine vet / Veteran). By all means PLEASE go ahead and change it over. The stub makes more sense and to be totally honest with you, i never thought of using veterinary instead of vet! Go for it. Please, go for it. Thor Malmjursson 01:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC) Oppose. I was at Taenidia and saw the notice of this stub type change. I suggest you examine Taenidia carefully before labeling it Veterinary medicine. — Randall Bart (talk) 18:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Support - Since zoological medicine only applies to zoo animals, I think renaming this stub type would be appropriate. However, I think Randall's point was that Taenidia is an article about anatomy, not medicine, something that is true for a lot of the zoological medicine stubs. I would suggest that these stubs be made into {{anatomy-stub}}s, and the rest into veterinary medicine stubs. Unfortunately, Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Stub sorting indicates that the anatomy stub category is only for human anatomy (not sure why), so another stub category ({{animal-anatomy-stub}}) would be necessary. --Joelmills 01:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cat:Catholic diocese stubs → Cat:Roman Catholic diocese stubs
The result of the debate was rename
[edit] April 9[edit] {{EU-politician-stub}}
The result of the debate was delete in favor of EU-org-bio-stub
[edit] Cat:Syria history stubs
The result of the debate was upmerge
[edit] Rename {{93stub}}
The result of the debate was rename
[edit] {{Centrist Party-stub}} / Cat:Centrist Party stubs
The result of the debate was speedy delete
[edit] {{Pie-stub}} / Cat:Pie-stubs
The result of the debate was keep, rename cat
[edit] April 10[edit] Category:Operetta stubs
The result of the debate was upmerge
Comment. I have just discovered this discussion. I am not sure I understand the technicalities but please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Opera#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Operetta where I explained that i had de-populated this category and proposed its deletion. Originally I thought I was putting up a Cfd and then someone moved it here. Perhaps I should explain? Operetta is one of a number of genres of opera. The others all have a fairly consistent category structure, but the operetta ones have been anomalous. Many of the articles - a lot of them minimal stubs - have been neglected. The idea behind deleting some of the categories, which incidentally were never used consistently, is to create a logical structure. This is important because we have a large number of articles: our projected coverage is now 1400+ works by 400+ composers, in addition to articles about singers, directors etc. Regarding the Cat:Operas by language the structure being followed is explained at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Opera. It's complicated but a lot of time and thought has gone into developing it. Please let me know if I can clarify any other questions - as I explained above I was unaware of this discussion as it was not on my watchlist. Thank you, - Kleinzach 15:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] April 11[edit] {{EastSussex-geo-stub}} / Cat:EastSussex-geo-stubs
The result of the debate was keep, rename cat
[edit] April 12[edit] Cat:Vietnam war stubs → Cat:Vietnam War stubs
The result of the debate was speedy rename
[edit] April 13[edit] {{Mass spectrometry-stub}} / Cat:Mass spectrometry stubs
The result of the debate was speedy delete by creator request
[edit] April 14[edit] Rename {{mathpublication-stub}} / Cat:Mathematical publication stubs
The result of the debate was rename
On a tangential point, I note the use of the US English term "math" rather than the rest-of-the-world English standard "maths" (which, when you think of it, makes sense, since there's no such thing as a mathematic) - any chance of a redirect at maths-lit-stub and similar at any other math-X-stub types that don't have them? Grutness...wha? 00:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] unmerge Category:Lithuanian football biography stubs
The result of the debate was upmerge
[edit] April 15[edit] Bus-section-stub
