This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
This is an archive of discussions from Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals for the month of June 2008. Please move completed June discussions to this page as they are closed, add discussion headers to each proposal showing the result, and leave incomplete discussions on the Proposals page. After June, the remainder of the discussions will be moved to this page, whether stub types have been created or not.
Those who create a stub template/cat should be responsible for moving the discussion here and listing the stub type in the archive summary.
Stub proposers please note: Items tagged as "nocreate" or "no consensus" are welcome for re-proposal if and when circumstances are auspicious.
The result of the debate was create.
I was just adding to the article
Monotonix, an Israeli band, when I decided to see if there was a specific stub for Israeli bands. Noting that the existing stubs are as far flung as Danish and Korean bands, I nearly created it before noticing this area. There are 61 articles in the category for Israeli musical groups with four subcategories and surely many of those can only be stub class.
Red157(
talk •
contribs)
23:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Upmerge following, S2 speedy
Severo T C 19:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Severo T C 19:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create upmerged template.
Looking through the fiddler articles I see quite a few stubs (see for example
category:Fiddlers by nationality; the
List of fiddlers talk page and
historical changes suggest that there are many more on the way)
. The most appropriate stub category currently available is
Violinist stubs, but there are already nearly 300 "violinist" stubs, of which only a handful are fiddlers'. The editor population attracted to the "violinist" label, and the category's size, make me think that fiddler stub expansion won't go anywhere without its own category. —
eitc
h
06:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
This oversized and essentially useless category continues to plague us (and continues to be useless). Here's some possibilities, and their estimated sizes from the category tree:
I'd take the numbers with a pinch of salt in this case, as many of them aren't in the "English" portion of the permcat tree, just stub-tagged that way, but they seem to at least indicate fairly strong prospects of viability. Alai ( talk) 16:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Don't even ask me exactly what these are... I just know we have a lot of 'em! The
Category:Membrane protein stubs are very oversized; this would seem to split 'em roughly in two. I'll try to find a WPJ that would be able to tell if this makes any sense.
Alai (
talk)
12:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
The mystery of why
Category:Brazil stubs got so big is solved: there's 150 of these.
Alai (
talk)
16:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as architecture-element-stub.
Another long-standing oversized parent, I think this would possibly solve that at a stroke. There's anywhere up to 211 of these, if you believe the category hierarchy implicitly, but at any rate there's at least 65 that are directly in the permcat.
Alai (
talk)
20:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Did we approve this already? Rings a bell from someplace, seems to be 62 of them. As noted, parent oversized.
Alai (
talk)
20:41, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Not one that would have occurred to me, but there seem to be exactly 60 of these in the oversized
Category:Government stubs.
Alai (
talk)
20:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Category:Poet stubs are oversized -- see
WT:WSS/T for the gory details -- the Indians seem to be the only new nationality that're viable, at 64.
Alai (
talk)
15:35, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
73 of these, parent is oversized.
Alai (
talk)
16:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as -collection-.
Category:Story stubs is oversized, this is the most sensible subcat I can find; would be at least 275 of them. Nothing else by-genre seems to work (although, dismayingly,
Category:Short stories by Orson Scott Card is responsible for 50 of these).
Alai (
talk)
17:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
At the moment these stubs are upmerged to
Category:Judaism stubs, but there are now 71 so I propose Speedy creation (S1).
Kathleen.wright5
06:19, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was taken to sfd.
Category:Law enforcement stubs currently has 733 members and could usefully be split. I have made a new stub-template
Template:Riot-control-stub. Is it any use to you?
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
10:18, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Permcat has next to no subcategorisation, so DoB seems to be the only viable option. Alai ( talk) 16:45, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Category:China stubs is oversized, this is the best I can come up with. Perhaps with upmerged templates for TV, radio, newspapers, etc.
Alai (
talk)
16:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Oversized. Following the pattern of the US split:
The "service" one might be excessively broad. Alai ( talk) 16:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Parent is oversized, there seems to be 68 of these. More generally, we'll probably need upmerged templates, and regions -- whatever those are exactly. (There are
Category:Northern Virginia and
Category:Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area permcats, for starters.)
Alai (
talk)
16:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create upmerged templates.
Apparently undergoing rapid growth by a certain someone who evidently doesn't "do" stub proposals, but is at least willing to engage in stub-proposal proposals. Or proximity proposals, maybe that is. At any rate, if you read
User_talk:Alai#Burkina Faso, you'll know all I currently know.
Alai (
talk)
00:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
E.g Category:Ganzourgou Province now has over 200 stubs alone. The best thing indeed would probably to split by 13 first and then if these become too big in the future then they can be split by Province. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 15:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I'd imagine eventually there will be around 10,000, that just towns and villages not including all the other geography stubs and the ones on departments, rivers etc. I would expect around 10,500 eventually. We are building the temmplates up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Burkina Faso/Provincial templates by province. The first few templates give a typical insight to how many are in each province. They look hideous listed together with 45 templates on one page but we needed to keep track of progress and eventually aim at expanding them when info becomes avilabale. Note that Bam province is actually only half complete.... ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 16:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Australian subdivisions seem to follow the UK model, which is to say, "total incomprehensibility to outsiders". Counting permcat numbers,
Category:Ipswich, Queensland geography stubs would seem to be viable at v63, which may or may nor correspond to an LGA. I'm currently rummaging through infoboxes to see if those add up better.
Alai (
talk)
17:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
UK-tv-bios are oversized; there seems to be something like 116 that would go in this.
Alai (
talk)
17:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
The comp-sci stubs are rather large now; I believe there are around 81 on data structures that could be carved out. I shall keep plugging away to find other possible subtypes.
Alai (
talk)
22:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
You know the drill. Alai ( talk) 01:32, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as revised.
For some countries there will be enough museums for seperate country museums like Greece and Korea etc (as has already been created) but for many museums in Africa etc I;d suggest splitting by continent first e.g
Category:Africa museum stubs etc. There are currently 774 stubs in that category as is likely to increase considerably due to the activities of the new museum project
♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦
$1,000,000?
16:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Of the upmerged Oceania bio stubs, {{
PapuaNewGuinea-bio-stub}} has reached 85 articles, and {{
Samoa-bio-stub}} 62. Speediable? –
Liveste (
talk •
edits)
16:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Irish people is oversized and this seems viable at 73 according to catscan. Could also act as a parent for
Category:Irish saint stubs.
Waacstats (
talk)
12:52, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
This stub should have had a Category a long time ago because I stopped counting when I got to F and 96 stubs. Currently under Category:Jewish biography stubs. Therefore I propose Speedy S1.
Kathleen.wright5
03:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
70 items that could use {{
sport-equipment-stub}}; more sub-cats of
Category:Equipment to come.
Her Pegship
(tis herself)
18:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
We appear to have 60 articles for which {{
US-legal-academic-bio-stub}} /
Category:United States legal academic stubs would not go a miss.
Waacstats (
talk)
16:05, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Both the following would just about be viable splits from this oversized category
Not to sure about the last name as it would map to Category:American historians which we already have a stub cat for. So do these just need resorting or do we need the new cat? Waacstats ( talk) 15:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Well, we knew this rather iffy one would arrive sooner or later. Given that we do have a
Category:Kosovo stubs, and also given that the country has been recognised by a pretty large cross-section of the world's nations, the geo-stubs from Kosovo (which have just reached 60 in number) can probably be afforded their own speediable category.
