Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 December 3: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:04, 3 December 2009

< December 2	December 4 >

December 3

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:Filmed deaths

Category:Filmed deaths - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: I find this category does nothing but to benefit the morbid, also it make no difference to a generic unfilmed category other than to benefit the morbid who will try to search it up on youtube. In short, Wikipedia is not Rotten.com.

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

Donnie Park (talk) 20:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Clontarf

Propose renaming Category:Clontarf to Category:Clontarf, Dublin

Nominator's rationale: Rename. For consistency with the main article, Clontarf, Dublin, and to distinguish from all the measly little copycat places listed at Clontarf (disambiguation), which presumably copied the name in the first place. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Blackrock

Propose renaming Category:Blackrock to Category:Blackrock, Dublin

Nominator's rationale: Rename. To conform with main article Blackrock, Dublin. (There ae other places in ireland called Blackrock, most notably Blackrock, County Cork. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:29, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indian Companies owning UK Brands

Category:Indian Companies owning UK Brands - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: A category containing just one item. What use is this? Biker Biker (talk) 12:05, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, though a better-named category may have a place if it can be populated with five or more articles. The sole article here is Jaguar Land Rover, which is not belong in "Indian Companies owning UK Brands", because it is actually the reverse: a UK brand owned by an Indian company. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:High School! Kimengumi

Category:High School! Kimengumi - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: 3 articles are not enough for a category by themselves Extremepro (talk) 08:41, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Images whose source is updated regularly

Category:Images whose source is updated regularly - Template:Lc1

Category:Images whose source is updated monthly - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: These two categories contain only one image, which hasn't been updated since it was uploaded in 2005. If this system of categorization was fully implemented and maintained, it could be useful; however, I don't believe that this issue can be tackled at this level or with a top-down approach. In the end, it will come down to individual editors working on individual articles who notice that an image is no longer recent or up-to-date and try to find a newer image. (Category creator notified using {{cfd-notify}}.) –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 06:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia images by quality

Suggest merging Category:Wikipedia images by quality to Category:Wikipedia images

Nominator's rationale: There are only two quality classes for images, "valued" and "featured"—both of which already appear in Category:Wikipedia images directly—so this category cannot have more than two members for the forseeable future. "Selected" is a designation for images used by portals, but it is not an assessment of quality so much as of relevance and significance to the subject of the portal. (Category creator notified using {{cfd-notify}}.) –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 05:52, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This definitely feels like a "don't we have bigger fish to fry?" issue, but I'm not opposed to the merge.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 20:32, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Architecture Selected pictures

Category:Architecture Selected pictures - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: ~~As far as I know, this is the only category of its type: one that is used by one portal only and which contains content other than the subpages of the portal.~~ Subpages of a portal can be placed in an eponymous category of the portal (e.g., Category:Philosophy portal), but I do not think that portals should begin categorizing articles or files. While this could potentially work as a talk page category, I think that a list maintained for the portal (Portal:Architecture/Selected picture archive) is a better way of keeping track of "selected pictures" than a template-populated (see {{Architecture SI}}) category. (Category creator not notified because: inactive or retired. Portal:Architecture notified.) –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 05:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. This is kind of more common than appears, I think. At WP:COMICS we use Category:Comics articles used on portals, which I think does a similar thing, through the project banner. There's a number of projects which do this. The implementation looks a little different, but not drastically. Thoughts? Hiding T 13:58, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Looking deeper into this, it appears that there are other similar categories (e.g., Category:California selected pictures) in addition to the ones you point out. Since this is apparently not the only one of its type, I would like to suggest then that this be renamed to Category:Architecture selected pictures and made into a talk page category (i.e., categorizing only file talk pages). (By the way, I have notified WikiProject Architecture of this discussion.) Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 17:08, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - No problem. What you suggest works for me. Hiding T 17:24, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User page galleries

Propose merging Category:User page galleries to Category:Wikipedia image galleries

Nominator's rationale: It seems to me that there is no reason to separate these categories. Firstly, neither one contains more than a handful of pages, so there is no size-related reason to keep them separate. Secondly, while there is a big difference between mainspace and non-mainspace image galleries, the difference between image galleries in different non-mainspace namespaces doesn't seem as significant.

