Canadian Coast Guard and Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2007/June: Difference between pages
(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
m →{{cl|dramatist and playwright stubs}}: support |
|||
Line 1:
==Proposals, June 2007==
If you create a stub type, please move its discussion to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/Archive/June 2007|the June archive]], add it to the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Stub_types|list of stub types]], and add it to the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/Archive|archive summary]].
<!--add proposals below, with === level headers-->
===NEW PROPOSALS===
<!--Please add any new proposals below here using the same header level-->
<br /><br />
=== Personality & Preference Inventory===
<br />
Can't find it and not sure how to put the info across as an NPOV. Will suggest stub. Can anyone help? <br />[[User:AVISSER|Cookie Monster]] 10:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{tl|GB-MP-stub}} / [[:Category:Great Britain MP stubs (1701-1800)]] ===
:''Moved from [[WP:SFD]] [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 00:40, 19 June 2007 (UTC)''
'''Propose creation''' of new stub template, and associated category, plus renaming of another related stub category.<br />The existing {{tl|UK-MP-stub}} is designed for [[Members of Parliament]] for the [[Parliament of the United Kingdom]], which was only created in 1801 after the [[Acts of Union 1800]]. However, {{tl|UK-MP-stub}} is also being being used for members of the predecessor [[Parliament of Great Britain]] (1707-1800), members of which should be categorised separately.<br />The proposed structure can be summarised as:
* [[Parliament of Great Britain]] → [[:Category:Members of the Parliament of Great Britain]] → {{tl|GB-MP-stub}} / [[:Category:Great Britain MP stubs (1701-1800)]]
* [[Parliament of the United Kingdom]] → [[:Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament]] → {{tl|UK-MP-stub}} / [[:Category:British MP stubs]] (should be renamed to [[:Category:United Kingdom MP stubs]])
--[[User:BrownHairedGirl|BrownHairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 21:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
*How is this for numbers - are there currently 60+ stubs which could do with this? If not, certainly an upmerged template is a good option until such time as there are. I agree about the change in the name of the category if a split is warranted. Not entirely convinced by the name GB-MP-stub, but I can't think of a better one... [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 00:40, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
*I don't have tools to allow an easy count, but I am currently running [[:Category:Members of the Parliament of Great Britain]] through [[WP:AWB|AWB]] to split it into [[:Category:Members of the Parliament of Great Britain for English constituencies|English]], [[:Category:Members of the Parliament of Great Britain for Scottish constituencies|Scottish]] and [[:Category:Members of the Parliament of Great Britain for Welsh constituencies|Welsh]] sub-categories, and I reckon that there are well over a hundred stub articles for which {{tl|GB-MP-stub}} would be useful. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|BrownHairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 14:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
*New cat would get 108, though there's the complication that 25 would have to be double-stubbed, so this isn't exactly what you'd call a "clean split". Also bear in mind that there's existing subcats by a) party, and b) constituent nation, as well as c) currency. Given that this is somewhat in the spirit of the third axis, whose permcat was deleted ({{cl|Current British MP stubs}}, {{cl|current British MPs}}), I wonder if we shouldn't save ourselves some work by waiting until the permcats stop to-ing and fro-ing, and then come up with a consistent scheme. Oh, and if this does go ahead, I'd favour {{tl|Britain-MP-stub}} for the template. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 14:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
===Miscellaneous double-stubbing mashup===
The following all have double-stubbings of more than 80, where one of the types is in the 600..800 range.
*{{cl|Pittsburgh geography stubs}} 81
*{{cl|New York City geography stubs}} 85
*{{cl|United Kingdom hospital stubs}} 80
*{{cl|American biologist stubs}} 75
*{{cl|Zimbabwean sculptor stubs}} 72
*{{cl|Canadian lacrosse biography stubs}} 68
*{{cl|Hungarian Olympic medalist stubs}} 69
*{{cl|Malaysian building and structure stubs}} 67
*{{cl|Australian poet stubs}} 65
*{{cl|United Kingdom publishing company stubs}} 65
Most of the parentages should be obvious; two that are less so are Hospital_stubs+United_Kingdom_medical_organisation_stubs and Asian_building_and_structure_stubs+Malaysia_geography_stubs (the latter perhaps being food for thought as to what -geo- stubs are actually used for, "on the ground".) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 21:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
*Malaysia's been long overdue for its own struct stub template at least, and now a category seems a good move - and like similar struct stubs, its parents should be {{cl|Asian building and structure stubs}} and {{cl|Malaysia stubs}} (not {{cl|Malaysia geography stubs}}, since buildings aren't normally grouped in with geo-stubs). I'd be inclined to put the UK hospitals in {{cl|Hospital stubs}}, {{cl|United Kingdom medical organisation stubs}} ''and'' {{cl|United Kingdom building and structure stubs}}, since the articles are likely to be at least in part about the buildings themselves, much like with theatre stubs and museum stubs. Yes to all the others (72 Zimbabwean sculptor stubs? Whoda thought...?), though I'd ask whether the NYC and Pittsburgh geo-stubs are likely to affect the way the rest of the state-geo-stubs are likely to be split in future... will it make for problems with Penn and NYState later? [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 00:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
**I forgot the ob. whoda thought?: thanks for correcting that omission. :) I shouldn't have said "parentage", I really meant "constituents of the double-stubbing" (though in most cases they're the same thing). I don't think splitting by city is going to be a problem; elsewhere we've split by county, but then we tend to end up upmerging them to μSAs, MSAs, CSAs, unofficial regions with articles defining their scope, or totally made up ones. Cities of significant size will invariably correspond to (the population centres of) *SAs, so they can just be made a subcat. (Chicago and Chicagoland are already done this way, for example.) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 01:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
===US schools by state===