Grutness...
wha?
12:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Heading to oversized, according to catscan
Category:Italian religious biography stubs / {{
Italy-reli-bio-stub}} would have 70 articles and a saint subcat.
Waacstats (
talk)
09:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Planning to create stub types for those major rugby league nations who do not current have one. Those being;
{{
PapuaNewGuinea-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Samoa-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Tonga-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Fiji-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Lebanon-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
SouthAfrica-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Cooks-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Ireland-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Scotland-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Wales-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
England-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
Will create in short order.
Londo
06
12:11, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Renamed to CookIslands. We are talking of around 50+ articles for all the stubs to be created. Londo 06 19:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
{{
UK-diplomat-stub}} is at 90 propose speedy creation of above category.
Waacstats (
talk)
20:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
The Canadians are nearly over 800 this has about 70 according to catscan.
Waacstats (
talk)
13:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
All of the following are viable given rough figures.
Waacstats ( talk) 13:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Again Japan-bios are oversized Catscan gives over 100 articles (with one or two oddities).
Waacstats (
talk)
12:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Another one hovering below the 800 mark.
Category:United Kingdom music biography stubs / {{
UK-music-bio-stub}} and {{
UK-conductor-stub}} is viable and could act as a parent for existing musician, singer and record producer stub cats.
Waacstats (
talk)
16:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Just sorted to under 800 a
Category:United States illustrator stubs / {{
US-illustrator-stub}} would be viable. Catscan gives 55 that could take {{
US-sculptor-stub}} and I am sure we could find the extra for a category but template first
Category:United States sculptor stubs if it reaches 60.
Waacstats (
talk)
16:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
{[sfp create}} Nearly oversized, undersorted to screen actor cat but I think it may be easier to sort if we finish off the template and create
Waacstats ( talk) 16:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was re-proposed as sport-equipment-stub.
I was working on
harness and noticed it had an inappropriate stub category. I looked at the list of stub types and found nothing that would group hardware, general misc equipment or gear together under one category of stub. This category could be further subdivided when appropriate, but other technology based stub types seem inappropriate for this type of article. I'm not hardover on the title but I think this one is a good top level name. --
THE FOUNDERS INTENT
TALK
15:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Never mind, I retract my request. Too many naysayers. -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT TALK 18:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
I estimate that about 77 gov-stubs are for "gov-jobs" (rather than bios). Parent is (still) oversized.
Alai (
talk)
01:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
On its way to oversized propose the usual suspects
Waacstats ( talk) 16:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
We don't have a general Cook Islands stub type, I haven't done the numbers, but propose {{
Cooks-stub}}/
Category:Cook Islands stubs pretty much regardless of size, although I think there's a fair few anyhow, including those articles tagged with {{
Cooks-geo-stub}}.
Severo
T
C
22:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
{{ CookIslands-stub}}//{{ CookIslands-bio-stub}}//{{ CookIslands-politician-stub}} then. I'll take the geo- template to SfD. Severo T C 22:04, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as revised.
Is up over 700 making it one of the argest sport cats, I propose to split by playing position as we have done with its southern neighbour American football. Catscan shows the following would be viable
and categories for any of the later that prove to be over 60. Waacstats ( talk) 21:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Another over 700 I propose splitting this in the same way as we have with Pennsylvania.
Cat scan shows this would have 300 articles. Other states that I checked that would also be viable are California 89, North Carolina 122, Virginia 177, Illinois 62, Marland 143, Ohio 87, Georgia 148, massachusetts 83. Waacstats ( talk) 21:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as tv-tech-stub.
tv-stubs are oversized, I think this would squeak to 63 or so.
Alai (
talk)
18:19, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Heading for oversized, we already have two subcats one for the English and one for those born in the 1940s Therefore we could goeither with templates for scotland , wales and NorthernIreland or for continuing the Decade of birth split. I propose we continue along the lines of decade of birth split. templates for each decade, category where it reaches 60.
Waacstats (
talk)
14:03, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Recently proposed tempaltes for film, stage and voice have all reached 60+ propose
be speedy created Waacstats ( talk) 12:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Category:United States rail stubs is oversized, this would certainly be viable. I thought we'd laready had this proposed, in fact... (under a slightly different name, or something?).
Alai (
talk)
18:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was do not create.
Category:Russia stubs is oversized, this is viable at 61.
Alai (
talk)
17:33, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Oversized -- warning, bot at work.
And others to follow -- probably near-alphabetically -- as they become viable. Alai ( talk) 17:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Oversized. Could readily be split into the following:
Open to other ideas. Alai ( talk) 16:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
I can only 55 of these at present, but since they're the largest by-country component of
Category:European sports venue stubs, they're enough to de-oversize it (... for now...), and since many of them won't even be in Europe, I suggest we wink at the shortfall, and trust that it'll grow soon enough anyway.
Alai (
talk)
11:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
'90s singles are oversized: as this is how we split the '00s, and indeed just about every album type, I'd think this might well be speediable. "Pop" would almost certainly be viable too, if someone cared to hand-sort (or even inspect the infoboxes).
Alai (
talk)
17:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Propose the last few country stubs are created with categories and bio stubs upmerged, all regardless of size:
Country | Stub | Bio stub | Catgeory (no. articles) |
---|---|---|---|
Solomon Islands | {{ Solomons-stub}} | extant | Category:Solomon Islands stubs (c.130 + geo subcat) |
Federated States of Micronesia | {{ Micronesia-stub}} | extant | Category:Federated States of Micronesia stubs (c.145) |
Marshall Islands | {{ Marshalls-stub}} | extant | Category:Marshall Islands stubs (c.60 + geo subcat) |
Palau | {{ Palau-stub}} | extant | Category:Palau stubs (c.130) |
Tuvalu | {{ Tuvalu-stub}} | extant | Category:Tuvalu stubs (c.60 + geo subcat) |
Vatican City | {{ VaticanCity-stub}} | {{ VaticanCity-bio-stub}} |
Severo T C 23:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Close to oversized I propose splitting out a
Category:Asian television biography stubs and
Category:European television biography stubs fed with as many country specific tempaltes as people want and then {{
continent-tv-bio-stub}}.
Waacstats (
talk)
16:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Category is around 800, definitely could use some attention, though I don't have any specific numbers or suggestions.--
Thomas.macmillan (
talk)
13:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was courageously whacked into submission by Caerwine.
The East/West split that was apparently agreed earlier doesn't seem to be happening. I certainly won't be making it happen, since it doesn't align to any permcats, at least with detectable populations. Should we be looking at this again?
Alai (
talk)
11:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
A couple of the by position categories (winger and defenceman) are over 700 and there is undersorting to these from the player category. I propose we split these by decade of birth. templates upmerged except where they reach 60.
Waacstats (
talk)
21:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no consensus.
UK-bishops are oversized. I think a large chunk are pre-reformation, though it's hard to be sure, since the contents of the permcat are, basically, completely nonsense. Should be possible to busk it from the dates. (The nonsensical permcat is also scoped as England and Wales, but I don't see any point in not going with the broader scope.)
Alai (
talk)
16:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as formatted on the To Do list.
