The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was taken to CfR.
Her Pegship ( speak) 18:58, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Since Bangsamoro region already replaced the now-defunct Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) thru recent plebiscite, i propose that a new Template:Bangsamoro-geo-stub be created to replace the Template:ARMM-geo-stub. -- RioHondo ( talk) 19:37, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

• Support speedy rename, as the ARMM permcats are up for speedy renaming at CfR. Her Pegship ( speak) 20:56, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

  Thank you. I don't know where to request for the renaming and recategorization of Category:Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao geography stubs as well but this should be renamed to Category:Bangsamoro geography stubs and under the new region Category:Bangsamoro.-- RioHondo ( talk) 08:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

The rest of the permcats are listed for speedy renaming at CfR; I suggest you use the

{{subst:Cfr-speedy|New name}}

tag on the category and list it there. Her Pegship ( speak) 17:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Ok, will try that. Thanks!-- RioHondo ( talk) 17:47, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create by year.

Because {{ 2010s-single-stub}} has more than one thousand articles, I propose splitting the category by year as follows:
{{ 2010-single-stub}}
{{ 2011-single-stub}}
{{ 2012-single-stub}}
{{ 2013-single-stub}}
{{ 2014-single-stub}}
{{ 2015-single-stub}}
{{ 2016-single-stub}}
{{ 2017-single-stub}}
{{ 2018-single-stub}}
{{ 2019-single-stub}}
-- Jax 0677 ( talk) 15:14, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

• The song and single stubs are pretty much used interchangeably with no standard as when one should be used over the other. Because most of these stub articles are songs released as singles, technically either usage is correct. I recommend upmerging the contents of Category:2010s single stubs to Category:2010s song stubs (with only about 250 articles), which the combined 1400 articles can then be reduced by moving to appropriate sub-stub categories such as Category:2010s pop song stubs, Category:2010s country song stubs and others which can be created such as Category:2010s electronic song stubs and Category:2010s rhythm and blues song stubs. This solution allows us to start this type of stub categorization scheme from scratch before making the "by year" stubs a common default to this situation. Thanks. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars ^{Talk to me} 17:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

My initial effort to go down this road is to change the sub-stubs/categories under Category:Hip hop song stubs, Category:2000s hip hop single stubs and Category:2010s hip hop single stubs‎‎, to Category:2000s hip hop song stubs and Category:2010s hip hop song stubs‎‎, so 1) naming convention matches the parent and 2) re-focus on a higher level "songs" naming convention for this scheme. The nomination is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 February 26#Hip hop song stubs. I am willing to submit my suggested merge to CfD if people feel it could benefit the project. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars ^{Talk to me} 17:39, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

• Reply - @ Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars:, be bold! -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 13:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @ Jax 0677: You did notice the CfD nomination for hip hop singles stub, right? Of course, you did because you've !voted twice already. And I've reduced the number of stub articles tagged as {{ 2010s-single-stub}} by 200 and I just started, so I think I've been pretty bold so far. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars ^{Talk to me} 00:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

• Reply - @ Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars:, sorry for accidentally voting twice. I struck through the second comment. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 14:00, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

• Note to closing administrator - Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2019/February was closed as "create by year, not by genre". -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 21:08, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create upmerged template.

• Propose creating Template:Mexico-politician-NationalRegeneration-stub (alternative name: Mexico-politician-Morena-stub) and an accompanying category Category:National Regeneration Movement politician stubs

Despite only being created in 2014, Morena now holds a majority in the LXIV Legislature of the Mexican Congress and carried Andrés Manuel López Obrador to presidential victory last year. Party switching is comparatively common for Mexican politicians, and particularly from the PRD ( Category:Party of the Democratic Revolution politician stubs), dozens of individuals will have switched to Morena. The creation of this stub template would immediately allow for the updating of stub types of Category:National Regeneration Movement politicians. Currently, many Morena politicians have PRI, PRD or Citizens' Movement stub templates because articles on them have not been updated, at least 30 from a cursory scan of politicians listed as Morena in the LXIV Legislature that have existing articles (from prior legislatures where a stub was created for every legislature). Party switching has left a significant number of articles on politicians in this realm with outdated stub types reflecting prior party affiliations. In addition, there are more than 200+ potential stubs drawn from new freshman legislators elected under Morena in 2018 that would qualify for this category. It would be immediately useful to get this template and category created now to begin this update task. While I prefer the stub template name with Morena, it might not be the most appropriate to match the other stub names in this area. Raymie ( t • c) 06:40, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Category:Mexican politician stubs has over 300 articles and could use a bit of sorting. As Category:National Regeneration Movement politicians currently holds only 34 articles, I support creating an upmerged {{ Mexico-politician-NationalRegeneration-stub}}, with the addition of Category:National Regeneration Movement politician stubs if and when the template is assigned to 60+ articles. (Also, though "Morena" is the common appellation in Mexico, I prefer the English "National Regeneration Movement" title for this wiki, for the sake of clarity for international sorters.) Her Pegship ( speak) 16:42, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

