The organization of this system is extremely awkward and is inconsistent with that of other maintenance pages. The latest month should come first, then the latest listings should be organized in the same manner only under the month in which they were discovered. Adraeus 02:52, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
I recently discovered Simpsons-stub, which is a redirect to {{ Simpsons-stub}}. I wonder how many other "stubs" there are in the Main namespace. This one, obviously, can be sent to Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion. If there are any "stubs" that aren't redirects, I'd probably turn them into redirects just to avoid WP:AFD. BlankVerse ∅ 15:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
If I'm stub sorting, say from Category:Stubs, and I encounter a new stub, I assume I am to use something from the official stub types list, and not from here. What if I encounter an article already tagged with one of these "discovered" templates? (Like Sasdk) Should I remove it, and replace it with one of the official ones? Any feedback is welcome... - GTBacchus 06:07, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
I think it's time to archive older stuff (at leat the months of August and september, and the deleted stuff), but for that we need to decide what gets kept and what goes.
This proposal deals with every entry from August through October. and could be rapidly archive to de-clutter the page.
These have been dealt with without any doubt.
these are implemented for all practical purposes (or probably should) but don't have WP:WSS/ST listings and appropriate tag in cat page (I included here those that have one, but not the other). Some of them also could use better categorizing.
All sort of nonsense here, including still-categoryless templates
These have not been clearly discussed and consensus to move into one of the speedy cat is needed, many are too small for speedy keep, but of uncertain growth potential. At worse, go through SFD with each of them and include accepted ones in WSS/ST with proper cats and categorization and all.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Circeus ( talk • contribs) 08:18, 28 December 2005 UTC
I think this is probably a good idea, as long as whoever does the archiving remembers to update the WSS/ST list at the same time. As to the problem cases, CapeVerde-geo-stub is fine (but without the gap - I thought that had been fixed), and NZ-university-stub survived SFD (and is now up to about 35 stubs) - the other university stubs and UK-bank-stub are probably fine, too. The others, though...need work, to say the least. Grutness... wha? 23:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure what to do with {{ Argentina-sport-stub}}. IIRC, SFD nomination resulted in no consensus. I can only think of listing it now or of nominating it for deletion again... say, in a month. Conscious 07:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I've noticed there's a rather huge number of stub categories that have less than "threshold"; 633 have less than 60 members, 414 less than 30, and 139 just one (and only five of these seem to be speediable as "empty"). Any number of these may actually be "in good standing", but it seems a lot to deal with, on any basis. But if anyone wants to help with "pre-discovery" on these, I could upload and wikify a list of them from some selected cut-off (I have no idea, don't ask me). Though I think we went through a similar exercise not that long ago, so if people are still "undersized-stubbed out" out from that... Alai 02:52, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Sold at 40. I've split them up into increments of 10, too. Grutness's suggestion about doing this smallest-up is a good one, partly to save work when the list is re-generated, which will requiring manually re-removing any "good" types from the list. The good news is, a lot of the 'singletons', and no few of the others, are simply redlinks, so are just a matter of fixing wherever points to them, and striking them off the list. Anyhoo, please do with them as thou wilt. Alai 16:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
The proposals page has been in reverse order for a couple of weeks now, with no ill effects (other than never noticing when anything gets added to the "other business" section...). Are we going to complete the job by doing the same to the discovery page? And if so, when? Grutness... wha? 12:04, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
I've uploaded an updated list of stub types with 40 articles or fewer. This time I've excluded the redlinks (as of the last dump), the types with any subtypes -- and as an act of mercy, the schools and novels. Hopefully, at least, on all counts. Have your will of them! Alai 04:18, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I have recently found a number of stub types which are included in the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types or the page Category:Stub categories, but not both. Can anyone tell me who I should contact about this, if anyone? Badbilltucker 18:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick responses. I will start making changes as you indicated immediately. Badbilltucker 18:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
This page is in desparate need of archiving (waaay too long to sort through), but I don't have the knowledge or confidence to do it myself. Most of the discussions are so old that I wasn't around then, so I don't know what really took place. I'll help if someone could give me guidelines or would be willing to assist in this. ~ Amalas rawr =^_^= 20:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Archive12 is now done (43KB) and I'll be getting to work soon on Archive 13 and likely a 14 as well. Caerwine Caerwhine 20:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Here's a plan: seemingly Werdnabot also works on project pages, so I propose to use it here on a trial basis. I'm thinking in terms of setting the parameters to be stale-for-270-days, and reducing it progressively from there until the page is down to reasonable size, perhaps to say stale-for-60-days. Thereafter we can decide whether to continue on a similar basis, or to use per-month transclusion, "rotating" two months or so at a go. This should require only a "changing the tape" style of of maintenance (updating the target archive every so often, or else simply making that per-month, too). Alai 22:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