650 stubs in this category. Most are from the Kara Region but gradually the other towns and villages in other regions will be added to. I'd upmerge them for now.
♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦
$1,000,000?
16:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create upmerged tpl.
User:Wloveral's been working through the butterfly stubs, and tells me that all families of butterfly bar Riodinidae have their own stub templates. I'd like to propose a {{
Riodinidae-stub}} template, with a separate category if and when we can find 60 stubs for it. The template's probably speediable, given that all the other families have similar templates.
Grutness...
wha?
00:24, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as originally proposed.
Cat is oversized, suggest splitting into regional categories
Category:Middle Eastern politician stubs,
Category:South Asian politician stubs,
Category:East Asian politician stubs,
Category:Central Asian politician stubs. Sorting will be very easy as all countries have been sorted into national templates.--
Thomas.macmillan (
talk)
02:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create regional categories for upmerged state templates.
I can't find any officially-defined regions for Mexico, but unfortunately it's oversized, and the states are too small. For the sake of argument, what about using the five broad regions defined
here?
Alai (
talk)
18:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create dump categories per Grutness.
There was some discussion of these stubs at the astro-objects WPJ, the trend of which seems to be that no-one really wants these articles, aside from the couple of people that have been creating them. No sign of a mass trend of deletion or merger yet, however. In the meantime, the mass-created articles are totally swamping the relatively few articles that have meaningful data, that have actually received some attention from editors. From a stub-sorting POV these are in effect, unsortable on any data-driven criteria, due to an absence of said data. Accordingly, I suggest we set up one or more "dumping ground" categories for those lacking some agreed threshold. For example, with no infobox, or no text beyond the form-letter minimum used by the auto-creations, or lacking meaningful infobox/category data, like family and spectral class. I realize this is perilously close to the revenge of the return of "sub-stubs", but it's the only way I can see forward.
Alai (
talk)
21:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
While far from oversized (360 at the moment), this category is missing a few templates and categories which would be quite useful. Propose {{
Europe-protected-area-stub}}, {{
Asia-protected-area-stub}} (has category but not template), {{
Canada-protected-area-stub}} (already has two potential sub-cats) and {{
SouthAm-protected-area-stub}} and categories when past 60.--
Thomas.macmillan (
talk)
15:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as PRChina-stub.
China's still something of a mess, due to being an ad hoc mixture of Chinese language and history, and the 2 1/2 modern states. As there are new four PRC-specific stub types, an actual national parent seems only sensible. (I'm not promising to rush to re-sort the
Category:China stubs myself, mind you, though it might be worthwhile putting it on the list.)
Alai (
talk)
15:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as NBA-stub with clear scope note.
While not oversized by any stretch (currently around 360 articles), I propose a {{
NBA-stub}} (or perhaps {{
NationalBasketballAssociation-stub}}?) as well as a {{
National-basketball-federation-stub}} upmerged template for the time being. The NBA stub is a definite for a category based on first glance.--
Thomas.macmillan (
talk)
06:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
The metal albums are relentless! Only plus side is, the 18 months the crapflood of all these album stubs will be divided into
Category:2010s album stubs, which it's remotely conceivable might take the load off for a while! Or not! At any rate, 73 of these. "Doom metal" is following along, currently at 53...
Alai (
talk)
16:53, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create upmerged Italy-art-stub.
I've been coming across various articles about paintings and art collections in Italy that have been tagged with {{
Italy-artist-stub}} to indicate a connection with art in Italy because there isn't a {{
Italy-artist-stub}}. I've now switched them to {{
Italy-stub}} but given that we have various "specific" Italian art stub types, it would be nice to have a more "generic", "catchall" stub. I'd guess there's probably 15-20 articles in the general {{
art-stub}} and {{
Italy-artist-stub}} categories, and I'd guess 40 or more generic Italy stubs that would fit. There could be scope for art stubs in other countries as well?
FlagSteward (
talk)
15:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create upmerged templates by district.
Another oversized Indian state, with "too many" districts: I can't find anything with more than 40 articles. If I can find some regions to upmerge to that I can get away with... The TN article mentions the regions of
Chettinad and
Tirunelveli, as well as four
Tamil_Nadu_Police#Zones. These could stand to be better-defined, though.
Alai (
talk)
12:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
In the latter case, I'm taking the liberty of inferring "folk rock" from simultaneous presence in a "rock" stub type, and a "folk" permcat... Alai ( talk) 01:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
70 of these by category. Parent is traditionally (and currently) oversized.
Alai (
talk)
23:47, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as originally proposed, and get on with the Antarctica stubs already!.
There's also the previously-mooted prospect of a Category:Psychiatry stubs, which would be populable on the face of it, at 176 according to the cat-hierarchy: unsurprisingly, though, about 114 of those are also candidates for clin-psych.
I'd propose to start with Category:Social psychology, since that has has the largest number of direction categorisations, so seems the safest bet, and work from there. Alai ( talk) 21:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Another long-term oversized type, that I submit we have to bite the bullet on sooner or later. Alai ( talk) 20:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
To help deal with the
Category:Anatomy stubs -- again, all other/betters ideas also sought. No apparent problem with size here: I see over 100, plus would supercat
Category:Eye stubs and
Category:Dentistry stubs, I assume.
Alai (
talk)
18:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
I count 53 of these, and the med-stubs are, is as traditional, huge. Anyone find another 7 for me, advocate winking at the shortfall, or think of a better idea?
Alai (
talk)
18:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
This is a long-term-oversized stub type with huge and twisty category tree that I'm going to propose tackling in a fairly gradualist manner, so as to try to minimise overlap, and incoherent transitivity of the category tree.
I may have more to follow during the run of this proposal, but if anyone else has any ideas, I'd love to hear 'em. Alai ( talk) 17:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Yes, oversized! What, you guessed? Some possibility to re-sort s'more to
Category:2000s pop rock album stubs and to
Category:2000s indie pop album stubs, but those won't hold us for long, if at all. In due course I suspect we'll be needing:
If they can't be made viable in the short-term, I may have to settle for upmerged templates. Alai ( talk) 16:09, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
The Kerala-geos are oversized, no single district appears to be over threshold. Suggest upmerged templates, feeding into historic regions, starting with this one.
Alai (
talk)
00:43, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Sub-stubs could subsequently be created for tobacco, pipe smoking, etc. My use case here is
Dokha, which I've just created. —
Hex
(❝?!❞)
02:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Taking a look at the perm cats, it looks like one possibility might be Category:Medicinal herb and fungi stubs (permcat Category:Medicinal herbs and fungi) as a child of both Category:Pharmacology stubs and Category:Plant stubs, though the permcat needs work too. By the way, it also looks like Category:Hallucinogen stubs is in need of a rename to Category:Psychedelic, dissociative and deliriant stubs to match the change in name several years ago of its parent from Category:Hallucinogens to Category:Psychedelics, dissociatives and deliriants. Caerwine Caer’s whines 17:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Create
Recall these? How we split them by language? They were mass-undone for our trouble. Two axes appear to be viable:
or
I don't mind which, just so long as it sticks this time, and whatever WPJ input we might get is at least vaguely stub-guideline compliant. Alai ( talk) 16:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Please have the courtesy to stop changing these cats until the editors at the Opera Project had had a chance to comment. I see some 60 or 70 changes have already been made to opera stubs by Pegship - changing librettists' opera stubs into playwrights stubs etc. Can this please stop? For your information we had a similar situation in December (see here). At that time the Opera Project decided against subdividing the stub tag/cat by language. -- Klein zach 04:17, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I completely agree that the Opera stub category is verging on too large; so changes should be made so it doesn't get to that point. Here's my basic idea of what would be useful.
