WikiProject Stub sorting/Criteria/Archive9 |
Closed for additions - 02:19, 2005 May 22 (UTC)
==Manufacturing==
Recently, before I was alerted by 03:34, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC) :Well, as I said, it s more of a courtest than mandatory, but it is useful to know what s going on, both for yo and for us. Personally, I think a name like Industrial processes would be useful, since the current name is a bit vague and some of the processes don t just refer to manufacturing (welding, for instance, is a process in things like panel-beating, which is not a manufacturing industry). It should probably be categorised on the stub-type page under technology, too. 03:47, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC) Renaming to industrial processes makes sense to me. The template could get renamed to Indust-proc-stub or the like, or just Industrial-processes-stub if that would be easier. How long do things stay on here until they are implemented I saw that it says one week above, but some of the things above this one look like they ve been here for awhile, so I ll wait for the go-ahead. -- 05:15, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC) :depends on how much debate they generate and how busy we all are :)
Okay - manufacturing-stub is now a soft redirect to the new for industry and industrial processes . If the Industrial processes category s wording is anything to go by, there s also a clear division between industrial processes and tools. Processes are things like welding, smelting, and prefabrication; tools are lathes, gauges, and the like. 00:10, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
==More subdivisions of ==
is getting huge (18 pages at the recent count). I propose some new subcategories:
* * *
Found about 20 of each in A alone, so meeting the 100 article requirement should be clear. Also, with stubs moved from into and , these two might also need subdivisions soon, though I m not so clear about which ones. I m currently busy sorting generic stubs, but after that, I d do the music stubs, and I don t want to have to sort generics that now go into again. -- 23:47, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC) Addendum: is also a candidate for subcategorization. Even though I think most album article can be considered non-stubby if they have an infobox and a tracklist. And already has some subcats (composer and opera singer) of course, but these are comparatively tiny. And a question: One-man bands/projects - or I tend towards . -- 00:47, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Another addendum: The more I think about it, the more I think that the present music subcat system isn t so good at all for stub expansion purposes. Who would know something about albums (in general) but not about bands (in general) Maybe the most prudent method would be to merge all music subcats once more and divide along genre lines, since musical taste is generally very genre-specific.
Music >> genre >> (people/bands/albums/songs) this last stage might not even be subdivided
This would mean a lot of work though. -- 01:04, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) :One problem with this is the genres themselves... there are so many genres and subgenres, and so much music doesn t fit comfortably into any one genre. Where, for instance, would Philip Glass s Low symphony (a classical reinterpretation of a David Bowie album) go Or Eddie Vedder s work with Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan Or an article on Elvis Costello 01:14, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) ::I m thinking very broad lines here - Classical, ethnic/folk, Jazz, HipHop, Electronic (LOTS of those stubs, let me tell you), maybe two or three flavors of rock, Pop. And if it s really oddball, we can still leave it in music-stub. This is still much better than dividing between albums and artists, because the old system, while being neat and all, doesn t really help anyone. -- 01:23, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) :Lots of electronica, yes... and you could pretty near have a separate Finland-Heavy-Metal-stub! 03:45, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Well, here is a sketch of a possible new, genre-orientated subdivision (bold ones already exist, numbers copied from the last count):|
|