{{ bike-stub}} | User: Happyfeet10 | 12 May | 2 | Bicycling or Bicycles | Feeds directly into
Category:Transportation. Listed at
Wikipedia:Template_messages/Stubs. Put up for deletion at WP:SFD. |
{{ Vietnam-War-stubs}} (now on WP:SFD | User: Sherurcij | 9 May | 1 | Vietnam War | No category, template name is plural. |
{{ Vietnam-war-stub}} | User: *Kat* | 22 May | 0 | Vietnam War | The previous one done right. |
Grutness... wha? 01:36, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
A specific author. I was surprised that there were as many articles in the category as there are (29). — Cryptic (talk) 15:17, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
Time to reveal the full details of what sent me screaming from Wikipedia a couple of weeks back. User:Tobias Conradi proposed the introduction of several new stub categories for South American countries at Category talk:Geography stubs. I calmly explained that two of the countries he was suggesting new categories for came close to our criteria, but that if he wanted to propose them he could do so at WP:WSS where, after a week, if there were no objections, they would be created. The following day I discovered that, despite being told how these things were done, he had gone ahead and created:
The user who created them all seems - by accounts from a large number of other wikipedians - to not really understand what is meant by consensus and not realising that "be bold" has limitations to its use. I strongly suspect he may well do the same thing with other countries shortly. Grutness... wha? 03:35, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
Of all the possible African countries to create a geo-stub for, User:TreveX chose one of the ones with the fewest geo-stubs - twelve at last count. Absolutely pointless, especially since it is split from the least populated section of African geo-stubs, Cental Africa (TreveX may not have realised this, since he made it a subcategory of East Africa, despite the wording of the articles on East Africa and Central Africa, and the wording of their respective stub categories). The best thing that can be said of this is that it is correctly formatted. Grutness... wha? 06:20, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Another new one to the bio-stub list: Estonia this time. Are there currently 60-100 Estonians with stub articles? Good question - perhaps the stub's creator, User:PeepP, knows of that many. Having said that, the stub type is well formed, and there are some 30 articles in the category, so... Grutness... wha? 12:25, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Okay - well, firstly apologies for my assumption, based on you adding it to the list (I should have checked the history). As to the stub itself, 30 wouldn't be enough for a new stub to be created, but if the number is growing... The gereal rule of thumb with this project seems to be not to create if there are less than 60-100 stubs already existing, but if something's discovered we take future potential into account more, since it would be more work to delete it then create it again later than just have it hanging around slowly building. If a category hasn't built up in a couple of months someone is likely to suggest taking it to WP:SFD, but this one does seem to have potential for growth. Grutness... wha? 13:50, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
{{ State forest-stub}} was created by UniReb on 2005-08-11 along with Category:State forest stubs. This is similar to {{ State park-stub}}. The category currently contains 17 articles, but it has potential to grow. — Fingers-of-Pyrex 13:01, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
So, it has finally happened. We got our first topical section stub. Do we like them? I tend to think not. That could possibly double the number of stub types :/ -- grm_wnr Esc 21:08, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
Created a week ago, has 1 article. Mentioned on WP:WSS/P, but without any decision. Probably ought to be broadened to reli-struct-stub, to include non-Christian religious buildings (or else create that as seperate parent category). -- Mairi 21:30, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
Created a month ago, but orphaned. Other than apparently not being proposed, looks like they were created properly. I don't know whether they're worth keeping or not -- Mairi 02:36, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Yet another new uncleared template - at least it has a proper category with it. This one should probably manage to reach criterion but - yet again - it would have been useful if it had been debated prior to its creation! Grutness... wha? 07:03, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
likely viable, with correct, but incorrect name and unwieldy formulation. Only one article. Circeus 22:06, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
Created today; used on 26 articles. Looks well formed, might be worth keeping. -- Mairi 01:19, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
Category needs tidying, template is badly named and malformed. Probably useful, but needs quite a bit of TLC. Grutness... wha? 02:44, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Been around since June, used on only 11 articles. There is a WikiProject Melbourne. The template could use rewording. -- Mairi 16:17, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
Created 2 days ago also. Grutness's count shows 21 stubs, which makes it less than needed, unless there's been alot in the past 12 days. Currently feeds into Category:Northeastern US geography stubs. If it's to be kept, the capitalization needs fixing. -- Mairi 03:48, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Created 11 days ago. The stub category needs renaming, but it already has 12 articles despite its lack of publicity. I say keep the stub, but submit the category to SfD for immediate renaming to Category:Nigeria stubs, it doesn't even have "-" that the other "related" stub cayecories do. Caerwine 15:17, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Been around since May, but only 12 stubs at the moment. Might do better with publicity. Caerwine 16:13, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Found this while sorting thru {AfricaE-geo-stub}. Only used on one article at present and has no category. By my count there are 25 stubs total that this could be used on. Not likely to reach 60 any time soon, but is it worth going through SfD on this? Caerwine 00:38, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Another US state stub. Lacks a category, created 2 days ago, and is unused. -- Mairi 06:23, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps has merit. Needs standard capitalization and a category if it does, tho. Created yesterday, used on 2 articles. -- Mairi 06:32, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
All created by the same anon user today, all lack categories. All used on exactly 1 article. According to Grutness's counts, none are over 50. -- Mairi 04:43, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Created today, for a wikiproject (which was also created today). Even so, it quite likely merits deletion, as I'd be suprised if there are at present more than 20 relevant stub articles. Lacks a category, and is currently unused. -- Mairi 01:21, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
For exploding-animal stubs. Just created, funny, but both silly and unneeded. Category messed up, too. A2Kafir 02:21, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
