The result of the discussion was upmerge all except Transformers stubs
Propose upmerging all of these to the parent category:
Dawynn ( talk) 14:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was Renbame both. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:01, 15 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Seeking parallelism again. I see the following:
Propose moving the following:
Dawynn ( talk) 17:16, 23 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was reverse rename, per amended nomination
I see the following stub categories:
I propose moving the following categories for parallelism:
And at this point, I'm choosing to leave this one alone, unless someone has a suggestion:
Dawynn ( talk) 18:50, 21 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was "Delete'
This template doesn't make any sense, since there is no such thing as “2011s”. Svick ( talk) 15:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete template and create two new replacements. Keep category for now, but propose for split when size allows.
One glance at the template name should give some indication of the problem. This template - previously at the correctly named ( via this forum) {{ Ski-stub}} - was drastically rescoped when WikiProject Skiing changed its name (not that renaming a WikiProject should in any way affect the name or scope of a stub template...). Rather than proposing a second stub for snowboarding at WP:WSS/P, which would have been the more senible thing to do, the name was changed to a cumbersome and convention-defying name. I propose renaming this back to its original name of {{ Ski-stub}} ({{ Skiing-stub}} would perhaps be better), adding a separate {{ Snowboarding-stub}}, deleting the current template name, and - if possible -splitting the category in the same way (the number of stubs is fairly slim, but given the presence of a WikiProject, the lower threshold is probably usable). Grutness... wha? 10:18, 19 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was Delete
These had already been cleared. The category is currently a soft redirect, but everything was still listed on the stub type list, as well as parent categories. I have now cleared all the connections, and these should be ultimately removed. They have already been replaced by appropriate North and South templates and categories. Dawynn ( talk) 13:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete category, upmerge template, create two new related templates
Has shrunk to the point where it's not really a necessity to keep this separate - just nine stubs, and hardly likely to be lost among the fewer than 200 chess stubs if it's upmerged. A further proposal which might be useful is for separate upmerged {{ Chess-tournament-stub}} and {{ Chess-org-stub}} templates, given that over 40 of those stubs are for tournaments and around 30 are for associations and federations. Grutness... wha? 07:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge the two remaining undersized categories
Several German states have their own building and structure stub categories - with one exception - they are all seriously undersized. Unless it is possible to populate them to somewhere near the 60-stub threshold, the following should be upmerged:
It may just be undersorting, and if it is I'll happily withdraw this proposal - but if it's not, then upmerging will be the simplest/best option. Grutness... wha? 07:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Withdrawing noms for two which are now past threshold (well done, Waacstats, or whoever else it might have been who got Bavaria and Berlin to the threshold). The others are at 22, 34, 46, and 16 stubs respectively now. Still a chance some of them might reach threshold, especially Hesse and Hamburg. Grutness... wha? 11:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Well, I did my best, but couldn't get either of the other two above 45 stubs, so upmerging still seems the best option for them. Grutness... wha? 23:29, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete
I'm sorry, but this one is surely at the faintly ridiculous level. Lanark is a town of 8,000 people in Scotland. The category on Lanark only has nine articles, so the likelihood of there being 60 stubs (or even 30, given that there is a WikiProject) look remarkably remote. We have stub types for Glasgow and Edinburgh, but those are the only cities large enough to really warrant them in Scotland - and if we were to have more, Lanark would be a long way down the list (Stirling or Aberdeen, maybe, but one for Lanark is, to say the least, overkill). A separate stub template for Lanark is useless for WP:WSS, and for general editing use as well, and is totally unnecessary for the Lanark WikiProject since they're already using a banner assessment template which does all the stub template can and more besides. Delete. Grutness... wha? 07:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge both
Double upmerge as underpopulated (permcat has 26 stubs); if kept, then rename to Cat:Georgian (country) cuisine stubs per other stub categories for this country. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:55, 15 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was Keep American Old West stubs, upmerge the bio stubs into it. Change name of both templates
We seem to have acquired a couple of new unproposed stub types, both with faultily-named templates. No objection to keeping either - but at corrected names ({{ OldWest-stub}} and {{ OldWest-bio-stub}}, deleting current names, per standard naming conventions). The bio category may need upmerging, since both categories are undersized and only just reach 60 stubs between them. Grutness... wha? 22:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC) reply
::Support template rename; Oppose category deletion. --
Rosiestep (
talk) 02:39, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
reply
The result of the discussion was Rename all. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC) reply
A few simple renames here - all of these categories are incorrectly ina plural form:
Note that all three are undersized, so there be no objections from me if anyone thought upmerging was a better option. Grutness... wha? 21:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was rename templates, deleting current names. May need revisiting at a future date, since this nom became a bit of a trainwreck with various opposing options.
