Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 December 12: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:39, 14 December 2007

< December 11	December 13 >

December 12

Category:Railway engine sheds

Propose renaming Category:Railway engine sheds to Category:Railway depots

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Moving from speedy with the discussion. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Railway engine sheds to Category:Railway depots. The category Category:Rolling stock depots is absent, the subcategory Category:Railway depots in the United Kingdom isnt divided to either the engine (locomotive) depots and the rolling stock depots. --ŠJů (talk) 01:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. In many countries, the words "engine shed" and "depot" are not synonymous - in quite a number, a depot is a non-terminus station. As such, renaming this to the ambiguous "Railway depots" will likely cause some confusion. Grutness...wha? 01:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose – Railroad depot redirects to "Train station" which is completly a different topic and therefore likely to confuse readers. I suggest that we may need to make "Engine sheds" a sub-category of "Railway depots in the United Kingdom" and then another sub-category for rolling stock depots if that is appropriate.Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose – Although the current name for most of the entries in these categories is xxxx TMD (Traction Maintenance Depot), historically and colloquially they are known as engine sheds. Otherwise as per Geof Sheppard. EdJogg (talk) 10:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose – in the UK 'Railway depots' cover a great deal of ground; not just locomotive depots and rolling stock depots (there they are stored, serviced and running maintenance undertaken) but goods or freight depots, maintenance depots, even lost property depot (?). As for historical engine sheds (or even engine stables as they were originally called), depot is entirely inappropriate. Equally there were Sheds for carriages, goods etc.. If this is to be re-organised, then use 'depot' as a generic name for modern installations but retain 'Shed' as a generic name for historic (and heritage) usage. XTOV (talk) 18:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Putative terrorist organisations

Category:Putative terrorist organisations - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Application requires interpretation, POV, and speculation. Currently defined as "A list of groups (formal or informal) which have carried out activities on a basis that possibly constitutes terrorism." Too mushy. In contrast, Category:Organizations designated as terrorist has objective inclusion criteria. Currently only one article in it. Snocrates 22:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subjective criteria for inclusion. Maralia (talk) 03:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, subjective. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, obvious pov-warning. --Soman (talk) 17:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Satirical Musical Compositions

Category:Satirical Musical Compositions - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: All pages in this category are currently listed at Articles for Deletion, and will most likely be deleted soon. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 22:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as they were closed and deleted. —Scouter Sig 15:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Greek Nazi parties

Suggest merging Category:Greek Nazi parties to Category:Nazi parties and to Category:Nationalist parties in Greece

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge, Category with one article with limited growth potential. Snocrates 22:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge per nom. --Soman (talk) 15:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Velazquez paintings

Propose renaming Category:Velazquez paintings to Category:Diego Velázquez paintings

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Technical nomination found doing November cleanup. While not listed, this pointed to a group discussion that was closed as no consensus. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep covered by the very recent decision, even if not included there. The problem is that although Diego Velázquez is the right name for the article, no-one ever talks of "Diego Velázquez paintings", or is likely to search for them. Johnbod (talk) 03:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vermicelli food stuff

Category:Vermicelli food stuff - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Technical nomination. Found doing November cleanup. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - nonsensical. Otto4711 (talk) 19:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Otto. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:SA

Propose renaming Category:SA to Category:Sturmabteilung

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Expand abbreviation per WP:NCCAT. Though it is perhaps better known in English as the "SA", it is ambiguous as a cateory name. Main article is at Sturmabteilung, and SA does not redirect there. Snocrates 22:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rename 'SA' is known in English, 'Sturmabteilung' is not. This is an English encyclopedia, not German. Change the current 'SA' page to 'SA (disambiguation)' and then use the SA page for redirect to Sturmabteilung. This should satisfy all concerns. Hmains (talk) 03:22, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm willing to agree to that if there is no objection to "SA" being the primary usage. Snocrates 04:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose SA is the more common seach term in English no doubt. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Nazi SA for clarity. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 20:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:SS

Propose renaming Category:SS to Category:Schutzstaffel

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Expand abbreviation per WP:NCCAT. Though it is perhaps better known in English as the "SS", it is ambiguous as a cateory name. Main article is at Schutzstaffel, and SS does not redirect there. Snocrates 22:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)*[reply]

rename But argment for name change failed in July. Use 'SS' page as a redirect to this renamed page which should satisfy all concerns. Hmains (talk) 03:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per last time, maybe with redirect. Johnbod (talk) 03:31, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oopsie sorry for the repeat, I'm willing to withdraw nomination since it was recent. An admin may speedy close. Snocrates 04:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I would, but there are differing opinions already, so let it run its course as WP:CCC...Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename and redirect. The category name should match the primary article name. -Sean Curtin (talk) 06:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per last time. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Nazi SS for clarity. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 20:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People who emigrated to escape Nazism

Propose renaming Category:People who emigrated to escape Nazism to Category:Emigrants from Nazi Germany

