Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/Archive/2018/July: Difference between revisions
m →The moths go ever on and on: closing, well done |
|||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
===The moths go ever on and on=== |
===The moths go ever on and on=== |
||
{{sfp top|create as revised}} |
|||
<small>''Same staggered approach. Same [[User:AddWittyNameHere/Lepistubsortprecedent|precedent for genus-level categories]]. As always, article-numbers given for existing categories do not include numbers in their extant subcategories; unless explicitly stated otherwise, estimated article numbers given for proposed categories do '''not''' include numbers for articles in simultaneously-proposed subcategories. Unless otherwise stated, most if not all articles for the proposed subcategories can be found in the lowest-level extant stub category I'm proposing it as subcategory of.''<br /></small> |
<small>''Same staggered approach. Same [[User:AddWittyNameHere/Lepistubsortprecedent|precedent for genus-level categories]]. As always, article-numbers given for existing categories do not include numbers in their extant subcategories; unless explicitly stated otherwise, estimated article numbers given for proposed categories do '''not''' include numbers for articles in simultaneously-proposed subcategories. Unless otherwise stated, most if not all articles for the proposed subcategories can be found in the lowest-level extant stub category I'm proposing it as subcategory of.''<br /></small> |
||
| Line 103: | Line 105: | ||
:::Striking Meleonoma as genus included in Antequerinae. Too much taxonomic contradiction both within and outside en.wiki. As a result, the category would be slightly undersized (50 stubs or thereabout) if separating Limnaecia into a subcategory, so gonna sort those straight into Antequerinae stubs instead. [[User:AddWittyNameHere|AddWittyNameHere]] ([[User talk:AddWittyNameHere|talk]]) 04:32, 7 July 2018 (UTC) |
:::Striking Meleonoma as genus included in Antequerinae. Too much taxonomic contradiction both within and outside en.wiki. As a result, the category would be slightly undersized (50 stubs or thereabout) if separating Limnaecia into a subcategory, so gonna sort those straight into Antequerinae stubs instead. [[User:AddWittyNameHere|AddWittyNameHere]] ([[User talk:AddWittyNameHere|talk]]) 04:32, 7 July 2018 (UTC) |
||
::::&{{done}} (but see above), now off to update the stub types list and then it's very much time for a break--my wrists are hurting. [[User:AddWittyNameHere|AddWittyNameHere]] ([[User talk:AddWittyNameHere|talk]]) 05:54, 7 July 2018 (UTC) |
::::&{{done}} (but see above), now off to update the stub types list and then it's very much time for a break--my wrists are hurting. [[User:AddWittyNameHere|AddWittyNameHere]] ([[User talk:AddWittyNameHere|talk]]) 05:54, 7 July 2018 (UTC) |
||
{{sfp bottom}} |
|||
Revision as of 17:20, 22 July 2018
Proposals, July 2018
Please check how many articles qualify for a stub type before proposing it.
NEW PROPOSALS
Regional Sub Categories for Missouri Registered Historic Place stubs
Missouri Registered Historic Place stubs has over 1100 stubs currently grouped in several dozen upmerged county-level templates. Proposing speedy creation of Regional NHRP subcategories matching the existing regional groupings of Missouri Geography stubs. The existing subcats are:
- Central Missouri geography stubs
- St. Louis Area, Missouri geography stubs
- Kansas City, Missouri region geography stubs
- Northeast Missouri geography stubs
- Northwest Missouri geography stubs
- Ozark region, Missouri geography stubs
- Southeast Missouri geography stubs
- Southwest Missouri geography stubs
And the new proposed subcats would be as follows (composed of the identical counties as in the geography groupings):
- Central Missouri Registered Historic Place stubs
- St. Louis Area, Missouri Registered Historic Place stubs
- Kansas City, Missouri region Registered Historic Place stubs
- Northeast Missouri Registered Historic Place stubs
- Northwest Missouri Registered Historic Place stubs
- Ozark region, Missouri Registered Historic Place stubs
- Southeast Missouri Registered Historic Place stubs
- Southwest Missouri Registered Historic Place stubs
-Furicorn (talk) 10:34, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Subcats of Othoptera stubs
Category:Orthoptera stubs has 1298 articles, currently. The insect order Orthoptera is divided into two suborders: Ensifera and Caelifera. I note the following search results, showing that at least 429 of the Orthoptera stubs seem to belong in Ensifera: [1], and at least 118 of them seem to belong in Caelifera: [2]. Those searches only catch articles where the applicable suborder is actually mentioned, so a great many are missed, which can be identified on closer inspection. (I can provide more evidence if needed.) I propose stub categories: Category:Ensifera stubs and Category:Caelifera stubs, which should suffice to almost completely depopulate the parent category, except for stubs dealing with Orthopterans in general. Subsequent further subdivision is likely to be desired, but I figure we start here. -GTBacchus(talk) 09:28, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
- Support, I did some research with PetScan, got the following results
- Category:Orthoptera stubs and Category:Ensifera - 100 results from PetScan PSID 5142490
- Category:Orthoptera stubs and Category:Caelifera - 675 results from PetScan PSID 5142545
- Interesting that PetScan counts seem to be the inverse of what the search results suggest. - Furicorn (talk) 10:25, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- >5 days, so created. I'd appreciate if someone could double-check my work, as it's been years since I've done this sort of thing. If I made any mistakes, I'd be happy enough to find out and learn to do better. -GTBacchus(talk) 17:26, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- @GTBacchus: You forgot to add the WikiProject banners (Stub sorting & Insects in this case) to the talkpages, but other than that I didn't see any issues. (Well, beyond the fact that most relevant stubs haven't been sorted into the newly established categories yet so they're still underpopulated for now, but that's to be expected as you only just created them) AddWittyNameHere 18:02, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Flanders stubs
- Qualifying articles: 9968
- Create Template:Flanders-stub and Category:Flanders stubs. Especially since we already have the Wallonia versions. Flanders and Wallonia are twins, counterparts. I'm surprised that we have one and not the other. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 20:28, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
- The Category:Wallonia stubs is populated by geo-stub sub-cats, thusly:
- Belgian Luxembourg geography stubs (67 P)
- Namur geography stubs (89 P)
- Walloon Brabant geography stubs
- Hainaut geography stubs (155 P)
- Liège geography stubs (132 P)
- Likewise, there are several Flanders geography stub categories:
- Antwerp geography stubs (96 P)
- East Flanders geography stubs (109 P)
- Flemish Brabant geography stubs (95 P)
- Belgian Limburg geography stubs (44 P)
- West Flanders geography stubs (146 P)
- It appears that the only reason to create a parent cat for Flanders geo-stubs is to mirror the Wallonia geo-stubs parent; very few of the articles in Category:Flanders are about anything but geography. Tentative support creation of parent cat Category:Flanders stubs; no support for {{Flanders-stub}}. Would rather create parent cat Category:Flanders geography stubs without a template. Her Pegship (speak) 22:35, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Must Overcome Tedium to Handle Stub-sort (M.O.T.H.S)
Same staggered approach. Same precedent for genus-level categories. As always, article-numbers given for existing categories do not include numbers in their extant subcategories; unless explicitly stated otherwise, estimated article numbers given for proposed categories do not include numbers for articles in simultaneously-proposed subcategories. Unless otherwise stated, most if not all articles for the proposed subcategories can be found in the lowest-level extant stub category I'm proposing it as subcategory of.