It would be much quicker improving the lists of orphan categories and stubs if, when the ommision (or error) is obvious (and not an attempt to elude NPOV), the obvious category could be directly added (or changed). They could be kept in a subcategory like: "Trivial Changes Made" so any doubters coud check. DGG 22:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I need some help here. I've twice tried to edit WP:WSS/D to add a comment to the belgium-sport-stub section, and each time, when i tried to save it, the whole section and part of the section above it disappeared. I though it was an editing glitch, but my edit appears OK enough in the page history. And no, it's not a caching problem - I tried opening the page in a different browser and i get the same weird glitch. Can anyone fix whatever it is I've done, please??? Grutness... wha? 03:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the help - it had me completely baffled. Grutness... wha? 23:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I just found two stub categories, {{ Haiti-painter-stub}} and {{ Haiti-writer-stub}}, which have no articles in them yet. I don't think they were necessarily cleared by your group, but I can't be sure. That's why I posted the information here on the talk page. Badbilltucker 16:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Now seems the perfect time to suggest this again. This page is very long, and takes forever to load for that reason. TranscriptionTransclusion by month, a la WP:WSS/P, would solve a lot of these problems, I'm sure. Are there any violent objections? If there are no objections, I could start making subpages in the next few days.
Grutness...
wha? 05:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
There's been no arguments against this, so here goes... Grutness... wha? 02:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
The useful {{ US-company-stub}} has been broken, apparently by a brand-new editor who should not have been mucking around with redirects. Instead of redirecting an article, he redirected the stub template, with the result being an ugly (and irrelevant) redirect being posted on every page that uses the stub. I can't revert it, because there is no history (which confuses me). What needs to be done to fix the stub template? Horologium t- c 18:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Done I've cleaned it up. Thanks for the report. If you're in doubt another time, try finding a related stub template that works (in this case, e.g. {{ Company-stub}}), use copy-paste on its content, and use it as the basis for a new version of the broken template, just remember to modify the text line and the stub category. If you do this, please remember that the stub category must never be a redlink. If it is, something remains broken. If any of this sounds tricky, don't hesitate to ask again. Best. Valentinian T / C 21:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Per the many comments on this page, I have (a) reversed the order of the Discoveries page and (b) begun archiving the rest of the 2006 discussions. If someone else could take on the task of keeping up with archiving here, it would be lovely, as I'm already the Proposals archive maven. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 21:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I've finally got round to making a suite of templates for notifying the creators of unproposed stub types that their creations have been either sent to SfD or reported on WSS/D. Have a look at {{ Sfdnotify1}}, {{ Sfdnotify2}} and {{ Wssdnotify}} and tell me what you think. It';s likely someone with more technical skill could parameterise the sfd ones so that only one template is needed, but I'll leave that to someone more skilled than I am. Grutness... wha? 01:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I found these templates using asbox that don't appear at WP:SST (incl. /Culture+/Geography) prior to starting the conversion. Some may need to be listed, and some may need discussed. I haven't really looked through it. – xeno talk 02:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Now that I am about half way done the conversion, I can tell you that 3549 stubs using asbox do not appear on the WP:SST+Culture+Geo pages. See [1]. – xeno talk 04:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Thankfully, many of these seem to be approved but missing from the list. There are enough here that aren't however, to make many a WP:WSS/P regular weep. Some have inappropriate names through form (e.g.{{ UKward-geo-stub}}, which appears to be an attempt to make a {{ UK-constituency-stub}}), others through ambiguity ({{ Mobile-stub}} is not about the city in Alabama). Others fail both quite spectacularly (e.g. {{ Distilled beverages-stub}}, with its inappropriate space and plural form, and lack of detail as to whether it's about alcoholic spirits or bottled water). Others have been listed at WP:WSS/D in the past (or at WP:SFD). One or two are not in use and unlikely to get much use even if accepted (e.g. {{ InheritanceTrilogy-stub}} -the parent, which is at Category:Inheritance cycle not Category:Inheritance Trilogy, only has 12 articles). All in all, it looks like quite a big cleanup job is ahead... (PS, for anyone else interested in this, Xeno has provided a longer list at User:WOSlinker/stublist). As far as getting all stub types approved, somedays it feels that we're repeatedly halving the distance to that target but never finally reaching it :) Grutness... wha? 00:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
I assume these need to be renamed, deleted, or merged. And probably listed. – xeno talk 15:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
All these at the very least need to be changed with the current names deleted - assuming they're needed. In some cases, I can see no practical use for these at all, so deletion's the most reasonable option. In which case they definitely shouldn't be listed at WP:SST, but rather at WP:SFD.
