"This file is an archive - please do not add new discussion here - add it to my  

 Archived to October 31 
 ==Stubstuff== 
 === Eritrea people stubs === 

 Apparently, someone created Eritrean people stubs without any discussion that I can remember. However, they currently only have 25 and I doubt they will pass the threshold anytime soon. I don't really know the procedure for deleting/upmerging it, so I am ""passing the buck"" to you. Thanks.  

 ===Tibet-geo-stub=== 
     This stub type covers Tibetan areas outside of the Tibet Autonomous Region (i.e. Tibetan autonomous prefectures and autonomous counties in nearby provinces). Is this the only geography stub type not following present-day political boundaries? Should it be rescoped (and perhaps renamed too) to cover only the Tibet Autonomous Region? —   
 :I completely agree with you, and argued as such at the time it was proposed. I suggest you check the WP:WSS/P archive and contact those who created it who disagreed. ...  

 ::  Do you think it has to be renamed if it's rescoped? —   

 ===Organized labour stubs (part 4)=== 

 Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2006/September/2 

 Well I don’t know what it is about stub names – but they seem to bring out the worst in me. / 

 I’ve been thinking about my reaction, and I think it’s pretty clear that I’m having difficulty separating myself from the stubs in no small part because I started them. I seem to have vested a little pride into them. With that in mind I would like to make a small proposal. 

 If you would close the current debate, as  has suggested, I would restart it, including tagging and notifying, and use the following text: 

 ====Organized labour stubs==== 

 *  -  
 **  -  
 **  -  
 **  -  
 **  -  
 ***  -  
 **  -  
 ***  -   
 **  -  
 **  -  
 *  -  

 There have been several discussions about renaming these stubs. (original naming,  rename one, rename two) They are not consistent and have generated some ongoing difficulties because of a couple conflicts: (labor vs labour) (trade union vs labour union). There are several choices to address this problem. 

 # rename to . Some previous objections to this have centered around the political connotations of the word “worker”. (redirects already exist) 
 # rename to . Some previous objections to this have noted that the word “union” has several uses. 
 # rename to , with a spelling exception for . This option is closest to the current names. Previous objections have noted the problem of inconsistency in spelling from country to country. 

 I would like to see one of these proposals adopted. As the original creator of most of these stubs I have had difficulty remaining… uh… detached from the discussion, and will recuse myself from further comment on this. Any of these choices (or others) will work just fine with me.  

 Does this sound OK? I don’t want to be overly dramatic about it – but it would be nice to simply solve this and then we could carry on with things. ) Cheers. Chris.  

 :Restarted at [[Wikip