If kept, rename to Category:Wikipedia user namespace image galleries or Category:Wikipedia image galleries in user namespace. The title "Category:User page galleries" suggests that the category contains galleries of user pages or that it contains image galleries on user pages, neither of which is accurate. The category contains galleries of images located in the user namespace (on user subpages). (Category creator not notified because: indef-blocked.) –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 04:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia voting images

Category:Wikipedia voting images - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Most consensus-driven processes in Wikipedia are not (supposed to be) votes and the use of symbols is discouraged in discussions, so there is no need for a category for voting icons. This category may once have contained multiple files, but now it has only one member. File:Symbol opinion vote.svg is already on Commons, where it is appropriately categorized. If kept, the category should be renamed to Category:Wikipedia voting icons as the current title is quite confusing: "Wikipedia voting images" suggests that the category is for Wikipedia images related to voting and elections. However, I don't see any advantage to keeping the category... (Category creator notified using {{cfd-notify}}.) –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 03:35, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - But not for the exact same reason as the nominator. Right, that image is now on Commons, so it doesn't need a description page here. And that description page only contained a category. So I have now deleted that image description page. And that leaves this category empty and unused, thus it should be deleted. But I leave the final decision on that to someone else since I don't know how we usually handle category deletions. --David Göthberg (talk) 04:18, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I noticed that, but I wasn't sure to what extent that is considered an acceptable practice with images. Now that the category is empty, it can be deleted if it is still empty in four days. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 04:36, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Suspected hoax images

Propose renaming

Category:Suspected hoax images to Category:Wikipedia suspected hoax images

Category:Suspected hoax articles to Category:Wikipedia suspected hoax articles

or

Propose merging Category:Suspected hoax articles and Category:Suspected hoax images to Category:Wikipedia suspected hoaxes

Nominator's rationale: Per category naming conventions, "[c]ategories used for Wikipedia administration [should be] prefixed with the word "Wikipedia" (no colon)" as needed for clarity. If the two categories are kept separate, then they need to be renamed to add "Wikipedia". "Suspected hoax images" is an unclear category title, since it could be confused with a category for articles about hoax images (such as art forgeries or fake photos); "suspected hoax articles", while less ambiguous, could still be confused with a category for articles about suspected hoaxes and should be renamed for consistency with its parents, Category:Wikipedia articles with sourcing issues and Category:Wikipedia cleanup categories. Another option would be two merge the two categories together (especially since the image category is empty at this time and probably much of the time). (Category creators not notified because: retired or indef-blocked.) –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 02:49, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse renaming to be consistent with policy. Don't think it makes sense to merge; we should keep separate categories for pages of different types. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Settlements with fewer than ten residents

Category:Settlements with fewer than ten residents - Template:Lc1

Category:Settlements in Canada with fewer than ten residents - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete. This is categorization by arbitrary inclusion criteria. Why is 10 the cut-off rather than 3 (since 3's a crowd), 12 (a biblical quorum), or 20 (a score of people)? I'm guessing it is because it is the one chosen by (the much older) List of places with fewer than ten residents. As stated explicitly in the guideline linked to above, having a list article is "a better way of representing this kind of information". This category is also not well-maintained (and it would presumably require constant updating as villages teetered between 9–11): right now only Canadian settlements are included, whereas the list includes many non-Canadian settlements. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:27, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Settlements where the number of residents is less than some arbitrarily-chosen number of your choice. Or better still, delete. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both per nom as overcategorization and a case where a list is unambiguously a more superior way of organizing information. The distinction between an inhabited settlement and an uninhabited settlement is a qualitative, non-arbirtary, and significant one (which is why we have Category:Former settlements, including Category:Ghost towns); the distinction between a settlement with 9 residents and a settlement with 10 residents is a purely quantitative and trivial one. Also, categories tend to make no distinction between current and former status (e.g., if a person is a politician once, the he or she belongs in the Politicians category tree even if he or she later leaves office). Applying this same principle to this category would mean including any settlement which has had fewer than ten residents at any point in time; not applying the same principle to this category would mean creating an impossible maintenance task. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 05:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both per WP:OC#ARBITRARY: a classic case thereof. Occuli (talk) 10:24, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:
-    :{{la|:Category:Filmed deaths in sports}}
+:{{la|:Category:Filmed deaths in sports}}
-    :{{la|:Category:Filmed suicides}}
+:{{la|:Category:Filmed suicides}}
-    :{{la|:Category:Filmed deaths of entertainers}}
+:{{la|:Category:Filmed deaths of entertainers}}
-    :{{la|:Category:Filmed accidental deaths}}
+:{{la|:Category:Filmed accidental deaths}}
-    :{{la|:Category:Filmed assassinations}}
+:{{la|:Category:Filmed assassinations}}
-    :{{la|:Category:Filmed executions}}
+:{{la|:Category:Filmed executions}}
-    :{{la|:Category:Filmed executions in Iraq}}
+:{{la|:Category:Filmed executions in Iraq}}
-    :{{la|:Category:Filmed executions in Pakistan}}
+:{{la|:Category:Filmed executions in Pakistan}}
-    :{{la|:Category:Filmed deaths from falls}} [[User:Donnie Park|Donnie Park]] ([[User talk:Donnie Park|talk]]) 20:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
+:{{la|:Category:Filmed deaths from falls}}
+[[User:Donnie Park|Donnie Park]] ([[User talk:Donnie Park|talk]]) 20:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 ==== Category:Clontarf ====