Two more misnamed templates, each feeding into what should be parent-only stub cats (if such cats are needed at all - all Normandy geo-stubs are subdivided by departement, so having a separate level between them and Normandy overall seems superfluous). Delete.
Grutness...
wha? 03:36, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
reply
The result of the discussion was delete } Propose deletion. We can't even justify a Cat:African hotel (structure) stubs. We're definitely not ready for an Algerian category. Plus, this is not named correctly, based on similar discussions (current convention would be Cat:Algerian hotel(structure) stubs). There is no template. The permcat has only one article, so even a template is questionable. So many issues. Dawynn ( talk) 15:46, 12 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete
Propose deletion of this category and template. There is no Cat:European basketball stubs category, so there is not a good place to categorize this. The category is undersized, and was never approved. Instead, I would suggest using the existing {{ RMacedonia-basketball-bio-stub}} and creating {{ RMacedonia-basketball-team-stub}}, and appropriately retagging each of the articles found here. Upmerge the new team template to Cat:Republic of Macedonia stubs and Cat:Europe basketball team stubs. Remaining articles that don't easily fall into these categories should be tagged with {{ RMacedonia-stub}} and a second appropriate tag to be chosen according to the article. Suggest:
Dawynn ( talk) 15:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge
Propose upmerging:
Dawynn ( talk) 15:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge
Propose upmerging:
Dawynn ( talk) 15:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete. - Mairi ( talk) 21:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming this to {{ chechnya-stub}}. Dawynn ( talk) 19:49, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was rename per nomination
Looks like the following should have been done with the October 8 moves. Propose the following renames.
Notice that all of these upmerge eventually to Cat:British business biography stubs. Looks odd to have the parent category say "British" and all the subcategories say "United Kingdom". Dawynn ( talk) 19:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge all except the Oregon newspapers one
The following categories all have less than 40 articles, and in each case, my attempt to add a {{ popstub}} request has been rejected by other users, insisting that each category is as full as it will get. Propose upmerging each of these categories to the next higher level parent(s).
Dawynn ( talk) 13:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Result was delete. As templates are currently in use, they'll be redirected to the generic {{ rpg-videogame-stub}} until they can be cleared. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 10:01, 18 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which is already empty:
Keeping the US category, as well as the North American (4 P) and Mexican (1 P) templates. Dawynn 13:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which already has no articles:
Keeping the Oceania template for now, with its sole article. Dawynn ( talk) 13:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which already has no articles:
Keeping the South American template for now, with its sole article. Dawynn ( talk) 13:02, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which already has no articles:
Keeping the US category for now, but with a {{ popstub}} tag. I was surprised how few stub articles I could find for the US. Granted, I was being fairly conservative as to what I was considering a "stub". Dawynn ( talk) 12:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which already has no articles:
Keeping the European category, as they are nearing enough articles to justify the category. (58 articles, but 11 are templates) Dawynn ( talk) 12:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which already has no articles:
Which leaves just two templates for African hotel companies (the general Africa template, and Uganda), with 1 article each Dawynn ( talk) 12:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Object to all Redirect them to xxxx-hotel-struct-stub then and restub sort them by country.... How many hotels does Australian have for instance?? 80.3.26.54 ( talk) 15:32, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Why not move them all to hotel-stub then? It would seemingly avoid confusion over what is a company or a structure. Because all hotels are companies, even individual country hotels, its just that some are run by international hotel firms. I would prefer Hotel stubs covering both companies and structures were in one stub category too. 80.3.26.54 ( talk) 13:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 21:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Propose Delete. Unused. Malformed. Never requested. Dawynn ( talk) 11:38, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was move to match permcat
Permcat is now at Cat:Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, so this should probably be moved to Cat:Philadelphia, Pennsylvania stubs to match. Grutness... wha? 04:14, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was renamed/moved/deleted per extended discussions on related Feb. 8 stub types
