Wikipedia talk:Simple Stub Project

WT:SSP

Colleges (and other institutions)

Should colleges (and schools, prisons, churches, hospitals, etc.) be considered geography stubs? For instance, should those in the USA use US-geo-stub or just US-stub? I ask because many are using geo-stub. Batrachoseps (talk) 14:53, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Batrachoseps: Those should not be in geography stub categories. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:24, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will start moving them out of the geography stub category while I make other edits. (Meaning I won't edit any just to change the stub tag.) Batrachoseps (talk) 21:37, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Batrachoseps: Sounds good, thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:03, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New bio-stub needed for English sportspeople

There are a large number of English sportspeople listed in the bio-stub categories, and I think it would be wise to create templates/categories for them in the same way as for the Japanese sportspeople. At this stage, it should be English only, as I don't see a huge number of Irish, Scottish, or Welsh people. It would be incorrect to create British pages as the UK countries generally compete individually.

Support creation as proposer. Thanks. Jack (talk) 14:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I Support. Thanks. (User Catcus DeMeowwy)

my input on how many articles could get the UK or English sportspeople stub tag is that many stub tags (templates) exist and this could be imported over with the UK sports people stubs. (These) stubs help with tagging articles better. One example stub template like this is US-Actor-stub (which should probably have its name changed/rcat from US_actor-stub). My input on the example template is that I have seen people use it often, when it is available (and that might carry over to other stub templates). This template would let people help the Simple wiki, navigate better, and edit the pages they are interested in (there are bound to be lots of people interested in UK sport) and not have to go through wiki template:stubs lists to do it. (This is a UK related template) I am from the UK, but support many or all stub tags being brought over as part of bringing this over - either way, support this template stub for getting brought to the Wiki (if consensus is needed).

signed { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 20:55, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BlackJack: When you say "a large number," how many do you mean? I don't know if you've read what we usually look for when approving a new stub type, but a couple of the things are:

At least 1,000 existing stubs that would go into the new category
A user who is planning to actively expand the stubs -- without that, just moving articles between stub types doesn't accomplish much

Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 14:39, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Auntof6. I think there must be hundreds of English people in the category, though perhaps not as many as a thousand, to be fair. I'm also thinking of the potential growth, given the scale of English cricket and football in particular, and of many other sports popular in England. On your second point, I'm certainly looking to expand many of the cricket biographies. This all came to my attention because of Jack Hobbs, erroneously listed as an American sportsperson stub initially. That is one article I could easily expand, by the way.

I have an open mind about this, I should point out. Obviously, we want to expand the stubs but, while there are some 13,400 in Category:Sportspeople stubs, and given that the number is probably rising, I'm inclined to think we should follow the Japanese example. I've no idea how many of the 13,400 are American, for example, but as with the English there must be several hundred at least.

Hopefully, we can achieve a consensus one way or the other.

Kind regards

Jack (talk) 18:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

does formatting on this page need to be fixed? The discussion is hard to follow unless that is me being new to the /w/ or Wikipedia part of the site --signed { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 21:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Catcus DeMeowwy: I did a little formatting. A couple of things that would help:

Keep signatures inline with the discussion instead of on different lines. Things on talk pages are just what you said, discussions; they are not letters. Having the signature on a separate line can make it look like a separate item. I put your signature above inline so you can see what I mean.
Format the conversation as a discussion, not a vote. The parameters of when to have a new stub type are a guideline, not usually subject to a vote.

Just my thoughts. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can read it now, cheers. Eventually I will make my signature automatically do the right things and other people's signatures will have to be their problem. Thread was quickly getting out of hand however

signed: { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 09:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think that there is large amount of stubs that would fall into this category.--Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ツ 12:51, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The rule isn't "a large amount". It's "at least 1000", plus the other considerations listed at Wikipedia:Simple_Stub_Project#New_stubs. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:06, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's a fair point because we have to think about how long a stub type will exist if there should be a drive to reduce the contents. Certainly, I intend to address the cricket ones.

It'll take a bit of time and effort, but I'd be happy to do a rough count of those I know or believe to be English, and I'll build a second tally for Scottish and Welsh as there might be well over a thousand who are British, not only English. Leave it with me for now. Thanks. Jack (talk) 11:36, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I mean more than 1000 Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ツ 11:33, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gulp! I'll have to withdraw this. I've looked at several samples of the current stubs, and I reckon the number of British people, not just the English, is a lot closer to 500 than 1,000. I wouldn't be surprised, though, if the Americans and Brazilians are hitting the thousand. Anyway, I'll be trying to expand many of the cricket stubs. Thanks, guys. Jack (talk) 18:29, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BlackJack: Understood. This wiki looks at stubs differently. English Wikipedia has so many more articles/stubs than we do that they can create a lot of categories and have thousands or tens of thousands in a lot of them. We don't have that many. Also, keeping the number of stub types lower is another way things are kept simple here. We haven't usually found much benefit in creating new stub types just because there are a lot of articles that could go in them, because people don't actually work on them much. Besides that, you don't need a separate category just to work in a certain area. There are ways to go through the existing stubs to find things based on criteria you specify, and give you a list of what seems to fit.

Thanks in advance for any stub expansions you do! -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:11, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I'm finding that the majority of cricket and football articles are stubs, so I only need to look at the subject categories. Regards, Jack (talk) 20:31, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UK, French, Irish, Italian and Mexican biography stub tags for articles of people from such countries

I really think we need Bio-stubs' labels for the pages about people from the above-listed countries similar to the US-bio-stub label for the American people-based articles. Would that, however, be a good idea on the Simple English? Angela Kate Maureen Pears 19:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tropical Storm Angela: Please give reasons that we need them. Remember that we don't want or need to duplicate the main category tree within stubs. Also please read the main page about what is needed before we create a new stub type. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:24, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The official reason we need them is the way people may be classified is necessary because of their ethnic background or races, not mentioning the country from which they originated or came. The country or continent from where they originated plays a really major factor with the stubs or categories here on Simple English Wikipedia. Angela Kate Maureen Pears 23:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tropical Storm Angela: That's what the regular categories are for -- stubs need the usual non-stub categories. How does this play a major factor with stub categories specifically? It doesn't really add value to create stub types if no one is going to concentrate on expanding the articles. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]