How's that look? §hep • ¡Talk to me! 16:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
This is a bit of an arbitrary section break as it's getting awfully long to edit easily. (Feel free to remove it). Even so, it might be worth looking at numbers. I've just had a look over the Opera Stub Cat. Kleinzach is right. There are relatively few non-singer bios in there, at most 10. So I don't know how much mileage we'd get out of a an "opera bio" cat. Overall there are about 135 "non-operas" in there - the vast majority are for companies, festivals and houses. There are also a few miscatergorized ones in there which we can remove now. But presumably not all the ones which Her Pegship removed have been restored?. It's also the case, that quite a few of those articles may not be stubs at all - they have been expanded without removing the tag. That would take some time to check, but would further reduce the size. If this project really considers that our current "Opera and opera related stub" cat is too big at about 715 or will soon become too big, what else can be done?
Just have an extra {{ opera related-topic-stub}}? Breaking down by century, language, or composer nationality (apart from the inherent problems with composer nationality) leaves the problem of what do you do with the opera-related articles? They won't fit in those sub cats because they're not operas. Would it be the case that they just appear in the current cat but not in the subcats, e.g. 19th century operas, etc.? I don't think §hep's proposal of an {{ opera-composer-stub}} is viable or would reduce numbers much, since my understanding is that the current opera stub isn't used for them anyway. There are no stubs at the moment in "Opera" which are about composers. The only other way to reduce numbers significantly is to have some stub that includes both opera houses and opera companies.
Alternatively, if the threshold hasn't been passed and looks like it won't happen for a while, especially if we can naturally prune that category, perhaps we could put off making any changes until it's absolutely necessary. Or at least until the autumn? An awful lot of OP members are going to be away or already are away for the summer. Just a thought. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 17:28, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps the easiest split would be this: change the scope of {{ Opera-stub}} to only cover the operas themselves, and create a new {{ Operatic-stub}} or similar to cover all other opera-related stub articles. The idea of a separate template (and possibly category) for opera houses is a good one, too. Grutness... wha? 00:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Here are updated figures: Opera stub =727, Opera singer stubs = 555 (I've done a check, removed some misstubbing, and finished reverting Pegship's mistakes). The figures could be reduced by 10 to 20% if the opera editors checked through the articles and uprated those that have now developed beyond stub stage. This would be the most practical solution.-- Klein zach 02:53, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
I take issue with the word "mistakes". A more neutral term might be "changes", or perhaps "work". Her Pegship (tis herself) 03:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Grutness: Please read the 'Secondary categorization rule' of WP:SUBCAT: "there are some articles which should be in both a subcategory and a parent category." This is the rule that the Opera Project follow - as explained on the project page. BTW It's a mystery to me why you think categories "clutter up the bottom of the articles" but not multiple stubs. -- Klein zach 15:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
You continue to second-guess the way another (rather technical) project goes about building its corpus of articles. Why you do this is a complete mystery to me. The music and opera editors don't tell the Gastropod Project what to do, they don't teach rocket science to the rocket scientists, they don't reclassify molecular biology diagrams or redraw maps of Angola, so why do you interfere in the editing of opera articles that you don't understand?
As for getting back on topic. While you have been attempting to justify the unjustifiable, squirming out of making an apology and writing tendentious headings, the Opera Project has been at work carrying out a major sweep of opera stubs to uprate the (many) articles that have significantly developed over the last year. As I write this, there are now only 578 articles with the opera banner (down from around 750).
I hope whoever closes this down notes that in future stub reorganization should not be carried out by stealth. When WPWSS believe that re-organization is desirable, they should first ask those directly concerned, in order to get essential background information. -- Klein zach 01:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Let's be clear about this. Pegship made about 120 unannounced edits to opera artucles. As VocediTenore and I have demonstrated, many of these edits were wrong because she didn't understand about the work of opera librettists, managers, directors etc. and made no attempt to find out. This was disruptive. The Opera Project does not own anything here, however like other contributing editors we object strongly to time-wasting disruptions. -- Klein zach 06:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Some questions to consider:
Voceditenore ( talk) 11:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Inspired by the discussion here, the Opera Project has started a stub review drive. We're going through the members of Category:Opera stubs and removing stub tagged articles that had since been expanded, and removing the occasional mis-tagging of articles that are not actually opera-related. So far we've done A-F and the opera stub numbers are now down to 675. G-I will be done by tomorrow. It's been quite a useful exercise. Voceditenore ( talk) 13:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
The review has now finished. The figure is down to 547 -smaller than the number of opera singer stubs. -- Klein zach 01:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
May I remind everyone involved in this conversation that Wikipedia is a resource that anyone can edit. For every trained opera musician like myself, there will always be someone less-informed, though possibly as well-intentioned, as myself. If the opera project would prefer that others not contribute to opera articles, perhaps a separate opera wiki would be the answer. Signing off from Disneyland... Her Pegship (tis herself) 23:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Apart from one or two slips, Pegship's edits were perfectly accurate in that they made the best choice of alternate stub given that the WPSS had decided to take a large body of articles out of their existing stub category. We pointed out some of the problems with using the alternate stubs from our point of view. But that's not the real issue as far as I'm concerned. The real issue is that WPSS decided to make and start implementing organizational and systemic changes affecting a large body of articles without even mentioning it to the project that looks after those articles.
From the discussions on the WPSS talk page and here, that seems to be your (collective "your") normal way of operating, and I acknowledge that none of you consider that way of operating to be a "mistake". But, really, was it so unreasonable for us to ask to be informed about the planned/proposed changes and given a chance for input before they got underway? This has nothing to do with ownership any more than the request in this WPSS banner which you (collective "you") put on the stub-category pages looked after by your project.
Now, is anyone here willing to return to actually discussing the proposal? Voceditenore ( talk) 05:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
According to CatScan, there are 38 articles under Category:Opera stubs which could be marked with some type of opera-bio-stub, including articles from Category:Opera critics, Category:Opera composers, Category:Opera directors, Category:Opera managers, Category:Opera designers, and Category:Opera librettists. Other types which would be less viable would be Category:Opera houses (18 articles) & Category:Opera festivals (10). Although the Opera Project has done some superb housecleaning as noted above, if they are amenable to any further splits I would suggest a {{ opera-bio-stub}} per the numbers I have given. Her Pegship (tis herself) 19:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
All the other discussions on this page have been closed. Will this be closed as well now? Or should I go ahead and close it myself? -- Klein zach 00:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Every other item on this page has been closed. Why hasn't this one? -- Klein zach 00:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
The number of Opera-related stubs has been reduced during the course of this discussion. The Opera Project are asked to periodically review and de-stub as necessary. (Doing this at least once a year would be a good idea.) Any future proposals for new stub types need to be quantified and discussed between the WPSS and the Opera Project.