The result of the debate was rename to bus-sectexpand The idea of topic-specific section stubs makes my head hurt. In theory "sect-stub" should only be used when the article itself is not a stub. As far as I know this is the only template of this type. — CharlotteWebb 01:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rename {{US-women-hoops-stub}}
The result of the debate was speedy rename
[edit] April 16[edit] Pacific bio-stubs
The result of the debate was upmerge/rename per nom
As to whether these are likely to reach threshold, there are currently only 169 stubs in Oceanian people stubs not already marked with a nationality. More than 1 in 3 of them would have to be in any of these categories to make them viable. In the case of Nauru, BTW, it would take 1% of the country's entire population having stub articles for this to reach threshold! Grutness...wha? 08:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC) Very Strong Keep - Stop being Discriminating. Oceania is something which is used 'In General' but it doesnt actually tell you which country they belong to and as a matter of fact the only reason I by-passed the stub proposal was that I didnt know about it. There was a stub present relating to fiji {{Fiji-bio-stub}} so why shouldnt there be one for Samoa, Tonga and Papua New Guinea. These are countries of importance from my Point of View and there was a stub for Samoa ({{Samoa-stub}}) but it was too general and it was hard to tell if it was regarding Samoan people or government organisation or places and the same applies to Tonga and Papua New Guinea. Samoa and Tonga (apart from fiji) are the two other biggest "nations" in the South Pacific region and if someone is to create an article on some of the people in the pacific region, it would be easier to class them because the Island nations have three type of people, Melanesians, Polynesians and Micronesians and if in the WP:BIO, the persons country is noted, it would be easier to differentiate between them. Most Articles regarding Samoan and Tongan rugby players would need their own coutry of origin stub and the bio stub is the best one to use because most people of notability that come from these island are usually rugby players and there are so many of them and the {{Samoa-bio-stub}} and {{Tonga-bio-stub}} would be the best ones to use...If there is anything needed to be discussed, do it on my talk page..Thanks..--Cometstyles 12:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Cometstyles, I take great offense at your unwarranted slur. I am an Oceanian myself, and find it abhorrent that you should accuse me of discrimination with no evidence whatsoever. Please address the facts I present, do not automatically leap to the conclusion that I must have some vendetta against Oceania. Play the ball, not the man. I have actually exercised some leniency as regarding these templates, by suggesting upmerging when deletion would have been a reasonable option in some cases. Are you seriously suggesting that we will soon have 60 stubs for people from Nauru - there are over 150 for Fiji, hence its category - when Nauru has a population of 5800 people? At that rate, proportionately we should have some 60,000,000 bio-stubs worldwide - 40 times more articles than Wikipedia's entire total. Please read the instructions regarding when stub types are required and when they are not, and pull your head in. Grutness...wha? 01:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] April 17[edit] Cat:Turkish musical group stubs and Cat:Turkish music stubs
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] {{Monk-stub}}
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] {{IT-derived-stub}}
The result of the debate was rename to ITsource
[edit] {{SA-actor-stub}}
The result of the debate was rename to SouthAfrica-actor-stub and upmerge
[edit] Track and field athletics biography
The result of the debate was rename
If anyone wants to add the Asia and Canada cats so they can be renamed Asian and Canadian respectively, I'll support that (as well as United States to American), but since the whole adjectival vs. noun debate is still going on at the Stub Sorting naming guidelines talk page, I thought I'd defer those for now. Caerwine Caer’s whines 00:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] April 18[edit] Once more into the breech dear friends!