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rather than using the category to subscribe an intent to the emigration, it would be more neutral to simply have a category for people who left Nazi Germany. Snocrates 22:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom - they do all seem to be from Germany, so no need for W.H. Auden etc. Johnbod (talk) 03:34, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - what about Stefan Zweig? He clearly fled to escape Nazism, and even killed himself in fear of its triumph, but it would be four more years before his country was taken over by Nazi Germany. On the other hand, yes, the proposed rephrase is more easily subject to verifiability criteria. Biruitorul (talk) 03:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zweig wasn't in the category when I was examining it; all the ones who were in it seemed to meet the definition of the revised name. Does anyone know if there are a lot more like this? Snocrates 08:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notably, Einstein left Germany in late 1932 to "travel"; when he "emigrated" is subject to debate. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Waldorf school alumni

Category:Waldorf school alumni - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete education by pedagogical philosophy? And anyone can call themselves a "Waldorf school" and these could range from preschools through high schools, presumably, so it's a rather indiscriminate list, not much different than Category:Christian school alumni, Category:Jesuit school alumni, Category:Public school alumni, Category:Expensive private school alumni and others we'd rather not have. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Is this a test nomination since there are a ton of these categories out there? If so, would it simply be better to listify in the school article? Vegaswikian (talk) 22:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. 1) Not any school can call itself a Waldorf school; it is a protected name. 2) It would thus not be analogous to any of the above, which are not integral educational philosophies, though it would be analogous to a Category:Montessori school alumni. 3) There are extensive discussions in educational circles about the results of various pedagogical approaches, including comparisons of alumni directions and success. This category has obvious relevance to such a discussion. 4) I note that there is a Category:Non-graduate alumni of Harvard. This seems at least as valid a category!Hgilbert (talk) 01:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- certainly analogous to Jesuit - can't call yourself a Jesuit school unless you are run by the Jesuit order. But the Waldorf webpage tells you that you can set up your own school & even home school. So if you are home-schooled a la Waldorf then presto a category for you. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can set up a school, but can't legally call it "Waldorf" until/unless accepted through a series of accreditation hoops by a national Association of Waldorf Schools. Homeschoolers cannot legally use the protected term "Waldorf" either; thus, they wouldn't qualify unless their homeschool has been accredited. Hgilbert (talk) 15:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Category:Non-graduate alumni of Harvard is under discussion for deletion HERE. Snocrates 09:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep surely the deletionists prefer that there is only one of these cats covering 1,000 schools? If deleted they would only splinter. I see no problem with a supercat Category:Jesuit school alumni collecting various subcats, nor one for public schools (English sense). And per Hgilbert. Johnbod (talk) 03:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As User:Hgilbert noted, a school may not call itself "Waldorf" unless it meets certain criteria set by an Association of Waldorf Schools such as exist in North America, the UK and Germany. Waldorf education is quite distinctive and a number of notable Waldorf alumni regard their Waldorf education as a significant part of their biography. EPadmirateur (talk) 05:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-defining and should the category then splinter into a thousand separate categories for a thousand separate schools below the university level, delete those too. Where one graduated from high school is rarely if ever defining and a collective category for high school (or grade school or kindergarten) graduates from schools with a particular educational philosophy is similarly non-defining. Otto4711 (talk) 19:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However concensus and many precedents are clearly against at least the first point. Johnbod (talk) 20:01, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of precedents for deleting high school alumni categories. Otto4711 (talk) 21:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are there? We just kept BHG's English "test case". Johnbod (talk) 07:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
These aren't limited to high schools, going to a waldorf nursery school makes you an waldorf alum. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So does attending a summer school course for high school students at Harvard make you a Harvard alum, I suppose. Normally one wouldn't count either case for such a list, however. You might look at Category:Groton School alumni for a precedent. Hgilbert (talk) 15:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Post World War II DP camps

Propose renaming Category:Post World War II DP camps to Category:Displaced persons camps

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Expand abbreviation of "DP camps" per WP:NCCAT. Including "Post World War II" doesn't seem to add much since the term was used after WWII but not much since. There are no other categories for DP camps, and DP camps that are unrelated to World War II tend to be called and categorized under Category:Refugee camps. See main article at Displaced persons camp. Snocrates 22:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rename per nom. Chris (talk) 02:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Airports in the Mojave Desert

Propose renaming Category:Airports in the Mojave Desert to Category:Airports in California

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Technical nomination found doing November cleanup. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This category actually covers airports in three states and not the two listed in the category so a rename would be completely wrong. Being in the Mojave Desert is not defining for any of these airports. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as appropriate. I'm sure we've deleted other Mojave categories on Vegas's rationale. Johnbod (talk) 05:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I did a quick check and all of the articles already seem to have correct cats so no need for a manual merge. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete airports in the US are grouped by state not by geographic feature as part of the scheme, so overlaying that with more and more jigsaw pieces of territory isn't likely to help navigation of our cats. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Can't merge to Category:Airports in California because three of the airports in the current cat are in Nevada. Amaryllis25^{"Talk to me"} 19:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Buildings and structures in Orlando