In part who-even-knows-anymore-plus-one of this saga, I'd like to propose the following:
For existing category Category:Drepanidae stubs (just shy of 800 stubs, no subcategories), the following subcategories and templates:
- Category:Drepaninae stubs/{{Drepaninae-stub}}: ~470-489 stubs. (I've just finished diffusing the non-stub counterpart categories and as usual, it's just about all stubs. Wouldn't be surprised to find it's all stubs, tbh, just not able/willing to guarantee it)
- Category:Thyatirinae stubs/{{Thyatirinae-stub}}: ~290-300 stubs. (Same as above)
AddWittyNameHere (talk) 03:19, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
- Five days past, creating. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 17:10, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
- Drepaninae done. Thyatirinae in progress. About 30% done, taking a bit of a break before wrapping up. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 00:16, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- And done, if a little later than expected. Adding to stub types list now. AddWittyNameHere 00:00, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
- Drepaninae done. Thyatirinae in progress. About 30% done, taking a bit of a break before wrapping up. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 00:16, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
The moths go ever on and on
- 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 as revised.
Same staggered approach. Same precedent for genus-level categories. As always, article-numbers given for existing categories do not include numbers in their extant subcategories; unless explicitly stated otherwise, estimated article numbers given for proposed categories do not include numbers for articles in simultaneously-proposed subcategories. Unless otherwise stated, most if not all articles for the proposed subcategories can be found in the lowest-level extant stub category I'm proposing it as subcategory of.
In part who-even-knows-anymore of this saga, I'd like to propose the following:
For existing subcategory Category:Blastobasidae stubs (494 stubs, no extant subcategories), the following subcategories and templates:
Due to lack of taxonomic certainty, no subfamily-level stubcategories are proposed.
- Category:Blastobasis stubs/{{Blastobasis-stub}}: Species in genus Blastobasis. ~160-170 stubs. (Based upon Category:Blastobasis holding 175 articles, combined with an at-a-glance estimate of articles in Category:Blastobasidae stubs showing by and far most Blastobasis articles are stubs. Par for the course with moths, sadly.)
- Category:Holcocera stubs/{{Holcocera-stub}}: Genus Holcocera and all species stubs. 67 stubs.
- Category:Hypatopa stubs/{{Hypatopa-stub}}: Genus Hypatopa and species stubs. 84 stubs.
For existing subcategory Category:Cosmopterigidae stubs (1540 stubs, 1 extant subcategory), the following:
- Category:Antequerinae stubs/{{Antequerinae-stub}}. 67 articles. (Antequerinae and all genus- and species-level stubs of genera Alloclita, Antequera,Chalcocolona, Cnemidolophus,Cosmiosophista, Euclemensia, Gibeauxiella, Lamachaera,
Meleonoma,(see below) Pancalia and Phosphaticola.)
:*Category:Limnaecia stubs/{{Limnaecia-stub}}. Genus Limnaecia and species stubs. 130 stubs. EDIT:Striking this, see below
- Category:Macrobathra stubs/{{Macrobathra-stub}}. Genus Macrobathra and species stubs. 123 stubs.
AddWittyNameHere (talk) 00:34, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Trusting (as usual) that you know what you're about taxonomy-wise, support. Pegship (talk) 16:19, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- One support, no opposition, five days and about two hours since proposing...time to create. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 02:27, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
- Blastobasidae subcategories done. Onto Cosmopterigidae it is. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 03:44, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
- EDIT: While diffusing I've made some changes to the proposed above: I see I accidentally gave Macrobathra an indent it shouldn't have had: meant to propose it separately//as subcategory of Cosmopterigidae, not of Antequerinae.
- Striking Meleonoma as genus included in Antequerinae. Too much taxonomic contradiction both within and outside en.wiki. As a result, the category would be slightly undersized (50 stubs or thereabout) if separating Limnaecia into a subcategory, so gonna sort those straight into Antequerinae stubs instead. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 04:32, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
- &
Done (but see above), now off to update the stub types list and then it's very much time for a break--my wrists are hurting. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 05:54, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
- &