Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals:
On this WP:WSS subpage, you can propose new stub types (please read the procedures beforehand!), as well as the reorganization and subdivision of existing stub types. You can also discuss anything else related to stubs on the talk page.
[edit] Proposing new stub types - procedure
Important: If you wish to propose the creation of a stub ARTICLE you've come to the wrong place. If you don't have a username yourself, please go to WP:AFC for proposing a new article. If you already have a username, you can create the article yourself. If you don't know how, add {{Helpme}} to your user talk page to request help from other editors. This page only deals with stub TEMPLATES and CATEGORIES; we cannot help you with creating articles.
|
Proposing new stub types |
|
If you wish to propose a new stub category and template, please follow these procedures:
- Check at Category:Stub categories to make sure that your proposed new stub does not already exist.
- List it at the top of the current month's section, under a header, like the ones shown (if any). Sign it with a datestamp (~~~~).
- Please bear in mind that a stub category isn't about the importance or notability of the topic!
- Find a good number[1] of stub articles, as many as you can, that will fit that template. Each of these articles can be:
- currently marked with {{stub}};
- currently marked with another type of stub tag (in which case you should justify why your tag is better for the article than the current one);
- a stub whose categorisation is highly ambiguous or questionable;
- not marked as a stub.
- Others may do the same, if they so desire.
- 5 days after listing it here, if there is general approval or no objection, go ahead and create the new category and template following the format on Wikipedia:Stub. List the new stub type on the stub types list in an appropriate section. If consensus is not clear, or discussion is still ongoing, the proposal will remain open until consensus can be reached.
- If you wish to propose a stub type which does not currently have 60 articles that could use it, you may propose an upmerged template in a similar way. An upmerged template would feed into currently existing stub categories until such time that there are enough stubs for a separate stub category. At that point a category for it may be separately proposed.
DO NOT place a proposal here for any stub type which is already being discussed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries or Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The proposal page is only for stub types that have not yet been created, and it is better to keep any discussion of such stub types in one place rather than splitting it between different pages.
^ . Good number means about 60 articles or more, or 30 or more if it is the primary stub type of a WikiProject, though this figure may vary from case to case.
|
[edit] "Speedy creation"
A stub type may be proposed for "speedy creation" if it meets one of the following criteria:
- S1 - the creation of a category for which an approved upmerged template already exists and is now in use on more than 60 articles.
- S2 - the creation of an upmerged national-level template for a subject in which other such national-level templates currently exist (e.g., X-bio-stub, X-hist-stub, or X-geo-stub, where X is the name of an internationally widely recognised country) or other instances where a clearly established pattern of similar subtypes exists. The proposed topic may not be controversial in scope.
List speedy creation proposals in the same proposal listings as normal stub proposals below.
[edit] Proposals, November 2008
If you create a stub type, please move its discussion to the November archive, add it to the list of stub types, and add it to the archive summary.
[edit] NEW PROPOSALS
Strange that this doesn't exist. Various other media-related stub cats exist, such as Cat:India media stubs and Cat:Florida media stubs.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 02:01, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
- Those tend to exist largely for "lumping" purposes (or when people have gone off on a flyer, and created them regardless). I think a {{media-stub}} template would be counterproductive, so that would leave it as a container. Alai (talk) 04:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
- No objection to it as a container only, per Alai. HOWEVER - and it's a big however (hence the caps), this is the wrong name. It should match the permcat as Cat:Mass media stubs - and all Cat:Fooian media stubs category should also be moved to the equivalent mass media name. when I first saw the heading, I though "shouldn't that be art media?", so there's clearly scope for confusion. (I'll propose the Fooian ones at SFD). Grutness...wha? 05:56, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
- Ah spod - it's much more complex than I though. The main category is Cat:Mass media but all the country-specific types are at Cat:Fooian media. I'll leave a note at WP talk:CFD, see if anyone thinks its worth a mass rename... The current proposal here should still be at Cat:Mass media stubs, though. Grutness...wha? 06:03, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
- I'm fine with it used as only a sorting tool for other media-related stubs.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 20:07, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Template over 60, European sports venue stubs over 800. Speedy!? Waacstats (talk) 16:22, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support. I would also look a tthe others if I was you and find ways that the 800 could be split. I'd probably recommend creating templates by country and upmerging the ones that aren't viable. Count Blofeld 16:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- Most of the countries with over 30 articles already have a template. Waacstats (talk) 17:06, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- Here's some additional counts:
-
-
- I suggest we create regional subcats, in line with the UN geoscheme. Alai (talk) 03:35, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds like a good idea, should finally get it off the oversized list. (Have we split any other euro cat by UN geoscheme?) Waacstats (talk) 23:32, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
- Not that I know of (Asia and Africa yes, Europe no). It's a shame we have to resort to that here, but I can't see any other easy option. Grutness...wha? 00:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Old business
Everything from here down has passed the five day proposal period. Unless discussion to determine consensus is actively on-going, proposals may be acted upon, to be created, or noted as not approved. Move this marker up as time passes.