*{{cl|Iowa school stubs}} 73
*{{cl|Nebraska school stubs}} 71
*{{cl|Alabama school stubs}} 69
*{{cl|Utah school stubs}} 65
*{{cl|South Carolina school stubs}} 64
Similar deal to below. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 21:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
*third time '''Speedy''' support. [[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 21:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy support for the first four'''. I'm not happy with lumping the Carolinas together, though. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 00:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
**Hey, it's good enough for the NFL... That was a typo, fixed. (If one really had to lump the two, I think "Carolinas" would be more usual, though the USCB defines also smaller component regions of the South.) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 01:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
***"Nothing could be finah than to be in Carolinah in the moooooooorning..." (and the song never says which one)...[[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 03:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
===US radio stations by state===
*{{cl|Pennsylvania radio station stubs}} 131
*{{cl|Florida radio station stubs}} 115
*{{cl|North Carolina radio station stubs}} 110
*{{cl|New York radio station stubs}} 92
*{{cl|South Carolina radio station stubs}} 84
*{{cl|Illinois radio station stubs}} 64
*{{cl|Indiana radio station stubs}} 60
*{{cl|Minnesota radio station stubs}} 59
All are currently populated from double-upmerged templates, so again I'm inclined to speedy these. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 20:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
*Again '''Speedy''' Support. [[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 21:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
===
I've been creating a number of upmerged stub templates for European actors, but two of them are now at exactly 60, so no longer need to be: {{tl|Denmark-actor-stub}} and {{tl|Spain-actor-stub}}. I propose to create cats fairly speedily. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 18:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy''' support. [[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 21:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{Tl|Lithuania-footy-bio-stub}}===
Upmerged template with over 60 articles. Suggest speedy create cat.[[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 11:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
*Agree with suggestion. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 14:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|geology stubs}} subcats===
*{{cl|tectonics stubs}} 107
*{{cl|geochronology stubs}} 122
*{{cl|volcanology stubs}} 63
Parent is oversized; these look to be viable, and not to overlap too much, if I'm understanding the category structure correctly. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 02:12, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
:Fully support split & willing to help populate as time permits. [[User:Vsmith|Vsmith]] 02:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
:Support; good idea. [[User:Avenue|Avenue]] 03:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
:Support - will sit nicely along glaciology-stub. With the usual caveat about volcanology (vulanology?) not being for actual volcanoes, of course. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 06:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
:Support. Makes sense to me with the assumption that all these stubs will be under the roof of Geology project. [[User:Solarapex|Solarapex]] 10:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
::They'll all be subcats of {{cl|geology stubs}}, and a project link or banner on the category page wouldn't seem amiss. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 14:12, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|dramatist and playwright stubs}}===
I don't have an exact count for this (though I suspect it's close to threshold just from the UK), but surely we should have this given the two existing national D&P stub types. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 20:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Support''' per nom. [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 17:57, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|United Kingdom children's writer stubs}}===
Oversized parent, 64 of them are in the "children's writers" tree, and no other "by genre" cat. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 19:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Support''' per nom. [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 22:40, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|legal term stubs}}===
At least 90 of them; parent is of course very oversized. Existing subcat {{cl|Latin legal stubs}} (should be "phrases"). [[User:Alai|Alai]] 18:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|Electronic sports stubs}}===
There is an [[Electronic sports]] category ({{cl|Electronic sports}}) but no stub. I think it would be a good idea to create one for a bunch of [[Electronic sports]] articles that may begin to arise as [[Electronic sports|esports]] hits national TV. One such is the [[Complexity Gaming]] article. [[User:Digx|Digx]] 08:50, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
:'''oppose''' need enough existing stub articles. [[User:Monni1995|Monni]] 04:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|United States media company stubs}}===
Parent oversized -- indeed, just about double-oversized -- 91 in the corresponding permcat hierarchy. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 03:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
*Already listed with 3 or 4 others on the to do list . [[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 11:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
**D'oh. Forgot to check for redlink-links... [[User:Alai|Alai]] 14:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
===Split of {{Tl|linebacker-stub}} and {{tl|runningback-stub}}===
Both are over 700, propose split by decade of birth as per precedent set by other position splits. [[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 23:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
*Support this and below, per prodigious quantity of precedents (and all bot-populable, to boot). [[User:Alai|Alai]] 00:41, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
:*I'd be very grateful if someone could popoulate these by bot, my knowledge of that side of things is poor, I will go through and try to pick up anything the bot misses, otherwise it will be a long hard slog. [[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 11:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