@ Pegship: I expect that to happen somewhat soon. There are articles like Aníbal Ostoa Ortega where the article isn't updated to reflect the LXIII or LXIV Legislature (he is with Morena now). User:Lgcsmasamiya once created hundreds of stubs for every Mexican federal legislator, but they were blocked indefinitely in May 2015. Between the LXIII and LXIV Legislatures, if enough stubs were created, that cat would exist _now_ (and I'm trying to make a dent in all those redlinks). Perhaps creating the template now (and making corresponding stub template changes) would help us understand the scale of the cat? Raymie ( t • c) 18:25, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

No matter how I dig, I can't find more than 17 articles that qualify as stubs which are currently in the National Regeneration Movement politicians category. Stub tags are meant to inspire folks to improve articles, not to create more stub articles to fill the category. (Personally I look forward to the day when there are no stub-level articles!) I encourage editors to work on updating articles and their categories so that the National Regeneration Movement politicians category is populated accordingly, and then we can revisit the question of whether a stub type is needed. I hope I'm making sense. Her Pegship ( speak) 23:50, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

@ Pegship: I'm actually going to rectify some of that tonight and spend some time updating categories. I get the sense we might be much closer than you think. Raymie ( t • c) 02:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Update: I did the math (and a lot of updating categories and articles on Morena politicians that had not been updated to reflect their new affiliation; the Morena politicians cat doubled in size) and I believe the number of stubs in the range is over 40 (PetScan says 37 pages belong to the Mexican politician stub cat or one of its subcats and the Morena politicians cat) and could still be a bit larger. Enough to merit an upmerged template, though the category right now can wait. Raymie ( t • c) 07:55, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was send to CfD.

Being ignorant of the policy in regards to creating stub templates, I went ahead and created Template:Ambazonia-stub and Category:Ambazonia stubs without consulting anyone. I created it out of concern that the alternative to it - Template:Cameroon-stub - may come off as POV if used in articles related to this separatist state. I don't know exactly how many articles it will be used in - Ambazonia Governing Council, Interim Government of Ambazonia, Sisiku Julius Ayuk Tabe and Samuel Ikome Sako are a few that I can think of - but I expect to write several short articles relating to the subject in the near future. I hope that this proposal will be supported for the sake of preserving a NPOV. Best, Mikrobølgeovn ( talk) 02:37, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi there! Thank you for your efforts in good faith. Stub sorting doesn't involve POV, but at the moment the issue is quantity. As the Category:Ambazonia and its sub-cats currently hold only 10 articles, it doesn't seem as though it will reach the usual threshold of 60+ articles to merit a stub category, and indeed I don't think that's anough to merit an upmerged stub template either. Anyone else have thoughts?

@ Pegship: My sole concern was avoiding using the Cameroon-stub template. Not because I have a problem with it myself, but because it is sure to provoke accusations of POV pushing. While I am not sure if we'll hit the threshold you mentioned anytime soon, I am planning to write short articles about ministers, activists, militias and militia leaders, and quite a few will probably be of stub length since there is only limited information available. If the Ambazonia-stub template has to be deleted, I'd appreciate any input in regards to what to replace it with. Cheers! Mikrobølgeovn ( talk) 20:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

The next administrative level would be Category:Central Africa geography stubs, but I'm still not sure how many articles require an Ambazonia stub of any kind. Does anyone else have input as to the possible re-assignment of Cameroon stub types to Ambazonia types? Her Pegship ( speak) 21:17, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Category:French politician stubs is over populated and should be split. Currently, {{ France-politician-PCF-stub}} has 65 transclusions, and should be spun off to create a subcategory (like Category:Socialist Party (France) politician stubs). -- DannyS712 ( talk) 18:13, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good to me! Her Pegship ( speak) 01:08, 4 March 2019 (UTC)