Powered by
TTSReader
Share this page on
Article provided by Wikipedia


"Shortcuts
"WikiProject Stub sorting
""Puzzle stub cropped.png
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
"Criteria "(A) (discontinued) "talk
Proposals "(A) "talk
- "Current month
"Deletion "(Log) (discontinued) "talk
"Category

On this "WP:WSS 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.

Contents

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"[edit]

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, June 2018[edit]

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

NEW PROPOSALS[edit]

Moths yet again: Proposal for a (upmerged?) template & a template+category (EDIT: &2 more temp+cats)[edit]

I would like to propose the following templates, for-now upmerged to "Category:Moth stubs:

While I'm at it, I would also like to propose the following template and category:

Since no one has responded yet, may as well add the following in the same section:

Proposing creation of the following templates+subcategories to "Category:Zygaenoidea stubs:

Speedy creation (S1) of category for upmerged template Scythrididae-stub transcluded on 450+ pages[edit]

{{"Scythrididae-stub}} is still upmerged but is, per the template transclusion count tool transcluded on 468 pages and thus well overdue a category creation. "AddWittyNameHere ("talk) 13:09, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy away! "Pegship ("talk) 03:46, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
Creation of "Category:Scythrididae stubs and retargeting the template are  Done "AddWittyNameHere ("talk) 21:31, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Iranian radio station stubs[edit]

I would like to propose {{Iran-radio-station-stub}}, to be upmerged into the existing categories "Asian radio station stubs and "Iranian media stubs The first article to be tagged with {{Iran-radio-station-stub}} would be "Radio Farhang "Eastmain ("talk • "contribs) 23:15, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@"Eastmain: Just one? Can you find any more? --"Redrose64 🌹 ("talk) 08:48, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
@"Redrose64: The licenced radio stations listed at "List of radio stations in Iran, http://www.logect.com/live/radio/iran/ and https://www.internet-radio.com/search/?radio=iran (not counting the Interenet-only stations) could probably all be the subject of stub articles. "Eastmain ("talk • "contribs) 13:14, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
@"Eastmain: Tentative Support upmerged template until those articles are created. "Pegship ("talk) 14:47, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

American football wide receiver, 1990s birth stubs[edit]

There are already existing stubs for each birth decade from 1890s until 1980s, and so adding the most recent decade makes sense. Moreover, there are about fifty articles to which this stub could be currently applied. "Deville ("Talk) 15:08, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

No objections? "Deville ("Talk) 14:08, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Have at it. "Pegship ("talk) 14:48, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Yes, set it up like "Category:American football wide receiver, 1980s birth stubs. --"Redrose64 🌹 ("talk) 18:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Proposals, May 2018[edit]

Perfumers[edit]

I don't think this template is needed. There are only 61 total perfumers with articles in "Category:Perfumers, and based on random sampling, it looks like less than half of these are stubs. We generally do not create stub templates with so little potential for growth. Perfumers are currently being sorted using {{"fashion-bio-stub}} which is not oversized. --"Qetuth ("talk) 08:49, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Looking at the history of the "to create" page, I see that this template was added to the "arts" list by RevengeOfTheRobots, along with a false date (this was never discussed as far as I can find). I'm guessing that the user realized that this Proposals page was the correct place to request the template and then moved it here. (Though I'm a bit suspicious of the "Aug 2008" date cited. Hmm.) Anyway, we definitely don't need a stub type for this subject, per "Qetuth's comment about viability. Do not create. "Pegship ("talk) 17:17, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I was like holy cow what did I just do then I tried to delete as soon as possible. But I also think people in the arts of fragrance don't fit perfectly in the fashion world. What about aromas and scents that exist outside of perfume and cologne. — Preceding "unsigned comment added by RevengeOfTheRobots ("talk • "contribs) 06:35, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Australian people stubs[edit]

Some speedy Australian templates and categories:

Also, I was going to propose an upmerged {{Australia-handball-bio-stub}} for the intersection of {{"oceania-handball-bio-stub}} and {{"Australia-sport-bio-stub}}, but I have just realised that this applies to every single transclusion of the oceania template - I'm not sure what the best solution here is. --"Qetuth ("talk) 14:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)


Propose stub subcategory "Pyrausta (moth)" within stub category Pyraustinae[edit]

There's a stub category for a subfamily of moths--Pyraustinae--with over 1300 articles listed. I recently went through the NON-stub category for the same subfamily, and separated out the genus Pyrausta as a subcategory. That new subcategory contains 295 articles, and I estimate that a subcategory for Pyrausta stubs will have about as many. With approval, I will undertake it. I've completed much larger projects here. And I recently did a new stub category and set up a stub template. So this one should go a little faster because I won't be figuring out from scratch what a stub template is and how to create one. "Uporządnicki ("talk) 13:53, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Anybody looking at these, lately? Perhaps if I add a remark, it'll come back to the top of people's attention. I'd like to undertake this project, but in two weeks, I haven't gotten a yea or a nay. "Uporządnicki ("talk) 19:13, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Well, in view of the declined gastropod request (below), is this something that the "Lepidoptera people would be OK with? --"Redrose64 🌹 ("talk) 11:16, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Point taken. I actually did, as I said, already create a non-stub subcategory for Pyrausta. And I've been at these things for many years, and have only run into that concern with the gastropods. But I'll run something up the flagpole at the Lepidoptera project page and see who salutes. "Uporządnicki ("talk) 13:01, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
For what it's worth, like I also said on the WikiProject page, it shouldn't be an issue. We've got several other genus-level stub cats scattered through our stub tree, some of which have been requested by me in the past and none of which have led to any complaints to the best of my knowledge.
(To be fair, I have just returned from a year-long absence. While it's possible things have changed, all the genus-level stubcats I know of in Lepidoptera still stand, nothing was said on my usertalk during my absence and no complaints were raised on the WikiProject talkpage. Indeed, a far more unusual division was proposed (dividing a stub-cat by alphabetic groupings of genera names) and the only comment it got on our WikiProject was an agreement. (It does not, however, seem to have been implemented). This makes me at mildest strongly suspect the WikiProject's stance is still the same: genus-level stub-sorting is fine.) "AddWittyNameHere ("talk) 17:56, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Stub template/category page for Odostomia, under Pyramidellidae[edit]

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 do not create

There's a large stub category for Pyramidellidae, a family of gastropods. It includes a very large genus, Odostomia. More than 400 entries on the stub page belong to this genus. I propose to create a stub template for Odostomia, then set up and populate a stub category page for it. Yes, it could take me several weeks; I have done many projects of comparable size. I notice that not long ago, someone set up a non-stub subcategory for Odostomia under the non-stub category for Pyramidellidae. Someone then moved 11 of the 400+ articles, and that someone has now left Wikipedia. So I want to go ahead and populate the non-stub category. If I do both projects simultaneously, it should save me time in the long run. "Uporządnicki ("talk) 14:05, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

It seems that it is not a good idea. When I ran it up the flagpole at the gastropods project page, they explained that there's reason not to break up large family categories into genera; apparently, gastropod taxonomy is in a state of flux. So I'll leave it alone. "Uporządnicki ("talk) 13:44, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
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.

Proposals, April 2018[edit]

Start dividing {{"Mountain-stub}} and its continent equivalents into countries as well[edit]

This is not exactly the request for a single stub, but rather multiple stubs. The reason for this is with only diving mountain stubs into continents, there are many more intricate stubs that are sub-cats of the geo-stub: countries, states, and even cities. If we could divide the mountains stubs into at least countries to start off with, that would allow for the "system" of mountain stubs to have many more pages, and therefore be a lot more productive (remember, my original request was at state level). I am by no means saying we should divide it into all of the continents in the world right away - I would probably start with some of the South America country categories that have a lot of pages in them.--"SkyGazer 512 "talk / "contributions / "subpages 13:50, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

French actress stub[edit]

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 taken to cfd for merge/renaming.

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.

Washington (state) geography stub sub-cats[edit]

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.

These templates have reached the 60+ threshold; speedy categories? "Pegship ("talk) 21:32, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

OK. --"Redrose64 🌹 ("talk) 22:27, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
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.

Oberea stubs[edit]

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.