===Split of {{Tl|England-footy-midfielder-stub}} and defendesr and strikers===
Different shaped ball same solution by decade of birth split Defender and Midifelders are over 700 and strikers are just shy of 600 (stitch in time) nb goalkeepers are way off at less than 300 and not worth splitting yet.[[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 23:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|military decoration stubs}}===
This looks viable as a subcat of {{cl|order, decoration, and medal stubs}}, and more to the point will help get rid of a few from {{cl|military stubs}}, which despite some recent shrinkage is still oversized. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 22:56, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|Seine-et-Marne geography stubs}}===
The region cat {{cl|Île-de-France geography stubs}} is oversized now, so time to split into departments. Only this one is clearly over threshold at the moment, at 409 (cough). However, some others are close-ish Val-de-Marne, 49; Yvelines, 41; Seine-Saint-Denis, 40; Essonne, 39; and Val-d'Oise, 37. Paris is only at 32, but when one adds in the {{tl|Streets of Paris-stub}} (see /D), it's also rather close. I'll create templates for all of them, and then see what happens. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 03:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
:As I said at /D, I object to adding the streets to that section. Road-stubs aren't listed as geo-stubs for anywhere else, so why Paris? Far better to make a France-road-stub and category for it to upmerge to. As to Seine-et-Marne's category and the other templates, though, that sounds fine. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 03:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
::I don't especially care in this instance, since one the first one's done it'll be off my to-do list (hopefully for some considerable time), but as I said the previous time you made this objection, I don't see the expansion-oriented logic of lumping urban streets, and articles like [[Place du Colonel Fabien]], in with say [[A151 autoroute]] (not marked as a stub, but looks like one to me). Some common sense about when things "must" be sorted by type (as well as when they must not be) would be a plan. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 04:54, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
:I just don't see why France should be treated any differently to the UK, US, Australia, and Canada - in each of those cases, urban roads are not treated as geo-stubs, they quite logically get road-stub. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 23:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|political term stubs}}===
{{cl|politics stubs}} is another large and murky type, but this looks like a viable subcat. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 16:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
:Do you have a good template name in mind? [[User:Valentinian|Valentinian]] <sup>[[User_talk:Valentinian|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Valentinian|C]]</sup> 01:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
::I'd suggest paralleling geo-term-stub and the like, and making it {{tl|poli-term-stub}}. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 02:39, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|qualification stubs}}===
The {{cl|education stubs}} are long-standing oversized, and the corresponding permcats hurt my eyes and brain. But this looks a clear-cut case: 70 of these. I wonder if we shouldn't also consider an {{tl|edu-bio-stub}}; the number don't look tremendous, but it'd also be a parent to existing cats (some of which I can't help but wonder if there's over-sorting to). [[User:Alai|Alai]] 15:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Support''' both per nom. [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 16:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|Federalist Paper stubs}}===
{{cl|United States government stubs}} is oversized, this would take care of it for the time being: there's 69 of these. Alternatively, could broaden this out to {{cl|United States official document stubs}}, of which there'd be 82 (including the above, which is a subcat). [[User:Alai|Alai]] 00:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
:Except that strictly speaking the Federalist papers, for all that they are used to interpret the founders' intent with respect to the Constitution, they aren't official. Indeed they're a subcat of a different cat, ''United States '''historical''' documents''. Given the brevity of these papers (after all, each was in origin a newspaper editorial) I'm hard-pressed to see where a lot of these will ever be more than short articles serving as a bridge between articles on Supreme Court cases that cited them and the relevant Wikisource entry. That said I could live with a {{cl|United States Constitution stubs}}. <span style="font-family:cursive">[[User:Caerwine|Caerwine]]</span> [[User_talk:Caerwine|<small style="font-family:sans-serif;color:darkred">Caer’s whines</small>]] 03:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
::That's not the subcatting route I'm referring to (since it's not in the government subtree), but rather, {{cl|Federalist Papers}} being in {{cl|United States Constitution}}, which is indeed in {{cl|Official documents of the United States}}. Some Chinese whispers at work, perhaps. By permcat, {{cl|United States Constitution stubs}} would contain the 69 Federalist Papers, and exactly one other. (Usual undercatting caveats.) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 03:49, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
:::Its a case where A being a subcat of B and B a subcat of C both make sense despite A not being a subcat of C in any way shape or form. That happens with cats. Since there won't ever be any more Federalist papers written, I'm dubious about a stub type for them. It probably would be more profitable to go with {{tl|US-federal-gov-stub}} / {{cl|United States Government stubs}} (note the capitalization of Government) with parent {{cl|Government of the United States}} and move the existing {{tl|US-gov-stub}} / {{cl|United States government stubs}} up in parentage to {{cl|Government in the United States}} as there are a number of State and local government stubs in United States government stubs that strictly speaking shouldn't be under the current scope. <span style="font-family:cursive">[[User:Caerwine|Caerwine]]</span> [[User_talk:Caerwine|<small style="font-family:sans-serif;color:darkred">Caer’s whines</small>]] 04:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
::::That's what I meant by the "Chinese whispers" effect, and yes, it happens with cats: an annoying amount. I agree that the FPs aren't the most obvious stub cat scope, but if these are "permastubs", at least they're not cluttering up the parents, and if they do get expanded, they can be upmerged. However, I'd certainly also be in favour of splitting up these on fed/state/local grounds, whether with one, two or three such local categories. It also looks to me that {{cl|United States state government stubs}} would be viable, with 74 articles at the most conservative estimates. (i.e. current US-govs in the immediate subcats of {{cl|State governments of the United States}}). I'd also agree with your re-parenting suggestion (what an entirely inobvious and opaque distinction in category names!). [[User:Alai|Alai]] 15:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|Radio Presenter stubs}}===
{{unsigned|124.180.204.52}}
==Old business==
<!-- END OF COMMENT PHASE -->
<div class="boilerplate metadata" id="Old Business" style="background-color: #FFFFCC; border: 1px solid #663300; margin: 0.5em; padding: 0.5em;">Everything from here on down has passed the five day proposal period. Unless discussion to determine consensus is actively on-going, proposals may be acted upon, to be created, or noted as not approved. Move this marker up as time passes.</div>
==={{cl|Australian sport stubs}}===
Australia stubs are oversized, this looks like the most coherent group to split out, with 58 in the {{cl|sport in Australia}} permcat tree. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 03:14, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
===Fire Equiptment/Alarms stub===
{{sfp nocreate}}
{{unsigned|Thedjatclubrock}}
*See {{tl|firefighting-stub}}. [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 19:12, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
That is not it. I mean Sirens, Horns and commercial fire alarms. For ex see [[notifier]]{{unsigned|Thedjatclubrock}}
*[[Notifier]] is a company and would be sorted under some type of company stub. Under {{cl|Fire detection and alarm}} there are only 14 articles; if I go up the hierarchy I only see maybe twice that number under the whole umbrella of {{cl|Fire protection}} and its sub-cats. If there is an associated WikiProject, 30+ stubs is the lowest number at which a stub template is considered; if not, 60+. Until those numbers can be reached I see no need for anything more specific than {{tl|firefighting-stub}}. [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 04:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
==={{cl|telecommunications term stubs}}===
Oversized parent, 54 of these on the basis of catting; shouldn't be hard to find a few more. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 06:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|Russian scientist stubs}}===
Surprised we don't have this one already. At any rate, parent is now Officially Big, 141 permcat-based possibilities for this. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 05:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|Greater Vancouver Regional District geography stubs}}===
BC-geo-stubs are oversized, splitting by regional district seems the obvious thing to do. 40 on the basis of just double-stubbing. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 04:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|television documentary stubs}}===
{{sfp top|hold off for now}}
Another reproposal: see [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/Archive/February_2007#Cat:television_documentary_stubs|here]]. If people want to actually go ahead with the topic-based fishing expedition, I'll hold off; if not, this looks the only one that's ''remotely'' close to being viable on the basis of permcatting. (Sport is about 30, everything else way below.) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 15:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
*I'll tackle this later in the week, after I wrestle US-tv-prog-stub to the ground. Thanks for the heads-up. [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 18:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
**Have begun with {{tl|bio-documentary-stub}}; more to come. [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 04:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
==={{cl|Chinese scientist stubs}}===
Touch and go at 58, but much needed, as the China-bios are still growing: almost at 1000. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 03:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|economics and finance book stubs}}===
{{sfp create}}
{{cl|Non-fiction book stubs}} are still oversized; {{cl|business books}}, {{cl|finance books}} and {{cl|economics books}} seem to disappear up their own fundaments in a category cycle, so pick your take for a suitable category name. Population of 72, by my count. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 02:51, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Works for me'''. [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 03:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
==={{cl|2000s thriller film stubs}}===
'00s drama films is oversized, this looks like the most promising possible new subcat... but only 43 are catted that way. Anyone think they can drag up another 17? (I could start with populating an upmerged template if that would help.) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 01:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|United States opera singer stubs}}===
{{sfp create}}
Seems to be 60-odd of these. The opera singers aren't in urgent need of being split, but the US-singer-stubs are, and this would take care of a handful of them, at least. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 22:39, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
==={{tl|US-rail-stub}} subtypes===
Oversized, here's two possibilities:
*{{cl|Defunct United States railroad companies stubs}} 187
or:
*{{cl|Class I United States railroad stubs}} 144
Anyone have a preference? [[User:Alai|Alai]] 19:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
: Can't we do the old split into 50 templates and upmerge to the 4 regions. Otherwise no preference (both?) [[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 21:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
::Trouble with that is there'll be a lot of multi-stubbing, as most railroads seem to cover more than one state, and in some cases a large number of states. I'll see if I can get some numbers of that, though... [[User:Alai|Alai]] 22:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
:What about splitting out locomotives and/or trains? Would that reduce the burden any? [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 10:02, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
::Hrm, not a bad plan... It's a little swamped in the numbers by the mass of railway operating companies, but if we smoosh together the contents of the {{cl|trains}} and {{cl|rolling stock}} (I'd have thought one would be a subcat of the other, but seemingly I'd have been wrong), there's around 80. It's a somewhat broad church, but at least it would separate them from the above. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 14:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
:::It would be especially useful to split out the paper railroads since I imagine that they are most likely to remain stubby and provide the worst inflation to the numbers. [[User:Mangoe|Mangoe]] 16:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|2000s Japanese single stubs}}===
{{sfp create}}
{{cl|2000s single stubs}} is oversized; we'd ideally want to split by genre, but isn't the Japanese music scene nigh unto a genre unto itself? There's 120 of these, at any rate. Only other obvious possibility seems to be #1 singles, which it strikes me is unlikely to be of much use, since it smooshes together #1s in ''completely different countries and charts'', which is pretty pointless for almost any editor I can think of. (The singles and songs need either more use of "genre" cats, or else for their by-artists cats to be put in genre categories, as the album-by-artist cats are.) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 19:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
*As I understand things, the Japanese music scene is separate from that in the United States. I need a new stub category for an article on the A&M single "Reimy - Speed of Light" on which I am still gathering data (some awaiting translation from ja.Wikipedia.org). Recommend, as an alternate, '''Category:Japanese song stubs'''. - [[User:B.C.Schmerker|B.C.Schmerker]] 04:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
**{{cl|Japanese song stubs}} looks sensible (and likely to be over threshold) to me, too. It might require a certain amount of double-stubbing rather than splitting, though. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 05:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
==={{cl|Latin America and the Caribbean singer stubs}}===
{{cl|Singer stubs}} is large again, and the biggest unsplit countries by permcat are Brazil and Argentina, with Jamaica and the Dominican Republic in single-digit remainder. Before anyone protests that we split the Americas into "North" and "South"... well, why? That's not how the UN geoscheme works, and we really need to decide whether we're following it, or not. This would be smallish, but Mexico would be an existing subcat, plus there's probably significant undercounting. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 16:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''', we already have {{tl|SouthAm-singer-stub}} which overlaps. [[User:Monni1995|Monni]] 19:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
**Oh, I'd missed that, sorry. But that's a) an upmerged template, that doesn't seem to have immediate prospects of categorical viability with that scope, b) at a level that doesn't correspond to any permcat, and c) is at the ''third'' level of the UN geoscheme: which indicates to me that it's not the right way of tagging such articles, in any respect. The question remains, do we want to follow the UN geoscheme, or not? (At least in cultural and human geography matters: if this were a geological type, that'd be a different matter.) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 14:38, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
*** {{tl|SouthAm-singer-stub}} does have ~50 incoming links, so taking count that not all country-specific permanent categories have been sorted yet, there is chance that remaining ~10 will come eventually. [[User:Monni1995|Monni]] 05:01, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
===Arena Football===
I don't know if this counts as a proposal but, I would like to propose we do something with {{Tl|ArenaFootballLeague-stub}}. It was nominated for discussion a while back and was kept upmerged to {{Cl|American football stubs}}. Having looked at the what links here for the template and the discussion it appears that it is to be used on players. I propose this is upmerged to {{Cl|American football biography stubs}} or as it has over 30 articles and a wikiproject given its own category. I have to admit not knowing much about this sport so I don't know which would be best. If this needs posting elsewhere let me know and i will move it. [[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 15:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
*Own category is probably the best option. You could also create a separate -bio- template... [[User:Alai|Alai]] 15:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
===US-tv-prog subcats by decade===
{{sfp top|create as revised}}
This has been lingering oversized for a while, and on the basis of categorisation, I see only one feasible axis to break it down further:
*{{cl|2000s United States television program stubs}} 193
*{{cl|1990s United States television program stubs}} 156
*{{cl|1980s United States television program stubs}} 104
*{{cl|1970s United States television program stubs}} 97
*{{cl|1960s United States television program stubs}} 69
*{{cl|1950s United States television program stubs}} 59
(Or alternatively "series" per the permcats, if that's a useful distinction.) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 15:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
*Can we hold off a bit while I slog through and see how much re-sorting I can do? I think a lot of them can be re-sorted by genre, at which point maybe we can make genre-related sub-cats. Cheers, [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 18:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
**That's fine with me, let us know when you know more... BTW, there might be another db dump soonish, so if people want to add genre-based permcats, that might also help. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 18:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
***I've dug through about half of the {{tl|US-tv-prog-stub}} articles and found many double-stubbed along with the appropriate genre. I think nearly everything in that category can be re-stubbed by genre. Can you do that voodoo that you do so well, and check to see which genres could use splitting? (since the toolserver is still out of date...) I'm finding a lot of non-fiction tv shows, particularly sports and cooking shows, which might be big enough to split out. Or maybe news shows. Thanks for any help you can give me. [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 22:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see where I've gone wrong: was crunching from the wrong parent; there are by-genre cats, just not US-specific ones. My bad for missing that in the first instance, sorry.