The result of the debate was delete
I've left alone the other two redirects {{Us-road-stub}} (as it is seeing some use) and {{US-street-stub}} since it is redirect that conforms to the naming guidelines. Caerwine Caer’s whines 21:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] {{minplan-stub}}
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] {{Planet-stub}}
The result of the debate was rename to planetary-science-stub
[edit] {{Path-stub}}
The result of the debate was rename to pathology-stub
It's a problem because we don't keep redirects that are ambiguous. Which means that if this is renamed, all the articles that you are stubbing with path-stub will need to be re-stubbed. Making more work. Whereas if you had waited for the debate as instructed at the top of the page it would have become quickly apparent that pathology-stub was a better title. "Doing your own work" is all very well - as long as you don't make more mess for other people to clear up after you. And as for "biting your head off", surely it would have made sense for you to read the instructions and follow them? The same applies to your new {{pathology-stub}}, BTW - Wikipedia is a community, so doing your own thing against community guidelines is a great way to piss people off - especially with templates and categories, which require more cleaning up (one of the main reasons why WP:BOLD doesn't apply to templates and categories). Grutness...wha? 02:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
{{pathology-stub}} now marks 56 articles. I encourage anyone to inspect those articles to see for themselves the appropriateness of this stub template. -RustavoTalk/Contribs 03:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] April 19[edit] {{Kiribati-stub}}
The result of the debate was withdrawn
[edit] {{UK-waterway-stub}} / Cat:United Kingdom waterway stubs
The result of the debate was rename/rescope to UK-canal-stub; Wikiproject to use talk page template
Keep Navigable Rivers are different from non-navigable rivers. People interested in improving one type until it is no longer a stub may not be interested in improving the other. There are sufficient articles which fit the proposed stub to make it useful in focussing the attention of editors with this area of interest. Martin Cordon 21:16, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] {{Objectivism-stub}} / Cat:Objectivism stubs
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] April 20[edit] Category:Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania geography stubs
The result of the debate was rename
[edit] {{Systems-stub}} / Cat:Systems stubs
The result of the debate was rename to systemstheory
[edit] {{Mazandaran-stub}}
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] April 21[edit] {{Sussex-geo-stub}} / Cat:Sussex geography stubs
The result of the debate was speedy delete as empty and redundant
Now East Sussex has its own geo-stub category and template, and West Sussex's one was proposed and agreed to at WP:WSS a while back. As such, I propose deleting this category and template and creating the new {{WestSussex-geo-stub}} and Cat:West Sussex geography stubs, and sorting everything in the current stub cat into the East and West stub types - in exactly the same way as happened with the long-departed Yorkshire-geo-stub. Grutness...wha? 03:56, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] April 22[edit] {{CSI-stub}}
The result of the debate was rename
[edit] April 23[edit] {{Kannada-cinema-stub}} / Cat:Kannada cinema stubs; Cat:Kannada film stubs (for upmerger)
The result of the debate was delete cinema stuff, rename as Kannada-film-stub, upmerge film cat
FYI, here's the stubs tagged in the permcat at time of the last db dump:
No telling how many simply don't have a language cat... Alai 06:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC) [edit] Cat:Kannada film stubs (for upmerger)Comment - Whats the purpose of listing this cat for deletion? Is there any policy in WP that mentions the criteria of minimum number of articles/pages to be present in the category, at the time of category creation? As such, whenever a category is created, obviously it is more or less empty, and as the days progress, it will have more content. The Kannada-film-stub template as well as stubs cat are brand new, not even a day old. I fail to understand why it is being nominated for deletion. Thanks - KNM Talk 06:28, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] April 25[edit] Cat:Oceania athletics biography stubs → Cat:Oceanian athletics biography stubs
The result of the debate was rename
[edit] {{Iceland-lang-stub}}
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] April 26[edit] {{KurdistanIran-geo-stub}} → {{KurdistanIR-geo-stub}}
The result of the debate was keep as is, create redirect from xxIR-geo-stub
[edit] {{Tennessee-media-stub}} / Cat:Tennessee media stubs
The result of the debate was delete, send Florida media to its own SFD
[edit] April 27[edit] {{IB-school-stub}} / Cat:IB School stubs
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] April 28[edit] {{NRHP}}
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] {{Faroe Islands-bio-stub}} / Cat:Faroese people stubs
The result of the debate was rename and upmerge
[edit] April 29[edit] {{rpg-chinese-stub}}
The result of the debate was delete
[edit] April 30[edit] {{Davis-cup stub}}
The result of the debate was rename
[edit] {{Former Republic-stub}} / Cat:Former USSR Republic stubs
The result of the debate was speedy delete
[edit] {{Warriors-stub}} / redlink
The result of the debate was speedy delete
|
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |
