Shortcuts
WikiProject Stub sorting
Information
Project page talk
- Stub types (sections) talk
- Stub types (full list) talk
- To do talk
- Naming conventions talk
- Redirects category talk
Wikipedia:Stub talk
Discussion
Proposals (A) talk
- Current month
Discussion talk
Criteria (A) (discontinued) talk
Deletion (Log) (discontinued) talk
Category

On this WikiProject Stub sorting subpage, you can propose new stub types (please read the procedures beforehand!), as well as the reorganization and subdivision of existing stub types. You can also discuss anything else related to stubs on the talk page.

Proposing new stub types – procedure[edit]

Important: If you wish to propose the creation of a stub ARTICLE you've come to the wrong place. If you don't have a username yourself, please go to WP:AFC for proposing a new article. If you already have a username, you can create the article yourself. If you don't know how, add ((Helpme)) to your user talk page to request help from other editors. This page only deals with stub TEMPLATES and CATEGORIES; we cannot help you with creating articles.

Proposing new stub types
If you wish to propose a new stub category and template, please follow these procedures:
  1. Check the List of stub types or under Category:Stub categories to make sure that your proposed new stub does not already exist.
  2. List it at the top of the current month's section, under a header, like the ones shown (if any). Sign it with a datestamp (~~~~).
    • Please bear in mind that a stub category isn't about the importance or notability of the topic!
  3. Find a good number[1] of stub articles, as many as you can, that will fit that template. You may use this tool to scan through categories; tagged stubs are always in Category:All stub articles and transclude ((asbox)). Each of these articles can be:
    • currently marked with ((stub));
    • currently marked with another type of stub tag (in which case you should justify why your tag is better for the article than the current one);
    • a stub whose categorisation is highly ambiguous or questionable;
    • not marked as a stub.
  4. If you use any category scan (from the tool mentioned above or from any other), please link to it so that other users can confirm that the results are still accurate.
  5. Others may do the same, if they so desire.
  6. 5 days after listing it here, if there is general approval or no objection, go ahead and create the new category and/or template following the format on Wikipedia:Stub. List the new stub type on the stub types list in an appropriate section. If consensus is not clear, or discussion is still ongoing, the proposal will remain open until consensus can be reached.
  7. If you wish to propose a stub type which does not currently have 60 articles that could use it, you may propose an upmerged template in a similar way. An upmerged template would feed into currently existing stub categories until such time that there are enough stubs for a separate stub category. At that point a category for it may be separately proposed. Some times, it may be difficult to be sure how many stubs would get a tag - in which case you can also start with an upmerged stub tag until you're sure there are enough.

DO NOT place a proposal here for any stub type which has already been created and is being discussed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. The proposal page is only for stub types that have not yet been created, and it is better to keep any discussion of such stub types in one place rather than splitting it between different pages. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion is the correct page for proposals to delete a stub type.

^ Good number means about 60 articles or more, or 30 or more if it is the primary stub type of a WikiProject, though this figure may vary from case to case.

"Speedy creation"

A stub type may be proposed for "speedy creation" if it meets one of the following criteria:

List speedy creation proposals in the same proposal listings as normal stub proposals below.

Proposals, February 2024[edit]

Please check how many articles qualify for a stub type before proposing it.

NEW PROPOSALS

Coleophora stubs

I'm unsure if this would actually work as a stub template, since it's a strange case - Category:Coleophoridae stubs is one of the biggest stub categories, but 1374/1409 of the articles are Coleophora, with only 35 non-Coleophora in the category. I'm sure if I knew more about moths I could propose more specific stub categories, but as it is I wonder if having a subcategory for Coleophora would at least help a tiny bit. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 22:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tetrapodomorph stubs

I would like to make a stub category for early tetrapodomorphs (animals closer to modern limbed vertebrates than to other modern animals). Tetrapodomorpha contains many taxa that don't fit neatly into the traditional "fish"/"amphibian" dichotomy. This template lists most of the articles about the group, most of which are stubs. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 00:52, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cynodont stubs

