Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries/Log/2017/March

March 2017

Antlion stubs

I've found {{Antlion-stub}} and Category:Antlion stubs. Like {{Cleroidea-stub}} and Category:Cleroidea stubs (below), these were created by Caftaric (talk · contribs), apparently without discussion, in January 2017. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:04, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Caftaric (talk · contribs) has been busy... creating and rearranging templates and categories, apparently unaware of stub sorting and creation procedure. (Assuming good faith, here.) I'll leave a note on its talk page and see what ensues. Her Pegship (talk) 04:10, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cleroidea stubs

I've found {{Cleroidea-stub}} (34 transclusions) which doesn't use {{asbox}}, and Category:Cleroidea stubs (35 members) which doesn't use either {{WPSS-cat}} or {{stub category}}. Here's the chronology as I see it:

11:20, 25 August 2014: Dawynn (talk · contribs) creates Category:Cleroidea stubs (using the normal format for a stub cat page) following this proposal
02:18, 26 August 2014: Dawynn creates {{Cleroidea-stub}} under the same proposal
11:10, 26 August 2014: Dawynn requests deletion of Category:Cleroidea stubs under WP:CSD#G7; this is actioned by RHaworth (talk · contribs) at 14:19 the same day
09:07, 21 November 2014: Good Olfactory (talk · contribs) converts {{Cleroidea-stub}} to a redirect to {{Polyphaga-stub}} following this CfD discussion
18:20, 6 February 2017: Caftaric (talk · contribs) converts {{Cleroidea-stub}} back to a non-redirected (but misconstructed) template, apparently without discussion
18:21, 6 February 2017: Caftaric recreates Category:Cleroidea stubs (using a non-standard format: there are two categories, nothing else), apparently also undiscussed

What shall we do about these? Fewer than 60 pages use these, so it's probably easiest to restore the template to a being a redirect, and delete the category again. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and the template should be adapted to {{asbox}} format as well. Her Pegship (talk) 16:18, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Caftaric (talk · contribs) seems to have boosted the category to 64 members but it is still in a highly non-standard format. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:23, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]