Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/Archive/2016/February: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m →Accipitriformes stubs: closing, created |
m →River stubs: closing |
||
Line 23:
===River stubs===
{{sfp top}}
There are [[:Category:Stub-Class_River_articles|over 23,000 stubs]] in [[WP:WikiProject Rivers|WikiProject Rivers]] and [http://tools.wmflabs.org/catscan3/catscan2.php?categories=Stub-Class+River+articles%0D%0AStub-Class+Brazil+articles&ns%5B1%5D=1&doit=1 2095] in Brazil alone. Has there been some decision made about not creating stub templates and categories like {{tl|Brazil-river-stub}} and [[:Category:Brazil river stubs]]? The only similar categories that I'm finding are for [[:Category:Queensland river stubs|Queensland]] and [[:Category:China river stubs|China]]. I'd be happy to build out the South American countries if there is some consensus to do this. [[User:Giso6150|giso6150]] ([[User talk:Giso6150|talk]]) 14:37, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
:'''Support'''; you may also want to do Australia, as the country which Queensland belongs to - even if there are 5 rivers, it woulld be enough for a normal stub category. [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od Mishehu]] 16:20, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
:I strongly suspect that I will end up nominating the China category for upmerging, as undersized; hpwever, I'm not ready to commit myuself to such a nomination until the tree is more or less populated. 15:35, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
{{sfp bottom}}
| |||