A couple of subcats of Cat:Hotel (structure) stubs were speedied without time for there to be any comments on naming issues. Given that the rest of the tree uses the form "Hotel (structure) stubs", it would make sense for the new tcategories to do likewise, especially since the alternative is both coumbersome and still ambiguous about whether it's the buildings or the companies. As such, I suggest the following renames:
Grutness... wha? 22:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was Rename all per the renames of similar categories on CfD.-- Mike Selinker ( talk) 16:26, 12 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Per this discussion resulting in Category:Washington (U.S. state) being renamed to Category:Washington (state). All non-stub subcategories will be renamed (eventually) via CFD (see e.g., here) or CFDS. -- Black Falcon ( talk) 21:28, 7 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was withdrawn
Having discovered that the vast majority of articles labeled as *-hotel-company-stub should have been labeled as *-hotel-struct-stubs, I'm proposing that the majority of the hotel company templates be redirected to the continental level.
I'm still in the process of migrating articles over to the new struct templates, so some of these still appear to have plenty of articles. For now, I'll leave the US and UK company templates alone. However, I expect to be able to delete all of the following categories, and upmerge any of the remaining templates to Cat:Hotel company stubs:
With any luck, we'll still have enough for a category. Dawynn ( talk) 13:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was rename both category and template. Current template name kept as a redirect
Rename to Cat:Toy stubs/{{ toy-stub}} - all other stub categories with names of objects or beings use the singular (i.e Cat:Magazine stubs, not Cat:Magazines stubs), and per correct English grammar. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge all except Transformers stubs
Propose upmerging all of these to the parent category:
Dawynn ( talk) 14:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was Renbame both. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:01, 15 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Seeking parallelism again. I see the following:
Propose moving the following:
Dawynn ( talk) 17:16, 23 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was reverse rename, per amended nomination
I see the following stub categories:
I propose moving the following categories for parallelism:
And at this point, I'm choosing to leave this one alone, unless someone has a suggestion:
Dawynn ( talk) 18:50, 21 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was "Delete'
This template doesn't make any sense, since there is no such thing as “2011s”. Svick ( talk) 15:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete template and create two new replacements. Keep category for now, but propose for split when size allows.
One glance at the template name should give some indication of the problem. This template - previously at the correctly named ( via this forum) {{ Ski-stub}} - was drastically rescoped when WikiProject Skiing changed its name (not that renaming a WikiProject should in any way affect the name or scope of a stub template...). Rather than proposing a second stub for snowboarding at WP:WSS/P, which would have been the more senible thing to do, the name was changed to a cumbersome and convention-defying name. I propose renaming this back to its original name of {{ Ski-stub}} ({{ Skiing-stub}} would perhaps be better), adding a separate {{ Snowboarding-stub}}, deleting the current template name, and - if possible -splitting the category in the same way (the number of stubs is fairly slim, but given the presence of a WikiProject, the lower threshold is probably usable). Grutness... wha? 10:18, 19 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was Delete
These had already been cleared. The category is currently a soft redirect, but everything was still listed on the stub type list, as well as parent categories. I have now cleared all the connections, and these should be ultimately removed. They have already been replaced by appropriate North and South templates and categories. Dawynn ( talk) 13:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete category, upmerge template, create two new related templates
Has shrunk to the point where it's not really a necessity to keep this separate - just nine stubs, and hardly likely to be lost among the fewer than 200 chess stubs if it's upmerged. A further proposal which might be useful is for separate upmerged {{ Chess-tournament-stub}} and {{ Chess-org-stub}} templates, given that over 40 of those stubs are for tournaments and around 30 are for associations and federations. Grutness... wha? 07:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge the two remaining undersized categories
Several German states have their own building and structure stub categories - with one exception - they are all seriously undersized. Unless it is possible to populate them to somewhere near the 60-stub threshold, the following should be upmerged:
It may just be undersorting, and if it is I'll happily withdraw this proposal - but if it's not, then upmerging will be the simplest/best option. Grutness... wha? 07:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Withdrawing noms for two which are now past threshold (well done, Waacstats, or whoever else it might have been who got Bavaria and Berlin to the threshold). The others are at 22, 34, 46, and 16 stubs respectively now. Still a chance some of them might reach threshold, especially Hesse and Hamburg. Grutness... wha? 11:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC) reply
Well, I did my best, but couldn't get either of the other two above 45 stubs, so upmerging still seems the best option for them. Grutness... wha? 23:29, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete
I'm sorry, but this one is surely at the faintly ridiculous level. Lanark is a town of 8,000 people in Scotland. The category on Lanark only has nine articles, so the likelihood of there being 60 stubs (or even 30, given that there is a WikiProject) look remarkably remote. We have stub types for Glasgow and Edinburgh, but those are the only cities large enough to really warrant them in Scotland - and if we were to have more, Lanark would be a long way down the list (Stirling or Aberdeen, maybe, but one for Lanark is, to say the least, overkill). A separate stub template for Lanark is useless for WP:WSS, and for general editing use as well, and is totally unnecessary for the Lanark WikiProject since they're already using a banner assessment template which does all the stub template can and more besides. Delete. Grutness... wha? 07:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge both
Double upmerge as underpopulated (permcat has 26 stubs); if kept, then rename to Cat:Georgian (country) cuisine stubs per other stub categories for this country. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:55, 15 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was Keep American Old West stubs, upmerge the bio stubs into it. Change name of both templates
We seem to have acquired a couple of new unproposed stub types, both with faultily-named templates. No objection to keeping either - but at corrected names ({{ OldWest-stub}} and {{ OldWest-bio-stub}}, deleting current names, per standard naming conventions). The bio category may need upmerging, since both categories are undersized and only just reach 60 stubs between them. Grutness... wha? 22:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC) reply
::Support template rename; Oppose category deletion. --
Rosiestep (
talk) 02:39, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
reply
The result of the discussion was Rename all. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC) reply
A few simple renames here - all of these categories are incorrectly ina plural form:
Note that all three are undersized, so there be no objections from me if anyone thought upmerging was a better option. Grutness... wha? 21:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was rename templates, deleting current names. May need revisiting at a future date, since this nom became a bit of a trainwreck with various opposing options.
Two more misnamed templates, each feeding into what should be parent-only stub cats (if such cats are needed at all - all Normandy geo-stubs are subdivided by departement, so having a separate level between them and Normandy overall seems superfluous). Delete.
Grutness...
wha? 03:36, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
reply
The result of the discussion was delete } Propose deletion. We can't even justify a Cat:African hotel (structure) stubs. We're definitely not ready for an Algerian category. Plus, this is not named correctly, based on similar discussions (current convention would be Cat:Algerian hotel(structure) stubs). There is no template. The permcat has only one article, so even a template is questionable. So many issues. Dawynn ( talk) 15:46, 12 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete
Propose deletion of this category and template. There is no Cat:European basketball stubs category, so there is not a good place to categorize this. The category is undersized, and was never approved. Instead, I would suggest using the existing {{ RMacedonia-basketball-bio-stub}} and creating {{ RMacedonia-basketball-team-stub}}, and appropriately retagging each of the articles found here. Upmerge the new team template to Cat:Republic of Macedonia stubs and Cat:Europe basketball team stubs. Remaining articles that don't easily fall into these categories should be tagged with {{ RMacedonia-stub}} and a second appropriate tag to be chosen according to the article. Suggest:
Dawynn ( talk) 15:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge
Propose upmerging:
Dawynn ( talk) 15:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge
Propose upmerging:
Dawynn ( talk) 15:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete. - Mairi ( talk) 21:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming this to {{ chechnya-stub}}. Dawynn ( talk) 19:49, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was rename per nomination
Looks like the following should have been done with the October 8 moves. Propose the following renames.