So that's 9/10 that probably require deletion (four of them speedily so), and the tenth is not a hard-and-fast keeper either. Grutness... wha? 00:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
I just discovered this stub. In Wikipedia, the articles in this category are classified under educationist. There is no reason to classify the stubs differently. Besiders according to Webster's, pedagogue is someone who educates: these are classified in Wikipedia as educators. Educationists are, also according to Webster's the persons who specialize in the theory of education. The discussion page of the stub indicates that pedagogue stub is wrong. It is therefore suggested that the category be changed to educationist stub. Afil ( talk) 02:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello: It was pointed out to me that I skipped quite a few steps in creating the public art stub and it is now listed here as a discovery. I just wanted to make myself known and let you know that I'm certainly willing to do whatever steps I need to to make things right and be an official, vetted stub. We spent a lot of time over the past month fixing up WikiProject Public art and obviously that task was hastily completed without looking into the proper process. I apologize for skirting the system; it wasn't intentional! Do let me know what you'd like me to do, since it's already created and has articles associated with it. Thank you and apologies again! HstryQT ( talk) 13:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
The organization of this system is extremely awkward and is inconsistent with that of other maintenance pages. The latest month should come first, then the latest listings should be organized in the same manner only under the month in which they were discovered. Adraeus 02:52, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
I recently discovered Simpsons-stub, which is a redirect to {{ Simpsons-stub}}. I wonder how many other "stubs" there are in the Main namespace. This one, obviously, can be sent to Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion. If there are any "stubs" that aren't redirects, I'd probably turn them into redirects just to avoid WP:AFD. BlankVerse ∅ 15:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
If I'm stub sorting, say from Category:Stubs, and I encounter a new stub, I assume I am to use something from the official stub types list, and not from here. What if I encounter an article already tagged with one of these "discovered" templates? (Like Sasdk) Should I remove it, and replace it with one of the official ones? Any feedback is welcome... - GTBacchus 06:07, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
I think it's time to archive older stuff (at leat the months of August and september, and the deleted stuff), but for that we need to decide what gets kept and what goes.
This proposal deals with every entry from August through October. and could be rapidly archive to de-clutter the page.
These have been dealt with without any doubt.
these are implemented for all practical purposes (or probably should) but don't have WP:WSS/ST listings and appropriate tag in cat page (I included here those that have one, but not the other). Some of them also could use better categorizing.