{{ bike-stub}} | User: Happyfeet10 | 12 May | 2 | Bicycling or Bicycles | Feeds directly into
Category:Transportation. Listed at
Wikipedia:Template_messages/Stubs. Put up for deletion at WP:SFD. |
{{ Vietnam-War-stubs}} (now on WP:SFD | User: Sherurcij | 9 May | 1 | Vietnam War | No category, template name is plural. |
{{ Vietnam-war-stub}} | User: *Kat* | 22 May | 0 | Vietnam War | The previous one done right. |
Grutness... wha? 01:36, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
A specific author. I was surprised that there were as many articles in the category as there are (29). — Cryptic (talk) 15:17, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
Time to reveal the full details of what sent me screaming from Wikipedia a couple of weeks back. User:Tobias Conradi proposed the introduction of several new stub categories for South American countries at Category talk:Geography stubs. I calmly explained that two of the countries he was suggesting new categories for came close to our criteria, but that if he wanted to propose them he could do so at WP:WSS where, after a week, if there were no objections, they would be created. The following day I discovered that, despite being told how these things were done, he had gone ahead and created:
The user who created them all seems - by accounts from a large number of other wikipedians - to not really understand what is meant by consensus and not realising that "be bold" has limitations to its use. I strongly suspect he may well do the same thing with other countries shortly. Grutness... wha? 03:35, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
Of all the possible African countries to create a geo-stub for, User:TreveX chose one of the ones with the fewest geo-stubs - twelve at last count. Absolutely pointless, especially since it is split from the least populated section of African geo-stubs, Cental Africa (TreveX may not have realised this, since he made it a subcategory of East Africa, despite the wording of the articles on East Africa and Central Africa, and the wording of their respective stub categories). The best thing that can be said of this is that it is correctly formatted. Grutness... wha? 06:20, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Another new one to the bio-stub list: Estonia this time. Are there currently 60-100 Estonians with stub articles? Good question - perhaps the stub's creator, User:PeepP, knows of that many. Having said that, the stub type is well formed, and there are some 30 articles in the category, so... Grutness... wha? 12:25, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Okay - well, firstly apologies for my assumption, based on you adding it to the list (I should have checked the history). As to the stub itself, 30 wouldn't be enough for a new stub to be created, but if the number is growing... The gereal rule of thumb with this project seems to be not to create if there are less than 60-100 stubs already existing, but if something's discovered we take future potential into account more, since it would be more work to delete it then create it again later than just have it hanging around slowly building. If a category hasn't built up in a couple of months someone is likely to suggest taking it to WP:SFD, but this one does seem to have potential for growth. Grutness... wha? 13:50, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
{{ State forest-stub}} was created by UniReb on 2005-08-11 along with Category:State forest stubs. This is similar to {{ State park-stub}}. The category currently contains 17 articles, but it has potential to grow. — Fingers-of-Pyrex 13:01, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
So, it has finally happened. We got our first topical section stub. Do we like them? I tend to think not. That could possibly double the number of stub types :/ -- grm_wnr Esc 21:08, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
Created a week ago, has 1 article. Mentioned on WP:WSS/P, but without any decision. Probably ought to be broadened to reli-struct-stub, to include non-Christian religious buildings (or else create that as seperate parent category). -- Mairi 21:30, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
Created a month ago, but orphaned. Other than apparently not being proposed, looks like they were created properly. I don't know whether they're worth keeping or not -- Mairi 02:36, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Yet another new uncleared template - at least it has a proper category with it. This one should probably manage to reach criterion but - yet again - it would have been useful if it had been debated prior to its creation! Grutness... wha? 07:03, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
likely viable, with correct, but incorrect name and unwieldy formulation. Only one article. Circeus 22:06, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
Created today; used on 26 articles. Looks well formed, might be worth keeping. -- Mairi 01:19, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
Category needs tidying, template is badly named and malformed. Probably useful, but needs quite a bit of TLC. Grutness... wha? 02:44, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Been around since June, used on only 11 articles. There is a WikiProject Melbourne. The template could use rewording. -- Mairi 16:17, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
Created 2 days ago also. Grutness's count shows 21 stubs, which makes it less than needed, unless there's been alot in the past 12 days. Currently feeds into Category:Northeastern US geography stubs. If it's to be kept, the capitalization needs fixing. -- Mairi 03:48, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Created 11 days ago. The stub category needs renaming, but it already has 12 articles despite its lack of publicity. I say keep the stub, but submit the category to SfD for immediate renaming to Category:Nigeria stubs, it doesn't even have "-" that the other "related" stub cayecories do. Caerwine 15:17, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Been around since May, but only 12 stubs at the moment. Might do better with publicity. Caerwine 16:13, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Found this while sorting thru {AfricaE-geo-stub}. Only used on one article at present and has no category. By my count there are 25 stubs total that this could be used on. Not likely to reach 60 any time soon, but is it worth going through SfD on this? Caerwine 00:38, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Another US state stub. Lacks a category, created 2 days ago, and is unused. -- Mairi 06:23, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps has merit. Needs standard capitalization and a category if it does, tho. Created yesterday, used on 2 articles. -- Mairi 06:32, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
All created by the same anon user today, all lack categories. All used on exactly 1 article. According to Grutness's counts, none are over 50. -- Mairi 04:43, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Created today, for a wikiproject (which was also created today). Even so, it quite likely merits deletion, as I'd be suprised if there are at present more than 20 relevant stub articles. Lacks a category, and is currently unused. -- Mairi 01:21, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
For exploding-animal stubs. Just created, funny, but both silly and unneeded. Category messed up, too. A2Kafir 02:21, 7 October 2005 (UTC)