Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2010/December/13
December 13
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 Upmerge
I'd like to propose that this template, and it's associated category, Category:New York State Highway stubs be upmerged into {{NewYork-road-stub}} and Category:New York road stubs respectively. There are only 7 articles with the template sitting in the category. The parent stub type has 50 articles in its category. Imzadi 1979 → 10:29, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I was going to hold off on this until I had cleared this out, but it doesn't really matter. Delete the cat and template and retag the contents with {{NewYork-road-stub}}. – TMF 15:45, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep the {{NewYork-State-Highway-stub}} template, but upmerge the category. Dough4872 18:13, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for consistency with other USRD stubs. --Rschen7754 21:10, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Upmerge category, and redirect template to {{NewYork-road-stub}}. --Admrboltz (talk) 21:19, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Upmerge category, either delete or redirect the template - whichever is standard practice (we've been through this many times in the past with unproposed State Highway types, so there's almost certainly some standard practice). Grutness...wha? 21:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I see no reason to retain the template. The backstory behind this template is this: {{NewYork-road-stub}} was created independently of the other US road stubs. At the time those were all renamed to "state-road-stub", the NY state highway stub category had about 300 routes, which is why it wasn't nominated to be merged into the newer {{NewYork-road-stub}}. In the three or so years since, WP:NYSR has eliminated all but the seven stubs left in the category, making this expendable on every level. I've known this was underpopulated for a long time, but I held off on nominating it for deletion until I could expand the rest of them. As you can see, that never happened. – TMF 23:23, 13 December 2010 (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.