All sort of nonsense here, including still-categoryless templates
These have not been clearly discussed and consensus to move into one of the speedy cat is needed, many are too small for speedy keep, but of uncertain growth potential. At worse, go through SFD with each of them and include accepted ones in WSS/ST with proper cats and categorization and all.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Circeus ( talk • contribs) 08:18, 28 December 2005 UTC
I think this is probably a good idea, as long as whoever does the archiving remembers to update the WSS/ST list at the same time. As to the problem cases, CapeVerde-geo-stub is fine (but without the gap - I thought that had been fixed), and NZ-university-stub survived SFD (and is now up to about 35 stubs) - the other university stubs and UK-bank-stub are probably fine, too. The others, though...need work, to say the least. Grutness... wha? 23:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure what to do with {{ Argentina-sport-stub}}. IIRC, SFD nomination resulted in no consensus. I can only think of listing it now or of nominating it for deletion again... say, in a month. Conscious 07:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I've noticed there's a rather huge number of stub categories that have less than "threshold"; 633 have less than 60 members, 414 less than 30, and 139 just one (and only five of these seem to be speediable as "empty"). Any number of these may actually be "in good standing", but it seems a lot to deal with, on any basis. But if anyone wants to help with "pre-discovery" on these, I could upload and wikify a list of them from some selected cut-off (I have no idea, don't ask me). Though I think we went through a similar exercise not that long ago, so if people are still "undersized-stubbed out" out from that... Alai 02:52, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Sold at 40. I've split them up into increments of 10, too. Grutness's suggestion about doing this smallest-up is a good one, partly to save work when the list is re-generated, which will requiring manually re-removing any "good" types from the list. The good news is, a lot of the 'singletons', and no few of the others, are simply redlinks, so are just a matter of fixing wherever points to them, and striking them off the list. Anyhoo, please do with them as thou wilt. Alai 16:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
The proposals page has been in reverse order for a couple of weeks now, with no ill effects (other than never noticing when anything gets added to the "other business" section...). Are we going to complete the job by doing the same to the discovery page? And if so, when? Grutness... wha? 12:04, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
I've uploaded an updated list of stub types with 40 articles or fewer. This time I've excluded the redlinks (as of the last dump), the types with any subtypes -- and as an act of mercy, the schools and novels. Hopefully, at least, on all counts. Have your will of them! Alai 04:18, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I have recently found a number of stub types which are included in the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types or the page Category:Stub categories, but not both. Can anyone tell me who I should contact about this, if anyone? Badbilltucker 18:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick responses. I will start making changes as you indicated immediately. Badbilltucker 18:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
This page is in desparate need of archiving (waaay too long to sort through), but I don't have the knowledge or confidence to do it myself. Most of the discussions are so old that I wasn't around then, so I don't know what really took place. I'll help if someone could give me guidelines or would be willing to assist in this. ~ Amalas rawr =^_^= 20:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Archive12 is now done (43KB) and I'll be getting to work soon on Archive 13 and likely a 14 as well. Caerwine Caerwhine 20:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Here's a plan: seemingly Werdnabot also works on project pages, so I propose to use it here on a trial basis. I'm thinking in terms of setting the parameters to be stale-for-270-days, and reducing it progressively from there until the page is down to reasonable size, perhaps to say stale-for-60-days. Thereafter we can decide whether to continue on a similar basis, or to use per-month transclusion, "rotating" two months or so at a go. This should require only a "changing the tape" style of of maintenance (updating the target archive every so often, or else simply making that per-month, too). Alai 22:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
It would be much quicker improving the lists of orphan categories and stubs if, when the ommision (or error) is obvious (and not an attempt to elude NPOV), the obvious category could be directly added (or changed). They could be kept in a subcategory like: "Trivial Changes Made" so any doubters coud check. DGG 22:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I need some help here. I've twice tried to edit WP:WSS/D to add a comment to the belgium-sport-stub section, and each time, when i tried to save it, the whole section and part of the section above it disappeared. I though it was an editing glitch, but my edit appears OK enough in the page history. And no, it's not a caching problem - I tried opening the page in a different browser and i get the same weird glitch. Can anyone fix whatever it is I've done, please??? Grutness... wha? 03:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the help - it had me completely baffled. Grutness... wha? 23:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I just found two stub categories, {{ Haiti-painter-stub}} and {{ Haiti-writer-stub}}, which have no articles in them yet. I don't think they were necessarily cleared by your group, but I can't be sure. That's why I posted the information here on the talk page. Badbilltucker 16:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Now seems the perfect time to suggest this again. This page is very long, and takes forever to load for that reason. TranscriptionTransclusion by month, a la WP:WSS/P, would solve a lot of these problems, I'm sure. Are there any violent objections? If there are no objections, I could start making subpages in the next few days.