"Category:Lamiinae stubs is one of the biggest stub categories there is, containing almost 2,500 pages. We could sub-categorize a good 112 of these pages if we added "Category:Oberea stubs as a subcategory, by putting {{"Oberea-stub}} on all 112 of these pages. Can I create the stub template and category?--"SkyGazer 512 "talk / "contributions / "subpages 14:32, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't even realize that it was in the "Saperdini tribe - that's good to know. In that case, yeah, I'll definitely add it to the Saperdini sub-cat if I create it.--"SkyGazer 512 "talk / "contributions / "subpages 22:25, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 Done. Considering the category now has 295 pages in it, I think adding the new stub was pretty productive.--"SkyGazer 512 "talk / "contributions / "subpages 21:40, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
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.

Proposals, March 2018[edit]

North Dakota geography stubs[edit]

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.


ND has 53 counties and one -geo- type for the whole state, used on 509 articles. May I create upmerged templates for counties whose -geo- cats contain stubs? "Pegship ("talk) 19:24, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Eventually I'd like to create upmerged county templates for Arizona (1,216 stub articles, 15 counties), Colorado (609 stub articles, 64 counties), Idaho (695 stub articles, 44 counties), Montana (658 stub articles, 56 counties), Nevada (631 stub articles, 17 counties), New Mexico (525 stub articles, 33 counties), Utah (718 stub articles, 29 counties), and Wyoming (493 stub articles, 23 counties). And that's just the Western United States... Also, does anyone know a way to automate stub tagging?? "Pegship ("talk) 23:16, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
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.

New York mountain and hill stubs[edit]

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 continent-level types for now.

Add Template:NewYork-mountain-stub, have it add pages using that template to Category:New York mountain and hill stubs, which would be a subcategory to "Category:New York (state) geography stubs. Category:New York (state) geography stubs currently contains 153 pages of various geography-related subjects, so I think it would be nice to separate articles that are hills or mountains. Although I haven't counted precisely, it seems like hills and mountains make up about 3/5 of the category (that's roughly 90 pages), and others make up about 2/5 of the category (roughly 60 pages).--"SkyGazer 512 "talk / "contributions / "subpages 14:40, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

I think those were created out of process by someone working on the HK-China articles. "Pegship ("talk) 01:23, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
So, could someone please answer whether you think I should go again and create mountain stubs for each continent? "Pegship? "Redrose64?--"SkyGazer 512 "talk / "contributions / "subpages 12:17, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Go for it. "Pegship ("talk) 16:29, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
I will! Thanks for replying.--"SkyGazer 512 "talk / "contributions / "subpages 16:44, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 Done! Now I'm adding images to the stubs and adding the stubs to articles. Soon I will include these new stubs in the stub sorting.--"SkyGazer 512 "talk / "contributions / "subpages 18:27, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Before this gets underway, I suggest we change the category nomenclature to be consistent with other stub cats, to wit:

See "Category:River stubs for examples. "Pegship ("talk) 18:29, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done--"SkyGazer 512 "talk / "contributions / "subpages 20:54, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Would it be good to expand mountains to mountains, mountain ranges, and peaks? I've kind of already been doing this, but if this is approved I'll probably edit the stub templates to say this (e.g. Australia mountain, mountain range, or peak related vs Australian mountain related).--"SkyGazer 512 "talk / "contributions / "subpages 19:03, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
If you mean the text that usually reads "This category is for stub articles relating to mountains in Australia" or the template text that reads "This Australian mountain related article is a stub", that seems okay to me. "Pegship ("talk) 22:27, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
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.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa geography stubs sub-cats part deux[edit]

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.

Please may I speedy "Category:Mansehra District geography stubs and "Category:Mardan District geography stubs?? "Pegship ("talk) 22:09, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

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.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa geography stubs sub-cats[edit]

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.

I'm still sorting, but as of now {{"Abbottabad-geo-stub}} and {{"Swat-geo-stub}} are well over 60. Speedy create "Category:Abbottabad District geography stubs and "Category:Swat District geography stubs? "Pegship ("talk) 23:30, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Yep. --"Redrose64 🌹 ("talk) 09:18, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
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.