This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
This is an archive of discussions from Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals for the month of June 2008. Please move completed June discussions to this page as they are closed, add discussion headers to each proposal showing the result, and leave incomplete discussions on the Proposals page. After June, the remainder of the discussions will be moved to this page, whether stub types have been created or not.
Those who create a stub template/cat should be responsible for moving the discussion here and listing the stub type in the archive summary.
Stub proposers please note: Items tagged as "nocreate" or "no consensus" are welcome for re-proposal if and when circumstances are auspicious.
The result of the debate was create.
I was just adding to the article
Monotonix, an Israeli band, when I decided to see if there was a specific stub for Israeli bands. Noting that the existing stubs are as far flung as Danish and Korean bands, I nearly created it before noticing this area. There are 61 articles in the category for Israeli musical groups with four subcategories and surely many of those can only be stub class.
Red157(
talk •
contribs)
23:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Upmerge following, S2 speedy
Severo T C 19:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Severo T C 19:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create upmerged template.
Looking through the fiddler articles I see quite a few stubs (see for example
category:Fiddlers by nationality; the
List of fiddlers talk page and
historical changes suggest that there are many more on the way)
. The most appropriate stub category currently available is
Violinist stubs, but there are already nearly 300 "violinist" stubs, of which only a handful are fiddlers'. The editor population attracted to the "violinist" label, and the category's size, make me think that fiddler stub expansion won't go anywhere without its own category. —
eitc
h
06:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
This oversized and essentially useless category continues to plague us (and continues to be useless). Here's some possibilities, and their estimated sizes from the category tree:
I'd take the numbers with a pinch of salt in this case, as many of them aren't in the "English" portion of the permcat tree, just stub-tagged that way, but they seem to at least indicate fairly strong prospects of viability. Alai ( talk) 16:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Don't even ask me exactly what these are... I just know we have a lot of 'em! The
Category:Membrane protein stubs are very oversized; this would seem to split 'em roughly in two. I'll try to find a WPJ that would be able to tell if this makes any sense.
Alai (
talk)
12:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
The mystery of why
Category:Brazil stubs got so big is solved: there's 150 of these.
Alai (
talk)
16:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as architecture-element-stub.
Another long-standing oversized parent, I think this would possibly solve that at a stroke. There's anywhere up to 211 of these, if you believe the category hierarchy implicitly, but at any rate there's at least 65 that are directly in the permcat.
Alai (
talk)
20:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Did we approve this already? Rings a bell from someplace, seems to be 62 of them. As noted, parent oversized.
Alai (
talk)
20:41, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Not one that would have occurred to me, but there seem to be exactly 60 of these in the oversized
Category:Government stubs.
Alai (
talk)
20:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Category:Poet stubs are oversized -- see
WT:WSS/T for the gory details -- the Indians seem to be the only new nationality that're viable, at 64.
Alai (
talk)
15:35, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
73 of these, parent is oversized.
Alai (
talk)
16:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as -collection-.
Category:Story stubs is oversized, this is the most sensible subcat I can find; would be at least 275 of them. Nothing else by-genre seems to work (although, dismayingly,
Category:Short stories by Orson Scott Card is responsible for 50 of these).
Alai (
talk)
17:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
At the moment these stubs are upmerged to
Category:Judaism stubs, but there are now 71 so I propose Speedy creation (S1).
Kathleen.wright5
06:19, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was taken to sfd.
Category:Law enforcement stubs currently has 733 members and could usefully be split. I have made a new stub-template
Template:Riot-control-stub. Is it any use to you?
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
10:18, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Permcat has next to no subcategorisation, so DoB seems to be the only viable option. Alai ( talk) 16:45, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Category:China stubs is oversized, this is the best I can come up with. Perhaps with upmerged templates for TV, radio, newspapers, etc.
Alai (
talk)
16:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Oversized. Following the pattern of the US split:
The "service" one might be excessively broad. Alai ( talk) 16:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Parent is oversized, there seems to be 68 of these. More generally, we'll probably need upmerged templates, and regions -- whatever those are exactly. (There are
Category:Northern Virginia and
Category:Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area permcats, for starters.)
Alai (
talk)
16:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create upmerged templates.
Apparently undergoing rapid growth by a certain someone who evidently doesn't "do" stub proposals, but is at least willing to engage in stub-proposal proposals. Or proximity proposals, maybe that is. At any rate, if you read
User_talk:Alai#Burkina Faso, you'll know all I currently know.
Alai (
talk)
00:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
E.g Category:Ganzourgou Province now has over 200 stubs alone. The best thing indeed would probably to split by 13 first and then if these become too big in the future then they can be split by Province. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 15:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I'd imagine eventually there will be around 10,000, that just towns and villages not including all the other geography stubs and the ones on departments, rivers etc. I would expect around 10,500 eventually. We are building the temmplates up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Burkina Faso/Provincial templates by province. The first few templates give a typical insight to how many are in each province. They look hideous listed together with 45 templates on one page but we needed to keep track of progress and eventually aim at expanding them when info becomes avilabale. Note that Bam province is actually only half complete.... ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 16:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Australian subdivisions seem to follow the UK model, which is to say, "total incomprehensibility to outsiders". Counting permcat numbers,
Category:Ipswich, Queensland geography stubs would seem to be viable at v63, which may or may nor correspond to an LGA. I'm currently rummaging through infoboxes to see if those add up better.
Alai (
talk)
17:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
UK-tv-bios are oversized; there seems to be something like 116 that would go in this.
Alai (
talk)
17:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
The comp-sci stubs are rather large now; I believe there are around 81 on data structures that could be carved out. I shall keep plugging away to find other possible subtypes.
Alai (
talk)
22:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
You know the drill. Alai ( talk) 01:32, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as revised.
For some countries there will be enough museums for seperate country museums like Greece and Korea etc (as has already been created) but for many museums in Africa etc I;d suggest splitting by continent first e.g
Category:Africa museum stubs etc. There are currently 774 stubs in that category as is likely to increase considerably due to the activities of the new museum project
♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦
$1,000,000?
16:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Of the upmerged Oceania bio stubs, {{
PapuaNewGuinea-bio-stub}} has reached 85 articles, and {{
Samoa-bio-stub}} 62. Speediable? –
Liveste (
talk •
edits)
16:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Irish people is oversized and this seems viable at 73 according to catscan. Could also act as a parent for
Category:Irish saint stubs.
Waacstats (
talk)
12:52, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
This stub should have had a Category a long time ago because I stopped counting when I got to F and 96 stubs. Currently under Category:Jewish biography stubs. Therefore I propose Speedy S1.
Kathleen.wright5
03:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
70 items that could use {{
sport-equipment-stub}}; more sub-cats of
Category:Equipment to come.
Her Pegship
(tis herself)
18:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
We appear to have 60 articles for which {{
US-legal-academic-bio-stub}} /
Category:United States legal academic stubs would not go a miss.
Waacstats (
talk)
16:05, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Both the following would just about be viable splits from this oversized category
Not to sure about the last name as it would map to Category:American historians which we already have a stub cat for. So do these just need resorting or do we need the new cat? Waacstats ( talk) 15:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Well, we knew this rather iffy one would arrive sooner or later. Given that we do have a
Category:Kosovo stubs, and also given that the country has been recognised by a pretty large cross-section of the world's nations, the geo-stubs from Kosovo (which have just reached 60 in number) can probably be afforded their own speediable category.