Notice that all of these upmerge eventually to Cat:British business biography stubs. Looks odd to have the parent category say "British" and all the subcategories say "United Kingdom". Dawynn ( talk) 19:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was upmerge all except the Oregon newspapers one
The following categories all have less than 40 articles, and in each case, my attempt to add a {{ popstub}} request has been rejected by other users, insisting that each category is as full as it will get. Propose upmerging each of these categories to the next higher level parent(s).
Dawynn ( talk) 13:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Result was delete. As templates are currently in use, they'll be redirected to the generic {{ rpg-videogame-stub}} until they can be cleared. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 10:01, 18 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which is already empty:
Keeping the US category, as well as the North American (4 P) and Mexican (1 P) templates. Dawynn 13:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which already has no articles:
Keeping the Oceania template for now, with its sole article. Dawynn ( talk) 13:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which already has no articles:
Keeping the South American template for now, with its sole article. Dawynn ( talk) 13:02, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which already has no articles:
Keeping the US category for now, but with a {{ popstub}} tag. I was surprised how few stub articles I could find for the US. Granted, I was being fairly conservative as to what I was considering a "stub". Dawynn ( talk) 12:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which already has no articles:
Keeping the European category, as they are nearing enough articles to justify the category. (58 articles, but 11 are templates) Dawynn ( talk) 12:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was delete/move per unopposed amendment to proposal
Requesting delete for the following templates, each of which already has no articles:
Which leaves just two templates for African hotel companies (the general Africa template, and Uganda), with 1 article each Dawynn ( talk) 12:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Object to all Redirect them to xxxx-hotel-struct-stub then and restub sort them by country.... How many hotels does Australian have for instance?? 80.3.26.54 ( talk) 15:32, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Why not move them all to hotel-stub then? It would seemingly avoid confusion over what is a company or a structure. Because all hotels are companies, even individual country hotels, its just that some are run by international hotel firms. I would prefer Hotel stubs covering both companies and structures were in one stub category too. 80.3.26.54 ( talk) 13:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 21:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Propose Delete. Unused. Malformed. Never requested. Dawynn ( talk) 11:38, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was move to match permcat
Permcat is now at Cat:Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, so this should probably be moved to Cat:Philadelphia, Pennsylvania stubs to match. Grutness... wha? 04:14, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was renamed/moved/deleted per extended discussions on related Feb. 8 stub types
A couple of subcats of Cat:Hotel (structure) stubs were speedied without time for there to be any comments on naming issues. Given that the rest of the tree uses the form "Hotel (structure) stubs", it would make sense for the new tcategories to do likewise, especially since the alternative is both coumbersome and still ambiguous about whether it's the buildings or the companies. As such, I suggest the following renames:
Grutness... wha? 22:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was Rename all per the renames of similar categories on CfD.-- Mike Selinker ( talk) 16:26, 12 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Per this discussion resulting in Category:Washington (U.S. state) being renamed to Category:Washington (state). All non-stub subcategories will be renamed (eventually) via CFD (see e.g., here) or CFDS. -- Black Falcon ( talk) 21:28, 7 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was withdrawn
Having discovered that the vast majority of articles labeled as *-hotel-company-stub should have been labeled as *-hotel-struct-stubs, I'm proposing that the majority of the hotel company templates be redirected to the continental level.
I'm still in the process of migrating articles over to the new struct templates, so some of these still appear to have plenty of articles. For now, I'll leave the US and UK company templates alone. However, I expect to be able to delete all of the following categories, and upmerge any of the remaining templates to Cat:Hotel company stubs:
With any luck, we'll still have enough for a category. Dawynn ( talk) 13:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was rename both category and template. Current template name kept as a redirect
Rename to Cat:Toy stubs/{{ toy-stub}} - all other stub categories with names of objects or beings use the singular (i.e Cat:Magazine stubs, not Cat:Magazines stubs), and per correct English grammar. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC) reply