*{{cl|Comedy_television_series}} 151
*{{cl|Non-fiction_television_series}} 139
*{{cl|Sitcoms}} 83
*{{cl|Drama_television_series}} 83
*{{cl|News_television_series}} 55
*{{cl|Children's_television_series}} 51
*{{cl|Comedy_television_series_stubs}} 47
*{{cl|Science_fiction_television_series}} 33
*{{cl|Drama_television_series_stubs}} 30
*{{cl|American_children's_television_series}} 27
*{{cl|American_comedy_television_series}} 26
*{{cl|Horror_television_series}} 26
*{{cl|Television_talk_shows}} 23
*{{cl|Game_shows}} 23
*{{cl|The_Outer_Limits_episodes}} 23
So it looks like comedy, non-fiction, drama, news and children's are pretty much gimmes (factoring in some modest degree of undercounting in the latter two cases). Comedy is possibly big enough to consider subcats, though that's not urgent. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 01:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
**Here's how these are ordered:
:*{{cl|Comedy_television_series}} 151
:**{{cl|American_comedy_television_series}} 26
:**{{cl|Comedy_television_series_stubs}} 47
:**{{cl|Sitcoms}} 83
:*{{cl|Non-fiction_television_series}} 139
:**{{cl|News_television_series}} 55
:**{{cl|Television_talk_shows}} 23
:**{{cl|Game_shows}} 23
:*{{cl|Drama_television_series}} 83
:**{{cl|Drama_television_series_stubs}} 30
:*{{cl|Children's_television_series}} 51
:**{{cl|American_children's_television_series}} 27
:*{{cl|Science_fiction_television_series}} 33
:*{{cl|Horror_television_series}} 26
:...so I propose a {{tl|news-tv-prog-stub}} and maybe a {{tl|sport-tv-prog-stub}}, although I don't see that in the list. Maybe upmerged {{tl|talk-tv-prog-stub}} and {{tl|game-tv-prog-stub}}. Any takers? [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 05:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
::Me, for one. Sports isn't on the list because I once ''again'' didn't pick a general enough route: there's 46 under {{cl|sports television}}, though, so that sounds very plausible, too. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 13:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
===Split of {{Cl|American football stubs}}===
{{sfp create}}
Over 600 articles and the entire first page is either drafts or seasons, don't think that we have enough for a drft-stub but certainly we have enough for a season stub I propose {{Cl|American football season stubs}} with the template called {{Tl|AmericanFootball-season-stub}} or {{Tl|Amfoot-season-stub}}. [[User:Waacstats|Waacstats]] 14:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
:After a recount we do have enough for a {{Cl|American football draft stubs}} again fed by which ever is deemed more acceptable {{Tl|AmericanFootball-draft-stub}} or {{Tl|Amfoot-draft-stub}}
::The main template in the parent is {{tl|Americanfootball-stub}}, so these should follow suit. Strong support on the first, and milder support on the second, BTW. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 01:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
==={{tl|Producer-stub}}===
{{sfp other}}
I think there needs to be a producer stub, because right now I've noticed that a lot of producers are just listed under stub. I think it would make things a little more organized, if they had their own stub category. Also, from there you can get more specific, like tv-producer-stub or movie-producer-stub. It's just an idea. Anyone have any thoughts on this? [[User:Kc12286|kc12286]] 01:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''comment''' - We've already got {{tl|film-producer-stub}}, and {{tl|music-producer-stub}}.[[User:Crystallina|Crystallina]] 03:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
: I looked for it. I guess it's listed under films. Well in that case, maye adding a tv-producer-stub would be helpful. [[User:Kc12286|kc12286]] 04:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
*We have just created {{tl|US-tv-producer-stub}}; are there any other nationalities big enough to split? Or enough among the other nationalities to merit a general {{tl|tv-producer-stub}}? [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 17:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
==={{tl|Ancient-Euro-bio-stub}}===
{{sfp create}}
This one may need a little brainstorming from the WP:WSS regulars. During discussion with [[User: Apcbg]] about the unproposed discovery Ancient-Thrace-bio-stub, it occurred to me that a stub covering biographies of ancient Europeans not covered by the Roman or Greek stub types would probably be very useful and would almost certainly reach 60 stubs, with Thracians, Spartans, Celts, Teutons and the like. IIRC we recently had a similar call for an Etruscan-bio-stub, which this would also cover. It does face a couple of problems, however: defining "Ancient" and defining "Europe". Personally, I'd define Ancient as being the same as BC and would be lenient on Europe to include Phoenicians, Trojans and Carthaginians - none of whom could accuately be described as European. And if that was to be the coverage, it might need a better name ("Classical-bio-stub"?). Any thoughts? [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 05:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
:::[[Image:Zlatna maska teres-2.jpg|44px|]]That would be a satisfactory solution I believe. Just one suggestion: Could we please illustrate the new Ancient-Euro-bio-stub with the picture used in Ancient-Thrace-bio-stub? It's the golden mask of a Thracian king, and reputedly the Thracians upheld the earliest cultural tradition in Europe (including the abovementioned 'peri-European' peoples too); as you possibly know the world's oldest gold (dated 46th century BC) was found near [[Varna Necropolis|Varna]]. [[User:Apcbg|Apcbg]] 12:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
::Sounds reasonable - the only other thoughts I had were the statue of Boudicca in Westminster, UK, and the statue of the dying Gaul - neither of which would be easily recognisable at that size. Discussing the stub icon's a bit like putting the cart before the horse, though - I'd prefer to get the actual name and scope of the thing sorted out first! [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 23:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
:::I'm not an expert on stub-template names, but 'Ancient-Europe-bio-stub' seems better to me; with 'Ancient-Euro-bio-stub' one would expect to see an 'Ancient-Dollar-bio-stub' too :-) [[User:Apcbg|Apcbg]] 08:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
::Heh. "Euro-" is used as a standard for Europe-related stub templates. Perhaps it should be the full word, but it would require a hell of a lot of work to get them all changed over to Europe. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 01:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
:::Just fine with me. [[User:Apcbg|Apcbg]] 05:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
:::'''Support''' per nom and the image of the Thracian gold mask is fine. I presume the category name (when we have 60 stubs) will be {{cl|Ancient European people stubs}} ? [[User:Valentinian|Valentinian]] <sup>[[User_talk:Valentinian|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Valentinian|C]]</sup> 07:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
::::In the meantime, the 'Ancient-Thrace-bio-stub' seems to have been transformed by [[User:Amalas]] into 'Ancient-Thrace-stub' (displaying however the former text "Ancient Thracians biographical article"); subject closed or what? [[User:Apcbg|Apcbg]] 19:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
===Anime and manga -- do-over===
We've been around this one before, but hopefully we might get a bit more traction this time. Parent is of course enormous. I hope I'm on solid ground with at least the first one, as it was [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga/Archive_14#Mangaka_stub|already suggested]] at the corresponding WPJ (at which I'm about to drop a note about this). I wonder if a still broader {{cl|anime and manga biography stubs}} would also be handy.