Grutness...
wha?
12:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Heading to oversized, according to catscan
Category:Italian religious biography stubs / {{
Italy-reli-bio-stub}} would have 70 articles and a saint subcat.
Waacstats (
talk)
09:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Planning to create stub types for those major rugby league nations who do not current have one. Those being;
{{
PapuaNewGuinea-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Samoa-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Tonga-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Fiji-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Lebanon-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
SouthAfrica-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Cooks-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Ireland-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Scotland-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
Wales-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
{{
England-rugbyleague-bio-stub}}
Will create in short order.
Londo
06
12:11, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Renamed to CookIslands. We are talking of around 50+ articles for all the stubs to be created. Londo 06 19:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
{{
UK-diplomat-stub}} is at 90 propose speedy creation of above category.
Waacstats (
talk)
20:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
The Canadians are nearly over 800 this has about 70 according to catscan.
Waacstats (
talk)
13:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
All of the following are viable given rough figures.
Waacstats ( talk) 13:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Again Japan-bios are oversized Catscan gives over 100 articles (with one or two oddities).
Waacstats (
talk)
12:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Another one hovering below the 800 mark.
Category:United Kingdom music biography stubs / {{
UK-music-bio-stub}} and {{
UK-conductor-stub}} is viable and could act as a parent for existing musician, singer and record producer stub cats.
Waacstats (
talk)
16:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Just sorted to under 800 a
Category:United States illustrator stubs / {{
US-illustrator-stub}} would be viable. Catscan gives 55 that could take {{
US-sculptor-stub}} and I am sure we could find the extra for a category but template first
Category:United States sculptor stubs if it reaches 60.
Waacstats (
talk)
16:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
{[sfp create}} Nearly oversized, undersorted to screen actor cat but I think it may be easier to sort if we finish off the template and create
Waacstats ( talk) 16:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was re-proposed as sport-equipment-stub.
I was working on
harness and noticed it had an inappropriate stub category. I looked at the list of stub types and found nothing that would group hardware, general misc equipment or gear together under one category of stub. This category could be further subdivided when appropriate, but other technology based stub types seem inappropriate for this type of article. I'm not hardover on the title but I think this one is a good top level name. --
THE FOUNDERS INTENT
TALK
15:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Never mind, I retract my request. Too many naysayers. -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT TALK 18:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
I estimate that about 77 gov-stubs are for "gov-jobs" (rather than bios). Parent is (still) oversized.
Alai (
talk)
01:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
On its way to oversized propose the usual suspects
Waacstats ( talk) 16:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
We don't have a general Cook Islands stub type, I haven't done the numbers, but propose {{
Cooks-stub}}/
Category:Cook Islands stubs pretty much regardless of size, although I think there's a fair few anyhow, including those articles tagged with {{
Cooks-geo-stub}}.
Severo
T
C
22:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
{{ CookIslands-stub}}//{{ CookIslands-bio-stub}}//{{ CookIslands-politician-stub}} then. I'll take the geo- template to SfD. Severo T C 22:04, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as revised.
Is up over 700 making it one of the argest sport cats, I propose to split by playing position as we have done with its southern neighbour American football. Catscan shows the following would be viable
and categories for any of the later that prove to be over 60. Waacstats ( talk) 21:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Another over 700 I propose splitting this in the same way as we have with Pennsylvania.
Cat scan shows this would have 300 articles. Other states that I checked that would also be viable are California 89, North Carolina 122, Virginia 177, Illinois 62, Marland 143, Ohio 87, Georgia 148, massachusetts 83. Waacstats ( talk) 21:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as tv-tech-stub.
tv-stubs are oversized, I think this would squeak to 63 or so.
Alai (
talk)
18:19, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Heading for oversized, we already have two subcats one for the English and one for those born in the 1940s Therefore we could goeither with templates for scotland , wales and NorthernIreland or for continuing the Decade of birth split. I propose we continue along the lines of decade of birth split. templates for each decade, category where it reaches 60.
Waacstats (
talk)
14:03, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Recently proposed tempaltes for film, stage and voice have all reached 60+ propose
be speedy created Waacstats ( talk) 12:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Category:United States rail stubs is oversized, this would certainly be viable. I thought we'd laready had this proposed, in fact... (under a slightly different name, or something?).
Alai (
talk)
18:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was do not create.
Category:Russia stubs is oversized, this is viable at 61.
Alai (
talk)
17:33, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Oversized -- warning, bot at work.
And others to follow -- probably near-alphabetically -- as they become viable. Alai ( talk) 17:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Oversized. Could readily be split into the following:
Open to other ideas. Alai ( talk) 16:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
I can only 55 of these at present, but since they're the largest by-country component of
Category:European sports venue stubs, they're enough to de-oversize it (... for now...), and since many of them won't even be in Europe, I suggest we wink at the shortfall, and trust that it'll grow soon enough anyway.
Alai (
talk)
11:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
'90s singles are oversized: as this is how we split the '00s, and indeed just about every album type, I'd think this might well be speediable. "Pop" would almost certainly be viable too, if someone cared to hand-sort (or even inspect the infoboxes).
Alai (
talk)
17:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Propose the last few country stubs are created with categories and bio stubs upmerged, all regardless of size:
Country | Stub | Bio stub | Catgeory (no. articles) |
---|---|---|---|
Solomon Islands | {{ Solomons-stub}} | extant | Category:Solomon Islands stubs (c.130 + geo subcat) |
Federated States of Micronesia | {{ Micronesia-stub}} | extant | Category:Federated States of Micronesia stubs (c.145) |
Marshall Islands | {{ Marshalls-stub}} | extant | Category:Marshall Islands stubs (c.60 + geo subcat) |
Palau | {{ Palau-stub}} | extant | Category:Palau stubs (c.130) |
Tuvalu | {{ Tuvalu-stub}} | extant | Category:Tuvalu stubs (c.60 + geo subcat) |
Vatican City | {{ VaticanCity-stub}} | {{ VaticanCity-bio-stub}} |
Severo T C 23:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Close to oversized I propose splitting out a
Category:Asian television biography stubs and
Category:European television biography stubs fed with as many country specific tempaltes as people want and then {{
continent-tv-bio-stub}}.
Waacstats (
talk)
16:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Category is around 800, definitely could use some attention, though I don't have any specific numbers or suggestions.--
Thomas.macmillan (
talk)
13:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was courageously whacked into submission by Caerwine.
The East/West split that was apparently agreed earlier doesn't seem to be happening. I certainly won't be making it happen, since it doesn't align to any permcats, at least with detectable populations. Should we be looking at this again?
Alai (
talk)
11:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
A couple of the by position categories (winger and defenceman) are over 700 and there is undersorting to these from the player category. I propose we split these by decade of birth. templates upmerged except where they reach 60.
Waacstats (
talk)
21:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no consensus.
UK-bishops are oversized. I think a large chunk are pre-reformation, though it's hard to be sure, since the contents of the permcat are, basically, completely nonsense. Should be possible to busk it from the dates. (The nonsensical permcat is also scoped as England and Wales, but I don't see any point in not going with the broader scope.)