While this is a bit hard to count since it has not been sorted, there are about 40 radio station articles for SA, 40 newspapers not to mention the books, broadcasting and other articles in Cat:South African media.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 02:10, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds OK to me; suggest separate templates for each medium. Alai (talk) 21:44, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- Should easily be viable. Yes seperate templates would be advisable. Count Blofeld 16:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
735 articles, likely to increase considerably given that an editor is currently expanding. By decade births? Create upmerged templates by decade and split where viable?
Count Blofeld 23:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Don't we normally split politician stubs by political party? Grutness...wha? 00:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
- Yup. Alai (talk) 03:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Ah I thought that would make more sense, but seieng how Norway was done I assumed this was the convention without thinking about the others. How many parties are there? Count Blofeld 12:10, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
- There is already {{AustralianGreens-politician-stub}} and {{Australia-National-politician-stub}} which categorise into the root category. Why not set up subcategories for those two, as see how far it gets you. Hesperian 22:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
- A better idea would be to try to get them to 60 stubs first - neither are there, though the National one is close. I'd definitely support the creation of a {{Australia-Labor-party-stub}} (yes, that's the correct spelling for the AU political party, though ghu alone knows why), {{Australia-Liberal-party-stub}}, and possibly {{Australia-Country-party-stub}}.Grutness...wha? 22:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- There is already {{Australia-Labor-politician-stub}} and {{Australia-Liberal-politician-stub}}, and they are already categorising into subcategories of Category:Australian politician stubs, and the parent category still has 742 members. From a random sampling of the first page, it would appear that a great many entries are for members of state legislatures. Would {{NewSouthWales-politician-stub}} work? Hesperian 00:09, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- P.S. The answer to your "Labor/Labour" mystery can be found at King O'Malley. Hesperian 00:09, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
We have one for French Guianan geo stubs but nothing for general French Guiana articles or people. Probably viable for Cat:French Guiana stubs too. Count Blofeld 21:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Support. About the time all such territories had their own generic stub templates at least. Support the cat, too, especially given that there's already a Cat:French Guiana geography stubs. Grutness...wha? 22:45, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
The category Category:African football club stubs has about 754 articles.
Create {{Egypt-footyclub-stub}}, possibly as upmerged. The category Category:Egyptian football clubs has about 25 articles, most of which are stubs.