Category:Prehistoric therapsid stubs is pretty big at over 200 pages, so I'd like to make a subcategory for the cynodonts, which make up a significant portion of the current therapsid stubs. Also, we already have Category:Anomodont stubs for another therapsid group. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 00:52, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sawfly 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.
The Template:Sawfly-stub upmerges to Category:Hymenoptera stubs. I propose to create the page for Sawfly stubs. There are about 150 articles marked as Sawfly stubs. Hymenoptera is an order of insects, specifically the ants, bees and wasps, and their relatives (like sawflies). The Hymenoptera stubs page itself, currently with 257 articles, has a banner saying that articles should be put into subcategories whenever possible, and the the category should contain mostly subcategories. Uporządnicki (talk) 18:04, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I forgot to mention, I propose it as an S1 Speedy Creation. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:42, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support per nom. Her Pegship (?) 00:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There being no objection, and it being a clear and straightforward case -- done! Uporządnicki (talk) 01:47, 21 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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.

Category:Indian passenger trains stubs

To categorise passenger train stub articles into a separate sub cat in Category:India rail transport stubs.

Existing sub cat Category:Indian express train stubs can be placed under this along with other non express train service articles.— Preceding unsigned comment added by nkb_21 (talk • contribs)

How many articles would qualify for such a sub-cat? Her Pegship (?) 23:20, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
about 78 articles qualify and the Category:Indian express train stubs upmerges to it. Nkb 21 (talk) 04:46, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nitidulidae stub upmerging--propose own category

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.
Template:Nitidulidae-stub currently upmerges stubs to Category:Cucujoidea stubs. There are roughly 140 stub articles for Nitidulidae. Under S1, I propose a Speedy Creation of category page for Nitidulidae stubs. Uporządnicki (talk) 22:12, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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.

Category: National Trust stubs

I'm proposing Category:National Trust stubs to enable editors to navigate directly to articles relating to the National Trust that could benefit from improvement, as part of a paid editing pilot for the organisation. There's 94 results using Petscan (ID). You can read more about the pilot here.

Note:This is my first stub category nomination, so please bear with me as I work out what to do if the nomination is successful. Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 15:07, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to the stub house! I have several questions about this proposed stub type:
Not making any judgments, just curious. Her Pegship (?) 20:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks very much for the questions @Pegship this definitely helps me think what would be useful.
1) Yes, it's the England, Wales, Northern Ireland one
2) I'm very happy to take more experienced advice on this - I suggested "National Trust stubs" as a catch-all, but am happy to be guided by editors with more experience in this area
3) Currently there isn't a WikiProject National Trust. My thinking with the general stub type as proposed was that it would be a one-stop-shop that we could point new editors to as place where all the NT content that might benefit from expansion could be held. Again, happy to take advice on this, I am new to the work in this project
Thanks again Lajmmoore (talk) 09:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see that the items on the PetScan list are mainly locations or structures or art. Maybe a more general ((NationalTrust-property-stub)), without the geography involved? Also, I assume that this template would be applied in addition to existing stub templates rather than replacing them; the articles already have templates like ((castle-stub)), ((painting-stub)), etc., which they should still keep. Her Pegship (?) 21:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, @Pegship you've got the words to express what I was thinking, but didn't quite know how to say. Thank you! Lajmmoore (talk) 14:11, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposals, January 2024[edit]

British Columbia Coast geography 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.
Excluding the British Columbia Coast river stubs, here are the results for possible sub-cats of the above, which I propose:

Her Pegship (?) 22:38, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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.

Re-creation of Norway geography stub categories

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 re-create.
Good morning. As of January 2024, Norway has seen 7 counties reborn; three short-lived counties have been split. So it is time to re-create the following categories:

When all the corresponding categories have been re-populated, etc. then the categories corresponding to the split counties shall be deleted. Best, --Fadesga (talk) 13:55, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support per nom. Her Pegship (?) 00:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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.

Stub category for Leiodidae stub, currently upmerging

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.
There's a Template:Leiodidae-stub. It upmerges stubs to Category:Staphylinoidea stubs. I believe there are well over 100 stub articles for Leiodidae. I propose to set up a category page, and reset the template to go to it directly. Uporządnicki (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I've done it--and it's not working right. I'm hoping I just have to wait for it. Uporządnicki (talk) 10:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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.
Category