Alai (
talk)
16:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as formatted on the To Do list.
650 stubs in this category. Most are from the Kara Region but gradually the other towns and villages in other regions will be added to. I'd upmerge them for now.
♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦
$1,000,000?
16:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create upmerged tpl.
User:Wloveral's been working through the butterfly stubs, and tells me that all families of butterfly bar Riodinidae have their own stub templates. I'd like to propose a {{
Riodinidae-stub}} template, with a separate category if and when we can find 60 stubs for it. The template's probably speediable, given that all the other families have similar templates.
Grutness...
wha?
00:24, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as originally proposed.
Cat is oversized, suggest splitting into regional categories
Category:Middle Eastern politician stubs,
Category:South Asian politician stubs,
Category:East Asian politician stubs,
Category:Central Asian politician stubs. Sorting will be very easy as all countries have been sorted into national templates.--
Thomas.macmillan (
talk)
02:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create regional categories for upmerged state templates.
I can't find any officially-defined regions for Mexico, but unfortunately it's oversized, and the states are too small. For the sake of argument, what about using the five broad regions defined
here?
Alai (
talk)
18:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create dump categories per Grutness.
There was some discussion of these stubs at the astro-objects WPJ, the trend of which seems to be that no-one really wants these articles, aside from the couple of people that have been creating them. No sign of a mass trend of deletion or merger yet, however. In the meantime, the mass-created articles are totally swamping the relatively few articles that have meaningful data, that have actually received some attention from editors. From a stub-sorting POV these are in effect, unsortable on any data-driven criteria, due to an absence of said data. Accordingly, I suggest we set up one or more "dumping ground" categories for those lacking some agreed threshold. For example, with no infobox, or no text beyond the form-letter minimum used by the auto-creations, or lacking meaningful infobox/category data, like family and spectral class. I realize this is perilously close to the revenge of the return of "sub-stubs", but it's the only way I can see forward.
Alai (
talk)
21:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
While far from oversized (360 at the moment), this category is missing a few templates and categories which would be quite useful. Propose {{
Europe-protected-area-stub}}, {{
Asia-protected-area-stub}} (has category but not template), {{
Canada-protected-area-stub}} (already has two potential sub-cats) and {{
SouthAm-protected-area-stub}} and categories when past 60.--
Thomas.macmillan (
talk)
15:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as PRChina-stub.
China's still something of a mess, due to being an ad hoc mixture of Chinese language and history, and the 2 1/2 modern states. As there are new four PRC-specific stub types, an actual national parent seems only sensible. (I'm not promising to rush to re-sort the
Category:China stubs myself, mind you, though it might be worthwhile putting it on the list.)
Alai (
talk)
15:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as NBA-stub with clear scope note.
While not oversized by any stretch (currently around 360 articles), I propose a {{
NBA-stub}} (or perhaps {{
NationalBasketballAssociation-stub}}?) as well as a {{
National-basketball-federation-stub}} upmerged template for the time being. The NBA stub is a definite for a category based on first glance.--
Thomas.macmillan (
talk)
06:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
The metal albums are relentless! Only plus side is, the 18 months the crapflood of all these album stubs will be divided into
Category:2010s album stubs, which it's remotely conceivable might take the load off for a while! Or not! At any rate, 73 of these. "Doom metal" is following along, currently at 53...
Alai (
talk)
16:53, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create upmerged Italy-art-stub.
I've been coming across various articles about paintings and art collections in Italy that have been tagged with {{
Italy-artist-stub}} to indicate a connection with art in Italy because there isn't a {{
Italy-artist-stub}}. I've now switched them to {{
Italy-stub}} but given that we have various "specific" Italian art stub types, it would be nice to have a more "generic", "catchall" stub. I'd guess there's probably 15-20 articles in the general {{
art-stub}} and {{
Italy-artist-stub}} categories, and I'd guess 40 or more generic Italy stubs that would fit. There could be scope for art stubs in other countries as well?
FlagSteward (
talk)
15:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create upmerged templates by district.
Another oversized Indian state, with "too many" districts: I can't find anything with more than 40 articles. If I can find some regions to upmerge to that I can get away with... The TN article mentions the regions of
Chettinad and
Tirunelveli, as well as four
Tamil_Nadu_Police#Zones. These could stand to be better-defined, though.
Alai (
talk)
12:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
In the latter case, I'm taking the liberty of inferring "folk rock" from simultaneous presence in a "rock" stub type, and a "folk" permcat... Alai ( talk) 01:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
70 of these by category. Parent is traditionally (and currently) oversized.
Alai (
talk)
23:47, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create as originally proposed, and get on with the Antarctica stubs already!.
There's also the previously-mooted prospect of a Category:Psychiatry stubs, which would be populable on the face of it, at 176 according to the cat-hierarchy: unsurprisingly, though, about 114 of those are also candidates for clin-psych.
I'd propose to start with Category:Social psychology, since that has has the largest number of direction categorisations, so seems the safest bet, and work from there. Alai ( talk) 21:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Another long-term oversized type, that I submit we have to bite the bullet on sooner or later. Alai ( talk) 20:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
To help deal with the
Category:Anatomy stubs -- again, all other/betters ideas also sought. No apparent problem with size here: I see over 100, plus would supercat
Category:Eye stubs and
Category:Dentistry stubs, I assume.
Alai (
talk)
18:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
I count 53 of these, and the med-stubs are, is as traditional, huge. Anyone find another 7 for me, advocate winking at the shortfall, or think of a better idea?
Alai (
talk)
18:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
This is a long-term-oversized stub type with huge and twisty category tree that I'm going to propose tackling in a fairly gradualist manner, so as to try to minimise overlap, and incoherent transitivity of the category tree.
I may have more to follow during the run of this proposal, but if anyone else has any ideas, I'd love to hear 'em. Alai ( talk) 17:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Yes, oversized! What, you guessed? Some possibility to re-sort s'more to
Category:2000s pop rock album stubs and to
Category:2000s indie pop album stubs, but those won't hold us for long, if at all. In due course I suspect we'll be needing:
If they can't be made viable in the short-term, I may have to settle for upmerged templates. Alai ( talk) 16:09, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
The Kerala-geos are oversized, no single district appears to be over threshold. Suggest upmerged templates, feeding into historic regions, starting with this one.
Alai (
talk)
00:43, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Sub-stubs could subsequently be created for tobacco, pipe smoking, etc. My use case here is
Dokha, which I've just created. —
Hex
(❝?!❞)
02:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Taking a look at the perm cats, it looks like one possibility might be Category:Medicinal herb and fungi stubs (permcat Category:Medicinal herbs and fungi) as a child of both Category:Pharmacology stubs and Category:Plant stubs, though the permcat needs work too. By the way, it also looks like Category:Hallucinogen stubs is in need of a rename to Category:Psychedelic, dissociative and deliriant stubs to match the change in name several years ago of its parent from Category:Hallucinogens to Category:Psychedelics, dissociatives and deliriants. Caerwine Caer’s whines 17:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was create.