Proposals, February 2018[edit]

Scottish nobility[edit]

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.

Category:Scottish nobility stubs currently has 438 articles. "This category is for stub articles relating to Scottish nobility or peerage, including royalty from the Kingdom of Scotland and predecessor states." The corresponding categories for the Peerages of England, Great Britain, Ireland and the United Kingdom have (subject to suffient numbers) separate categories for dukes, earls, viscounts and barons (although not for marquesses) - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Peer_stubs . I propose to create "Lord-of-Parliament-stub", "Scotland-duke-stub", "Scotland-earl-stub" and "Scotland-viscount-stub", linking respectively to "Lord of Parliament stubs",‎ "Peerage of Scotland duke stubs‎", "Peerage of Scotland earl stubs" and "Peerage of Scotland viscount stubs‎". "Alekksandr ("talk) 21:56, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me! Support per nom. "Pegship ("talk) 18:42, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
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.

Category:Georgia (U.S. state) people stubs / GeorgiaUS-bio-stub[edit]

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 upmerge for now.

I started doing this before reading the recommendation to respond here. Anyway this seems like it makes sense and would help get things out of the main Georgia category "Category:Georgia (U.S. state) stubs. ☆ "Bri ("talk) 00:33, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm all for an upmerged template; if it ends up on 60+ articles I support creating the category. "Pegship ("talk) 20:56, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
I found the {{"GeorgiaUS-bio-stub}} and corrected the code (it was formed like a category), upmerged it to "Category:Georgia (U.S. state) stubs until it reaches 60+. "Pegship ("talk) 20:40, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
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.

"Category:Göttingen district geography stubs‎[edit]

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.

In 2016 the former "district of Osterode was merged into the existing "district of Göttingen. Therefore the Category:Osterode district geography stubs has become obsolete. There is no "Category:Göttingen district geography stubs yet, but there is an upmerged template {{"Göttingen-geo-stub}} (linking to "Category:Braunschweig region geography stubs). With 36 articles in Category:Osterode district geography stubs and about 50 80 articles transcluding {{"Göttingen-geo-stub}}, "Category:Göttingen district geography stubs would contain enough articles. Speedy S1. "Markussep "Talk 10:17, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

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.

New Brunswick school stubs[edit]

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.

{{"NewBrunswick-school-stub}} tags 60 articles; speedy cat? "Pegship ("talk) 17:17, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

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.

Economic terminology stubs[edit]

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.

{{"econ-term-stub}} now used on 89 articles; I propose "Category:Economic terminology stubs. I proposed the cat previously and later withdrew the proposal, am now re-proposing more confidently. "Pegship ("talk) 23:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

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.

Spilomelinae sub-cat[edit]

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.

The stub category for Spilomelinae--a subfamily of butterflies--notes that the category is very large. I'd like to have a subcategory for the genus Syllepte within that category. As I see it, there will be roughly 195 items in that subcategory--more than in any subcategory that already exists under that category. I'm quite happy to populate such a subcategory; I've done many far bigger projects. "Uporządnicki ("talk) 21:07, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Since I proposed this, I actually set up a subcategory for the genus itself, under the category for Spilomelinae (not the stub), and I'm a bit more than a third of the way through populating that category. "Uporządnicki ("talk) 18:02, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Support per nom, and thanks. "Pegship ("talk) 20:46, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
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.

Proposals, January 2018[edit]

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

"Category:Andalusia stubs / {{"Andalusia-stub}}[edit]

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.

I created the category and template moments ago, before I remembered stub types are supposed to be proposed here first; mea culpa, and I'll gladly undo my edits (and delete the template and category) if others think it's not needed. The structure would be:

There are 1,800+ articles in "Category:Andalusia (depth: 10) and "Category:Stub-Class Spain articles, so I'm sure there will be more than 60 members once I've populated it (holding off currently pending others' feedback). -- "Black Falcon ("talk) 23:48, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

As there isn't a category for Andalusian structure stubs, I'd leave the Cádiz structure stub category where it is, as a sub-cat of Spanish building and structure stubs. "Pegship ("talk) 21:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
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.
) ) WikipediaAudio is not affiliated with Wikipedia or the WikiMedia Foundation.