Grutness...
wha? 05:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
There's been no arguments against this, so here goes... Grutness... wha? 02:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
The useful {{ US-company-stub}} has been broken, apparently by a brand-new editor who should not have been mucking around with redirects. Instead of redirecting an article, he redirected the stub template, with the result being an ugly (and irrelevant) redirect being posted on every page that uses the stub. I can't revert it, because there is no history (which confuses me). What needs to be done to fix the stub template? Horologium t- c 18:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Done I've cleaned it up. Thanks for the report. If you're in doubt another time, try finding a related stub template that works (in this case, e.g. {{ Company-stub}}), use copy-paste on its content, and use it as the basis for a new version of the broken template, just remember to modify the text line and the stub category. If you do this, please remember that the stub category must never be a redlink. If it is, something remains broken. If any of this sounds tricky, don't hesitate to ask again. Best. Valentinian T / C 21:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Per the many comments on this page, I have (a) reversed the order of the Discoveries page and (b) begun archiving the rest of the 2006 discussions. If someone else could take on the task of keeping up with archiving here, it would be lovely, as I'm already the Proposals archive maven. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 21:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I've finally got round to making a suite of templates for notifying the creators of unproposed stub types that their creations have been either sent to SfD or reported on WSS/D. Have a look at {{ Sfdnotify1}}, {{ Sfdnotify2}} and {{ Wssdnotify}} and tell me what you think. It';s likely someone with more technical skill could parameterise the sfd ones so that only one template is needed, but I'll leave that to someone more skilled than I am. Grutness... wha? 01:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I found these templates using asbox that don't appear at WP:SST (incl. /Culture+/Geography) prior to starting the conversion. Some may need to be listed, and some may need discussed. I haven't really looked through it. – xeno talk 02:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Now that I am about half way done the conversion, I can tell you that 3549 stubs using asbox do not appear on the WP:SST+Culture+Geo pages. See [1]. – xeno talk 04:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Thankfully, many of these seem to be approved but missing from the list. There are enough here that aren't however, to make many a WP:WSS/P regular weep. Some have inappropriate names through form (e.g.{{ UKward-geo-stub}}, which appears to be an attempt to make a {{ UK-constituency-stub}}), others through ambiguity ({{ Mobile-stub}} is not about the city in Alabama). Others fail both quite spectacularly (e.g. {{ Distilled beverages-stub}}, with its inappropriate space and plural form, and lack of detail as to whether it's about alcoholic spirits or bottled water). Others have been listed at WP:WSS/D in the past (or at WP:SFD). One or two are not in use and unlikely to get much use even if accepted (e.g. {{ InheritanceTrilogy-stub}} -the parent, which is at Category:Inheritance cycle not Category:Inheritance Trilogy, only has 12 articles). All in all, it looks like quite a big cleanup job is ahead... (PS, for anyone else interested in this, Xeno has provided a longer list at User:WOSlinker/stublist). As far as getting all stub types approved, somedays it feels that we're repeatedly halving the distance to that target but never finally reaching it :) Grutness... wha? 00:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
I assume these need to be renamed, deleted, or merged. And probably listed. – xeno talk 15:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
All these at the very least need to be changed with the current names deleted - assuming they're needed. In some cases, I can see no practical use for these at all, so deletion's the most reasonable option. In which case they definitely shouldn't be listed at WP:SST, but rather at WP:SFD.
So that's 9/10 that probably require deletion (four of them speedily so), and the tenth is not a hard-and-fast keeper either. Grutness... wha? 00:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
I just discovered this stub. In Wikipedia, the articles in this category are classified under educationist. There is no reason to classify the stubs differently. Besiders according to Webster's, pedagogue is someone who educates: these are classified in Wikipedia as educators. Educationists are, also according to Webster's the persons who specialize in the theory of education. The discussion page of the stub indicates that pedagogue stub is wrong. It is therefore suggested that the category be changed to educationist stub. Afil ( talk) 02:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello: It was pointed out to me that I skipped quite a few steps in creating the public art stub and it is now listed here as a discovery. I just wanted to make myself known and let you know that I'm certainly willing to do whatever steps I need to to make things right and be an official, vetted stub. We spent a lot of time over the past month fixing up WikiProject Public art and obviously that task was hastily completed without looking into the proper process. I apologize for skirting the system; it wasn't intentional! Do let me know what you'd like me to do, since it's already created and has articles associated with it. Thank you and apologies again! HstryQT ( talk) 13:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)