Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/February/27

< Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion‎ | Log‎ | 2007/February

February 27 edit

{{MythBusters-stub}} edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete


Never proposed, no stub category (feeds straight into the Cat:MythBusters - and that permcat has only 15 articles). The chances of this reaching even close to threshold are virtually nil. Also its unclear whether this is for the episodes, myths tested or exposed by the programme, or people involved with the programme. Delete. Grutness...wha? 00:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This stub is going to be inroduced to all pages MythBusters. Currently, WikiProject MythBusters is just starting up, and we are trying to standardize and consolidate articles. This is just one of the tools we are using. It only has a few articles because we have not added it to the pages it needs. If it turns out that there are too few articles that need the stub, we will just have a major over-arching category. Please give us some time to get things straight---we are just starting out ........jw 04:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that even with a WikiProject this stub type would need more than 15 articles to be effective, and the main category only has 15 articles, so there are likely to be even fewer than 15 stubs. With that few articles, you'd be far better off with a list of the articles as a subpage of your WikiProject, listing all the pages and what needs doing to them. Also, as I said, there are questions as to exactly what types of articles this stub would cover. Grutness...wha? 03:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Concur with Grutness on all points. This is "overprojectification" (by analogy with "overcategorization"). Jaypenguin: I think it would be more productive for you to use a larger-category TV stub type, one level up (it might even attract new editors/project members!), and for your project-internal categorization purposes use a standard-style WikiProject talk page header (which can be used to assess articles as Stub-class and auto file them in Category:Stub-class MythBusters articles under Category:WikiProject MythBusters (which I note doesn't even exist yet). I.e., use the WP 1.0 Assessment and Peer Review system to classify your small number of articles as stubs or not for your particular needs. The WP:WSS stub sorting system really isn't going the help you much, because your topic is of too narrow an interest. See the WikiProject Council for stock talk page WikiProject templates and such, not to mention more info on how to set up WikiProjects to be more effective (an internal Category:WikiProject MythBusters is a must). — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 08:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Turkish cuisine stub}} (redirect) edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete


Yes, I know - this was part of a mass proposal only a couple of weeks ago. But in the rush the fact that this was a misnamed stub seems to have been overlooked - it was renamed, but the faultily worded original wasn't deleted. Since we now have a perfectly acceptable {{Turkey-cuisine-stub}}, this redirect can (and should) be deleted. Grutness...wha? 23:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Caerwine Caer’s whines 01:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete: per nom's reasoning, this sounds utterly uncontroversial, just fixing an oversight by removing something that is already surpassed by a properly-named template. Copied this to WP:SFD#To delete, which seems to be our equivalent of SD. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 09:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

CVG mass rename edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename all to *-videogame-stub


The video game people have by and large, save for one exception, noted below in an separate SFD, finished renaming the computer and video game stub categories, to say just video game. Now the question is what to do with all those templates that have cvg in them. Do we change from the cryptic cvg to the equally cryptic vg or shall we consider videogame to be short enough to dispense with abbreviations, and replace cvg with that? Personally, I favor that we rename all to use videogame. Caerwine Caer’s whines 18:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support renaming {{cvg-stub}} to {{videogame-stub}} over redirect and children with same change. Monni 20:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all per nom (i.e., to "X-videogame-stub"). Oppose using "vg" as an abbreviation, as it is too ambiguous (see VG). No preference as to keeping or deleting cvg redirects. Grutness...wha? 23:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all: I support renaming everything to something like {{vg-stub}} and keeping all the redirects. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all - Yes, it would be kinda weird to leave it as computer and video games after all this time. --Addict 2006 05:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all. I completely agree with Dread Lord CyberSkull. §†SupaSoldier†§ 16:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all to "vg-whatever". Seems a good idea to keep it short, though "videogame-whatever" is fine too.--Mike Selinker 04:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support if renaming to videogame as its easier to see where it is come from. Oppose if its shortened to vg as it doesn't really help and just means people that have learnt cvg must rememeber to type vg instead. Ksbrowntalk 09:35, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to videogame-stub or something of the like; get rid of all the sub categories. Agree that vg-stub is unclear. --  user|TALK 19:30, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to videogame-stub, but oppose vg-stub. bibliomaniac15 04:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to videogame-stub, vg-stub is too cryptic. Clement Cherlin 12:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename. I thinks it's a good idea to use just one stub template for all short video game articles. BuickCenturyDriver (Honk, contribs, odometer) 13:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to video-game- for preference, or else videogame-, for clarity and consistency. Oppose vg- (and strongly oppose deletion of sub types). Alai 16:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to "videogame" versions, not "vg", not "video-game" ("video-game" is not a common spelling and would ergo be confusing; vg is geeky and not easily guessable as to meaning, plus easily mistaken for a country or language code.) — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 08:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support rename to "videogame-". oppose rename to "vg-". Entro-P 13:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Rename {{educational-cvg-stub}} edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename


Besides the what do we do with cvg issue of the above, there is the question whether to take the opportunity to replace educational with the edu abbreviation used by other education-related stub templates. Caerwine Caer’s whines 18:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Rename {{sports-cvg-stub}} edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename


Besides the what do we do with cvg issue of the above, there is the question whether to take the opportunity to replace sports with the sport used by other sports-related stub templates. Caerwine Caer’s whines 18:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rename to sport-videogame-stub per nom. Grutness...wha? 23:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to sports-videogame-stub (sports not sport). Last I looked there was definitely not a majority of sport[s]- stubs being sport- versus sports-, while -sport- not -sports- is used in the combining form (as a Major Component, per WSS/NG) after geographical names. This mirrors the vast majority of non-stub category usages: Almost all "Sports something" and "Qualifier sports something" (where "Qualifier" is something like "Racing", "Water", etc.) categories use "sports". Meanwhile, the geographic sporting categories almost universally use "sport", singular, e.g. "Category:Sport in Italy". I think the "what to do about sport vs. sports" issue in stubspace needs further discussion (and my take on the issue is much less simplistic than I think has been understood so far). So, for this particular rename nomination I propose leaving "sports" as-is for now in the stub in question. If it already said "sport" I would not advocate renaming that part of the stub name to "sports", because that could be seen as a US- vs. UK-English debate, and we shouldn't go there. Another way of putting it, I think the current rename nominations with regard to the CVG stubcats should focus on what to do about the "cvg" segment, and re-order them where necessary to satisfy WSS/NG, but not wander into disputed territory. :-) I object to "tak[ing] the opportunity", as Caerwine put it, because it would pre-emptively move to settle the question before the debate has actually come to a conclusion. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 08:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Rename {{cvg-web-stub}} edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename


Since the stub type is for websites, I suggest that at the same time as we take care of the cvg issue above, that we rename to end in website-stub, the same as its parent {{website-stub}}. Caerwine Caer’s whines 18:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Cat:Computer role-playing game stubs → Cat:Role-playing video game stubs edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename


Probably didn't get caught up in the permacat rename because it didn't mention video games in the category title. Propose that we rename to match the permacat Cat:Role-playing video games Caerwine Caer’s whines 18:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Delete redirects {{cvg-char stub}} {{cvg-corp-stub}} {{cvg-item-stub}}, {{cvg-soft-stub}} edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete


As long as we're cleaning up these, lets delete these redirects left over from previous template renames and start the new names off reasonably clean of redirects. Caerwine Caer’s whines 19:06, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, clean is the way to go... Monni 20:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Yep. The redir mess might just cause the creation of new cvg templates. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 08:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Rename redirects {{manga-cvg-stub}}, {{cvg-rpg-stub}} edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename


The first exists because in general for every anime stub type a redirect from manga exists. The second redirect exists so as to help people unsure as to whether cvg or rpg should go first. Suggest that we rename to match whatever is done with the other cvg stubs. (By the way, I created the notification template, {{sfr-r}}, just to handle this peculiar case.) Caerwine Caer’s whines 19:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support in principle, but it sounds like the specifics are unknown. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 09:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/2007/February/27&oldid=1146025400"