Create
Recall these? How we split them by language? They were mass-undone for our trouble. Two axes appear to be viable:
or
I don't mind which, just so long as it sticks this time, and whatever WPJ input we might get is at least vaguely stub-guideline compliant. Alai ( talk) 16:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Please have the courtesy to stop changing these cats until the editors at the Opera Project had had a chance to comment. I see some 60 or 70 changes have already been made to opera stubs by Pegship - changing librettists' opera stubs into playwrights stubs etc. Can this please stop? For your information we had a similar situation in December (see here). At that time the Opera Project decided against subdividing the stub tag/cat by language. -- Klein zach 04:17, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I completely agree that the Opera stub category is verging on too large; so changes should be made so it doesn't get to that point. Here's my basic idea of what would be useful.
How's that look? §hep • ¡Talk to me! 16:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
This is a bit of an arbitrary section break as it's getting awfully long to edit easily. (Feel free to remove it). Even so, it might be worth looking at numbers. I've just had a look over the Opera Stub Cat. Kleinzach is right. There are relatively few non-singer bios in there, at most 10. So I don't know how much mileage we'd get out of a an "opera bio" cat. Overall there are about 135 "non-operas" in there - the vast majority are for companies, festivals and houses. There are also a few miscatergorized ones in there which we can remove now. But presumably not all the ones which Her Pegship removed have been restored?. It's also the case, that quite a few of those articles may not be stubs at all - they have been expanded without removing the tag. That would take some time to check, but would further reduce the size. If this project really considers that our current "Opera and opera related stub" cat is too big at about 715 or will soon become too big, what else can be done?
Just have an extra {{ opera related-topic-stub}}? Breaking down by century, language, or composer nationality (apart from the inherent problems with composer nationality) leaves the problem of what do you do with the opera-related articles? They won't fit in those sub cats because they're not operas. Would it be the case that they just appear in the current cat but not in the subcats, e.g. 19th century operas, etc.? I don't think §hep's proposal of an {{ opera-composer-stub}} is viable or would reduce numbers much, since my understanding is that the current opera stub isn't used for them anyway. There are no stubs at the moment in "Opera" which are about composers. The only other way to reduce numbers significantly is to have some stub that includes both opera houses and opera companies.
Alternatively, if the threshold hasn't been passed and looks like it won't happen for a while, especially if we can naturally prune that category, perhaps we could put off making any changes until it's absolutely necessary. Or at least until the autumn? An awful lot of OP members are going to be away or already are away for the summer. Just a thought. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 17:28, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps the easiest split would be this: change the scope of {{ Opera-stub}} to only cover the operas themselves, and create a new {{ Operatic-stub}} or similar to cover all other opera-related stub articles. The idea of a separate template (and possibly category) for opera houses is a good one, too. Grutness... wha? 00:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Here are updated figures: Opera stub =727, Opera singer stubs = 555 (I've done a check, removed some misstubbing, and finished reverting Pegship's mistakes). The figures could be reduced by 10 to 20% if the opera editors checked through the articles and uprated those that have now developed beyond stub stage. This would be the most practical solution.-- Klein zach 02:53, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
I take issue with the word "mistakes". A more neutral term might be "changes", or perhaps "work". Her Pegship (tis herself) 03:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Grutness: Please read the 'Secondary categorization rule' of WP:SUBCAT: "there are some articles which should be in both a subcategory and a parent category." This is the rule that the Opera Project follow - as explained on the project page. BTW It's a mystery to me why you think categories "clutter up the bottom of the articles" but not multiple stubs. -- Klein zach 15:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
You continue to second-guess the way another (rather technical) project goes about building its corpus of articles. Why you do this is a complete mystery to me. The music and opera editors don't tell the Gastropod Project what to do, they don't teach rocket science to the rocket scientists, they don't reclassify molecular biology diagrams or redraw maps of Angola, so why do you interfere in the editing of opera articles that you don't understand?
As for getting back on topic. While you have been attempting to justify the unjustifiable, squirming out of making an apology and writing tendentious headings, the Opera Project has been at work carrying out a major sweep of opera stubs to uprate the (many) articles that have significantly developed over the last year. As I write this, there are now only 578 articles with the opera banner (down from around 750).
I hope whoever closes this down notes that in future stub reorganization should not be carried out by stealth. When WPWSS believe that re-organization is desirable, they should first ask those directly concerned, in order to get essential background information. -- Klein zach 01:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Let's be clear about this. Pegship made about 120 unannounced edits to opera artucles. As VocediTenore and I have demonstrated, many of these edits were wrong because she didn't understand about the work of opera librettists, managers, directors etc. and made no attempt to find out. This was disruptive. The Opera Project does not own anything here, however like other contributing editors we object strongly to time-wasting disruptions. -- Klein zach 06:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Some questions to consider:
Voceditenore ( talk) 11:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Inspired by the discussion here, the Opera Project has started a stub review drive. We're going through the members of Category:Opera stubs and removing stub tagged articles that had since been expanded, and removing the occasional mis-tagging of articles that are not actually opera-related. So far we've done A-F and the opera stub numbers are now down to 675. G-I will be done by tomorrow. It's been quite a useful exercise. Voceditenore ( talk) 13:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
The review has now finished. The figure is down to 547 -smaller than the number of opera singer stubs. -- Klein zach 01:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
May I remind everyone involved in this conversation that Wikipedia is a resource that anyone can edit. For every trained opera musician like myself, there will always be someone less-informed, though possibly as well-intentioned, as myself. If the opera project would prefer that others not contribute to opera articles, perhaps a separate opera wiki would be the answer. Signing off from Disneyland... Her Pegship (tis herself) 23:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Apart from one or two slips, Pegship's edits were perfectly accurate in that they made the best choice of alternate stub given that the WPSS had decided to take a large body of articles out of their existing stub category. We pointed out some of the problems with using the alternate stubs from our point of view. But that's not the real issue as far as I'm concerned. The real issue is that WPSS decided to make and start implementing organizational and systemic changes affecting a large body of articles without even mentioning it to the project that looks after those articles.
From the discussions on the WPSS talk page and here, that seems to be your (collective "your") normal way of operating, and I acknowledge that none of you consider that way of operating to be a "mistake". But, really, was it so unreasonable for us to ask to be informed about the planned/proposed changes and given a chance for input before they got underway? This has nothing to do with ownership any more than the request in this WPSS banner which you (collective "you") put on the stub-category pages looked after by your project.
Now, is anyone here willing to return to actually discussing the proposal? Voceditenore ( talk) 05:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
According to CatScan, there are 38 articles under Category:Opera stubs which could be marked with some type of opera-bio-stub, including articles from Category:Opera critics, Category:Opera composers, Category:Opera directors, Category:Opera managers, Category:Opera designers, and Category:Opera librettists. Other types which would be less viable would be Category:Opera houses (18 articles) & Category:Opera festivals (10). Although the Opera Project has done some superb housecleaning as noted above, if they are amenable to any further splits I would suggest a {{ opera-bio-stub}} per the numbers I have given. Her Pegship (tis herself) 19:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
All the other discussions on this page have been closed. Will this be closed as well now? Or should I go ahead and close it myself? -- Klein zach 00:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Every other item on this page has been closed. Why hasn't this one? -- Klein zach 00:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
The number of Opera-related stubs has been reduced during the course of this discussion. The Opera Project are asked to periodically review and de-stub as necessary. (Doing this at least once a year would be a good idea.) Any future proposals for new stub types need to be quantified and discussed between the WPSS and the Opera Project.