#{{cl|Manga artist stubs}} 186
#{{cl|Anime OVA stubs}} 139
#{{cl|Anime film stubs}} 97
#{{cl|Science fiction anime stubs}} 144
#{{cl|Shōjo stubs}} 108
#{{cl|Mecha anime stubs}} 76
#{{cl|Fantasy anime stubs}} 71
As to the others, I'm easy either way on whether it makes more sense to split by medium, or by genre.
*'''Support''' {{cl|Manga artist stubs}}, '''Oppose''' all other as it give [[WP:ANIME]] too many stubs to juggle. Genre stubs are a particularly bad idea as most anime and manga belong to multiple genres and choosing the best stub won't be easy and a constant source of greif. --'''[[User:TheFarix|Farix]]''' ([[User talk:TheFarix|Talk]]) 19:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
*I numbered them for easier reference. I support all but {{cl|Shōjo stubs}}. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="green">日本穣</font>]]<sup>[[Help:Japanese|?]] · <small>[[User talk:Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">Talk</font>]] <font color="darkblue">to</font> [[WP:JA|Nihon]][[WP:MOS-JA|<font color="darkgreen">joe</font>]]</small></sup> 19:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Support''' {{cl|Manga artist stubs}}, as most manga artist articles are stubs. Glad you took it up, I never got around [[User:Ninja_neko/Mangaka_stubs|listing all eligible articles]] (there are so many!). Not sure about the other cats though, as this would mean you could apply multiple stub cats on one article (a mecha-sci fi-fantasy OVA for instance), it could get confusing. [[User:Ninja neko|Ninja neko]] 08:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
**I imagine we'd (at most) want to do either the form/medium axis, or the genre axis, but not both. Since the "series" are in theory already split (that is, the type exists, but isn't significantly sorted to), and since it would presumably lead to less overlap, maybe the former makes more sense. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 12:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Support''' {{cl|Manga artist stubs}}, As for OVA and films, I have opposed a stub type for anime-series before because its purpose is far outweighed by the maintenance needed to separate them from other anime/mange stub types. Basically all of what Farix said I agree with. --[[User:Squilibob|Squilibob]] 07:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
**Given the ever-increasing size of the parent stub type, can someone explain to me exactly what "maintaining" of this the anime WPJ is doing at present? From a stub-sorting point of view, it's not acceptable for this just to grow endlessly, and I can't believe it's very useful for anyone else (supposedly) working on these, either, at least as regards the chances of these articles ever being "unstubbed". Is the project going to agree to ''any'' way of sorting the remainder of these? (Note "agree to", not "actually do".) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 13:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
::*'''Comment''': There are [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Anime and manga articles by quality statistics|1847 stub]] anime and manga articles. If you split OVAs and films off then that would removed only 236 of the 1847 still leaving over 1600 stubs left in the one category, ''but'' some OVAs have film adaptions and vice versa. And science fiction/mecha/fantasy would have even more overlap. --[[User:Squilibob|Squilibob]] 05:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
:::*Well, for one thing you're using the wrong numbers: this has nothing to do with the "stub class articles", which would remain as-is. The overlap is actually pretty small: around 25 of the above. There's about 1200 A&M-stubs per se, and sorting 200 of them would be an excellent first step, in my book. Also bear in mind that these numbers are on the basis of existing categorisation, and are probably considerable underestimates (I'll compile a list of the A&M stubs with no other category, in the vague hopes someone might actually categorise them). If someone else has a better idea as to how to split these up I'm all ears, but if the project is just going to say "no" to everything... [[User:Alai|Alai]] 22:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
*Alternatively, if the films and OVAs are especially apt to overlap (or not an especially interesting distinction for editorial purposes in the first place), we could have a combined "film and OVA stubs" category, which would at least serve to separate them out from wholly different media. Would that be a more attractive option? [[User:Alai|Alai]] 17:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
**We don't have any film stub types that use release format (i.e. direct to video); I think just {{tl|anime-film-stub}} would work for our current purposes -- if necessary. There are only 2 pages of {{cl|Anime films}}. Any OVA can be given the category of {{cl|Direct-to-video films}} as well. [[User:Pegship|Her Pegship]] <small><font color="green">[[User talk:Pegship| (tis herself)]]</font></small> 19:31, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
***I've gone ahead and done this, with an initial bot-population on as conservative a basis as I could manage. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 04:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
==={{cl|fungal plant disease stubs}}, and such like===
