Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/Archive/2020/June

This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page.

Proposals, June 2020

Detarioideae stubs (speedy)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation 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 create.
{{Detarioideae-stub}} has 196 transclusions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Support per nom. Her Pegship (I'm listening) 04:08, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposal for Ryukyu stub

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation 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 no consensus.
Much like how there’s a Hawaii stub or a Scotland stub, I would like to propose a stub for Ryukyu-related articles. I often find myself having to put “Japan-stub” on Ryukyu articles even though that’s quite broad and I’m not focusing on all of Japan, just its southernmost islands. Stubs for specific regions do exist so I propose a stub specifically for the Ryukyu Islands. Another alternative could be an Okinawa prefecture stub, since Okinawa Prefecture takes up most of the Ryukyu Archipelago. However, this would leave out the Amami Islands of Kagoshima Prefecture which also is within the Ryukyu region. - CobaltCards (talk) 19:24, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

There is a stub type for Okinawa Prefecture and one for Kahoshima Prefecture (see sub-cats under Category:Japan geography stubs); will those do for your purposes? Her Pegship (I'm listening) 04:41, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pyrotechnics stub

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation 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 create.
Currently stubs related to fireworks or pyrotechnics articles are categorised as explosives or to a geographical location. I propose to create a specific one for pyrotechnics. Petscan gives 123 results. Alexcalamaro (talk) 07:04, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Her Pegship (I'm listening) 04:45, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Split Category:Electronic song stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation 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 created.
Proposing the creation of the following sub-stubs and categories of Category:Electronic song stubs:

{{1990s-electronic-song-stub}} Petscan: 126
{{2000s-electronic-song-stub}} Petscan: 90
{{2010s-electronic-song-stub}} Petscan: 111

This will also serve as child categories to Category:1990s song stubs, Category:2000s song stubs, and Category:2010s song stubs, respectively. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:32, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Split Category:2000s rock album stubs by year

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation 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 create.

No objections after more than 5 days,

creating... --DannyS712 (talk) 00:03, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Category:2000s rock album stubs currently has 1539 stubs. I suggest splitting it by year. Number of articles per year:

2000: 151
2001: 120
2002: 139
2003: 167
2004: 151
2005: 154
2006: 203
2007: 170
2008: 111
2009: 130

Thoughts? Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 02:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Support per nom, as seen with hip hop album stubs. Her Pegship (I'm listening) 05:16, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Question Could I also recommend that albums-by-year parent stubs/categories be created (e.g., Category:2001 album stubs for Category:2001 rock album stubs and Category:2001 hip hop album stubs)? Category:2000s pop album stubs has over 1000 stub articles, so it may warrant splitting as well at some point. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:20, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
@Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars: I don't think a by-year is needed for all of the subcategories we have now; I'll take a look at the by-year breakdown for pop album stubs and see if there is 60 of each year (probably) DannyS712 (talk) 01:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, I agree with you. My suggestion was to have parents for the by-year scheme that is in place for hip-hop album stubs and proposed by you for rock album stubs, not for the sparsely populated subcategories. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 02:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
@Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars: oh, that makes sense. Not sure if that needs a separate discussion though DannyS712 (talk) 00:01, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.