Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/Archive/November 2006: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m archiving |
m archiving |
||
Line 12:
**{{tl|sfp top}} for customized result description (use <nowiki>{{sfp top|result}}</nowiki>).
*Discussion footer: {{tl|sfd bottom}}
===Battlestar Galactica stubs {{tl|Galactica-stub}}===
{{sfp create}}
Following in the footprints of such stubs as {{tl|Babylon5-stub}}, {{tl|StarTrek-stub}} and {{tl|EastEnders-stub}}, the Battlestar Galactica stub category would categorize the large (and ever-growing) number of BSG related articles that need work. --[[User:BlueSquadronRaven|<font color="blue">'''BlueSquadron'''</font><font color="black">'''Raven'''</font>]] 22:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
*There actually used to be one of these, but it was deleted as underused and poorly named (it was at BG-stub)... but if you're right about this being fast-growing, perhaps it's more viable now. There appears to be a WikiProject, albeit a small one, so that cuts the necessary stubcount down to about 30. Is this likely to have 30 current articles that can use it? If so, I don't see any problems with a {{tl|BattlestarGalactica-stub}}. But I'd like to know the numbers first! [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 23:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
*(ec)Assuming there's at least 30 (given that there's [[WP:BSG]]), seems sensible. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 23:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
:A quick look through [[:Category:Battlestar Galactica]] and subcategories came up with fifty articles marked as stubs, spanning both the old and new versions of the show, in articles on episodes, actors, characters and miscellaneous subjects. --[[User:BlueSquadronRaven|<font color="blue">'''BlueSquadron'''</font><font color="black">'''Raven'''</font>]] 04:15, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
:'''Question''' If this stub category meets approval, how would people feel if I created it as either {{tl|BSG-stub}} or {{tl|Galactica-stub}} for sake of brevity? --[[User:BlueSquadronRaven|<font color="blue">'''BlueSquadron'''</font><font color="black">'''Raven'''</font>]] 04:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
::Personally I've no objection to {{tl|Galactica-stub}}, but I'd have a BIG objection to BSG-stub. [[BSG]] is a disambiguation page, to start with, and it's not instantly obvious to an outsider what BSG would stand for - see my note above as to one of the reasons the original Battlestar Galactica stub was deleted. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 04:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
::[[Galactica]] is also a disambig page, as it turns out, however, it's not as extensive as [[BSG]] and the Battlestar reference trumps the other two, I think. Unless there's further objections, I'll make it Galactica-stub. --[[User:BlueSquadronRaven|<font color="blue">'''BlueSquadron'''</font><font color="black">'''Raven'''</font>]] 04:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
:::I'd support that template name. Note that the category should use lower-case 's': {{cl|Battlestar Galactica stubs}}. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 13:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
:::Done. Proposal altered. --[[User:BlueSquadronRaven|<font color="blue">'''BlueSquadron'''</font><font color="black">'''Raven'''</font>]] 17:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, everyone, for your input. The stub template and category has been created. --[[User:BlueSquadronRaven|<font color="blue">'''BlueSquadron'''</font>]][[User talk:BlueSquadronRaven|<font color="black">'''Raven'''</font>]] 04:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
===New Zealand structures===
{{sfp create}}
I've just been through {{cl|New Zealand stubs}} sorting out the new templates, one of which was NZ-struct-stub, currently upmerged into {{cl|Oceanian building and structure stubs}}. I was surprised to discover 70 stubs that could take the NZ-struct-stub template - enough for a separate category. it would leave the Oceanian parent a little thin at 41 stubs, but I'll have a hunt aroundf to see if that can be increased (in any case, it would be 41 stubs plus plus four child categories, so it's not ''too'' dreadful). I'd therefore like to propose a separate {{cl|New Zealand building and structure stubs}}. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 10:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. fits right in with the other "building and structure" stubs, from what I can see. I say we do it. --[[User:Ohms law|Ohms law]] 19:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
*Support. Small size of parent isn't an issue, as it's holding sensible subcats. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 12:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
==={{cl|Ranunculales stubs}}===
{{sfp create}}
Plant stubs are oversized again; fixable with sorting to existing types, but I note that this would also be viable, at 78. (Technically I'm breaking the 'singular noun phrase', but singularising scientific Latin clade names doesn't seem like too good a plan.) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 05:15, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
* Support, the category is already big enough, and important group evolutionarily and horticulturally. I'm not certain though, if this page is about supporting or not, but I do support this as a useful stub category, as certaily it is one I would peruse for articles to work on, and it is much easier in plant articles to work on groups at a time. [[User:KP Botany|KP Botany]] 20:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
**Support is always welcome, though to be honest there's splits where anything short of entrenched opposition would be construed as adequate consensus. :) [[User:Alai|Alai]] 20:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
==={{tl|Gosford-geo-stub}} / {{cl|Gosford suburb geography stubs}}===
{{sfp create}}
The NSW geo stubs are oversized again; only sensible-looking split I can find is the 67 articles in {{cl|Suburbs of Gosford, New South Wales}}. [[User:Alai|Alai]] 04:43, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
{{sfd bottom}}
=== University of Virginia stubs ===
| |||