{{cl|Plant disease stubs}} is now huge: over 1300. The only trouble with a "fungal" subtype is that it look like ''it'' would be huge, too: hundreds of articles were double-stubbed with fungus-stub at the time of the last db dump a week ago, and there's been a lot more created since. Broadly speaking I'd imagine we'd want to split further by either taxonomy of the infective agent, or else by taxonomy of effected species. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 22:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
:I don't know what the solution is - perhaps I should stop creating all these stubs, and in fact, I'm pretty well done - I wanted to create stubs for all of the pathogens listed in the various disease lists. However, the issue is not really just restricted to 'stubs'. The 'Plant pathogens and diseases' category is now also very large. How could it be better organized? I noticed that the fungi category includes subcategories such as Ascomycetes and Basidiomycetes. Most of the plant disease stubs are for Ascomycetes, however, very few have so far been added to this category. If they were, the category would also be large. There also some subcategories for specific genera. I don't know if we want to start creating genera specific stubs (e.g Fusarium pathogen stub, ...) or crop specific stubs (Canola disease stub ..), although the taxonomic approach seems to be one that has been used for the organization of plant species - although I'm not sure if this is also reflected in the plant stubs.[[User:Somanypeople|Somanypeople]] 01:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
::That's really out of our brief. Perhaps the best solution would be for you to find whatever WikiProject is most involved with this subject and work out how to subdivide the main parent category - [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants]], or [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Biology]] perhaps, or maybe [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Fungi]] or even [[[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Microbiology]]. That would make our job easier, too, since we can then divide the stub cats along whatever line the permcats are divided. If the stub category isn't going to grow much larger any time soon (and you did say you've more or less finished what you're doing), then we can hold off any split for a short while, at least. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 01:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
::: Well as a member of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Fungi]] I have been adding fungal plant diseases to their coverage but its quiet a small wikiproject. The majority of plant diseases are fungal, so the creation of a fungal plant disease catergory would, your correct, be huge. It may be best to divivde them by their hosts then. I suggest cereal disease stub, tree disease stub ect and I also suggest a general plant virus stub due to the number of viral family stub articles where all the members of that family are plant pathogens. Viruses also have a very large host range so it'd be harder to classify them that way. [[User:Million Moments|Million_Moments]] 11:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
::On permcats (though as G. says, this isn't strictly on-topic for this page, but what the hey) I'd image one would want categorisation by both organism and by host. Say, cat:<taxon> or cat:<taxon> plant diseases, plus something along the lines of cat:diseases of <taxon> (or cat:<taxon> diseases). Whether one wants "intersection categories" between the two is a judgement call. Once those are in place, then it becomes just a matter of which of the two (or which combination) is the most useful for editors expanding them. BTW, notice also [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/Archive/June_2007#fungus_subtypes|this proposal]] to split up the fungi per se, which presumably will overlap a great deal with this. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 14:04, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
===Split of {{tl|mil-stub}}===
{{sfp top|create by continent}}
Mil-stub is 5 pages and needs a split. {{tl|Asia-mil-stub}}, {{tl|Africa-mil-stub}}, {{tl|SouthAm-mil-stub}} would be a good beginning and could also be the parent cat's to the existing x-mil-stub. Also, a {{tl|country-mil-stub}} would be useful.--[[User:Thomas.macmillan|Thomas.macmillan]] 21:29, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Support''' the continent splits (plus, if deemed useful, simular for Oceania, CentralAm, Caribbean and MEast). Not so sure about the country-mil-stub, though - what would that be used for? If simply "Military of Foo"-type articles, wouldn't they be better simply given their respective continental-mil-stub? [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 23:32, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
==={{tl|pharmacology-stub}} subtypes===
{{sfp create}}
Bigger than ever, but categorisation seems to have improved, so the following all look to be plausible now:
*{{cl|monoclonal antibody stubs}} 153
*{{cl|antimicrobial stubs}} 119
*{{cl|analgesic stubs}} 74
*{{cl|sedative stubs}} 70
*{{cl|anticonvulsant stubs}} 66
*{{cl|antihypertensive agent stubs}} 62
:'''Support'''. Monoclonal antibodies in particular would benefit from subsorting. I presume {{tl|antimicrobial-stub}} would apply to antifungals, antiparasitics etc. [[User:Fvasconcellos|Fvasconcellos]]<small> ([[User talk:Fvasconcellos|t]]·[[Special:Contributions/Fvasconcellos|c]])</small> 21:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
| |||