Create {{SouthAfrica-footyclub-stub}}, possibly as upmerged. The category Category:South African football clubs has 38 articles, some of which are stubs. Some other African countries should probably have their own stubs. -- Eastmain (talk) 19:21, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Certainly it looks like a few country-specific templates would be useful (though I must admit it would be daunting to suddenly have 50-60 new stub templates needing creation). All of them would probably been upmerged for now - I doubt any would reach 60 stubs - though it may be worth cranking out five regional subcategories for north, southern, east, west, and central Africa. Grutness...wha? 22:04, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Here's the top 15 by-country populations, according to permcat-population:
- Surely someone can shove Morocco over the top... I've no objection to regional subcats, provided we use the UN geoscheme. Alai (talk) 01:06, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- Yes. Nigeria I think you'd find could probably go over the top too Count Blofeld 16:26, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Approaching 750. Needs stub sorting. Count Blofeld 11:56, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Any suggestions of how to split? By country of origin? Subject matter? The only one we have so far is by subject matter - if we continue along those lines perhaps templates for {{nature-documentary-film-stub}}, {{history-documentary-film-stub}}, and {{bio-documentary-film-stub}} may be worth considering. Grutness...wha? 22:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- We have {{hist-documentary-stub}} and {{bio-documentary-stub}}. Her Pegship (tis herself) 23:30, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Oops - didn't notice them. The nature one's still a good idea though, IMO. Perhaps this is more a case of sorting (i.e., the "To do" list) than further splitting? Grutness...wha? 23:57, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Those seem to be for more than just documentary films (hence their not being sub-types), so that would be shuffling them sideways, and/or double-stubbing them, rather than sorting per se. Alai (talk) 01:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- They were originally created to cover both tv and film. If the film types are created as above, then the current types should be renamed tv-foo-documentary-stub to clarify the difference. Her Pegship (tis herself) 01:59, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- Or in one case, docs of all sorts, including radio. So, renaming would also mean resorting them. On the other hand, would there be enough to split into two types? Best thing might to be to create an additional upmerged template for now, and revisit the split into films and others at a later date. Alai (talk) 16:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- Is by decade out of the question? Count Blofeld 21:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
[edit] rugbyunion-bios
[edit] A few new hospital templates
[edit] US sportspeople and Olympic medalists
At a quick glance, a large number of the unsubcategorised Spain-geo-stubs seem to be for places in the Balearic Islands. We have a generic {{Balearics-stub}}, but no geo-equivalent. CatScan suggests at least 45 articles could be marked with such a template - of course, if the totals 15 higher than that, a category would also be useful... Grutness...wha? 11:24, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Support However, I'd upmerge templates for Majorca-geo-stub, Minorca-geo-stub and Ibiza-geo-stub and feed them into a Cat:Balearics geography stubs instead. Majorca may be even be viable for its own category. Count Blofeld 22:21, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Not a bad idea at that - or perhaps Balearics-geo-stub with three redirects for specific islands may be better. I'd think the category should probably be at Cat:Balearic Islands geography stubs, BTW. Grutness...wha? 22:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
As with the parent so the child, this one is creeping up, the following seem viable
Denmark and Ukraine both seem close enough for templates and possibly categories if a few extra can be found elsewhere, templates for any other countries to help future splits. Waacstats (talk) 14:32, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- I'd suggest we do not include Kosovar political parties in this category.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 17:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
There are already over 100 articles in the cloud computing category and many more yet to be added and/or created. Currently new cloud computing articles end up inappropriately tagged as computer-stubs, web-software-stubs, internet-stubs, etc. (or a combination). Articles like Mosso (cloud computing) are good examples of where things go wrong (this is a company, web host, storage and infrastructure article, typical of many cloud computing providers). I was going to propose an upmerged stub initially but there doesn't appear to be an appropriate category to upmerge into. -- samj inout 06:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Not too sure any of those are "inappropriate", but if there are a significant number for which this would be more appropriate, be more useful, would improve consistency of tagging, could be a good plan. One possibility would be to look at whether a Cat:distributed computing stubs type would be viable, and upmerge there. Alai (talk) 04:04, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- Not a bad idea, but distributed computing != cloud computing. 84.72.91.139 (talk) 15:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not suggesting they're "==" (if we must speak in C), but that distributed computing is a broader, more inclusive topic. Hence the logic of upmerging to that target. Alai (talk) 21:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- Right but distributed computing is about parallellism - others have said that centralized computing is a better analogy. Are we saying then that we need to upmerge into something rather than create a new stub type? -- samj in
|