Propose renaming Category:Buildings and structures in Orlando to Category:Buildings and structures in Orlando, Florida

Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match parent Category:Orlando, Florida and form used by all children categories. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. Snocrates 22:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Orlando musical groups

Propose renaming Category:Orlando musical groups to Category:Orlando, Florida musical groups

Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match other categories in parent Category:Orlando, Florida. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. Snocrates 22:03, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename before Tony Orlando & Dawn are added. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Frankie Valli and The Four Seasons

Category:Frankie Valli and The Four Seasons - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category for a band, redundant per WP:OCAT. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 21:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom & ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salt Lake City

Propose renaming Category:Buildings and structures in Salt Lake City to Category:Buildings and structures in Salt Lake City, Utah

Category:Companies based in Salt Lake City to Category:Companies based in Salt Lake City, Utah

Category:Mayors of Salt Lake City to Category:Mayors of Salt Lake City, Utah

Category:Neighborhoods in Salt Lake City to Category:Neighborhoods in Salt Lake City, Utah

Category:People from Salt Lake City to Category:People from Salt Lake City, Utah

Category:Salt Lake City media to Category:Salt Lake City, Utah media

Category:Sports in Salt Lake City to Category:Sports in Salt Lake City, Utah

Category:Salt Lake television anchors to Category:Salt Lake City, Utah television anchors

Nominator's rationale: Rename for consistency with parent category Category:Salt Lake City, Utah and article Salt Lake City, Utah. Snocrates 21:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename all per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep rename the article instead to Salt Lake City. As a former Olympic City, it should not need disambiguation. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 20:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People that have played Survivor more then once

Category:People that have played Survivor more then once - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: I don't think that this category is necessary; it seems that only five people have "played" Survivor more than once, and that might always be the case. Overly limited category. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 21:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - every Survivor contestant has a template of all the contestants and the template is color-coded for those who've played more than once. Far too narrow a category. Otto4711 (talk) 21:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Actually, there are 20 contestants who have played more than once, and probably 8 more to be announced shortly. Nevertheless, Otto4711's analysis is correct. --Maxa megalon 2000 23:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom & Otto. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Celebrities that Competed on Reality Shows

Category:Celebrities that Competed on Reality Shows - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary category, already exists in the form of Category:Reality television participants. Only page in this category was Trace Adkins, whom I removed. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 21:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm - I wonder, given the antipathy expressed toward categorizing celebrities by specific reality show appearances while at the same time recognizing that people have a great deal of interest in the topic, if keeping this with a rename to Category:Celebrity reality television participants might not be a good idea. Then all of the categories like Category:Celebrity Fit Club participants and Category: Dancing with the Stars (US TV series) participants could be merged to it. I'm not married to the idea but it's worth discussing. Otto4711 (talk) 21:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete performer by type of performance not really different than Category:Celebrities who were in drama shows, Category:Celebrities who were in horror shows, Category:Celebrities who were in comedies, and I remember reading about some sort of "battle of the network stars" where lots of tv celebrities did athletic? competitions and so this will just add cat clutter to bios already cluttered with trivia. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 14:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mortal Kombat terms

Category:Mortal Kombat terms - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Contains only two articles, one of which is set to merge into the other. Too narrow for a category. Upmerge into parent categories. Pagrashtak 21:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge. At any rate, the Brutality article will probably be merged into the Fatality aricle. -Sean Curtin (talk) 06:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jumping Monks

Category:Jumping Monks - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete unnecessary eponymous cat for a band; per many precedents. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --Alksub (talk) 01:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per precedent. Maralia (talk) 03:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Various mixtures

Propose renaming Category:Homogeneous mixtures to Category:Homogeneous chemical mixtures

Propose renaming Category:Heterogeneous mixtures to Category:Heterogeneous chemical mixtures

Nominator's rationale: Rename to match its parent Category:Chemical mixtures. Our article mixtures describes what could be homogeneous & heterogeneous mixtures which include "salad". Let's let this stay focused on chemical mixtures, not whether a cobb salad is homogeneous or heterogeneous (does it matter if it's tossed?) and the heterogeneous category tells us that pizza is also heterogeneous. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT-related films by country

Category:LGBT-related films by country - Template:Lc1

Category:LGBT films of Canada - Template:Lc1

Category:LGBT films of the Philippines - Template:Lc1

Category:LGBT-related films from Taiwan - Template:Lc1

Category:LGBT-related films from Thailand - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete parent, merge all subcats to Category:LGBT-related films. The parent LGBT-related films is not so enormous that it needs to be fragmented along national lines. If retained the subcats need to be renamed Category:Fooian LGBT-related films, in line with the parent and grandparent and per the convention of Category:Films by country. Otto4711 (talk) 19:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I created the parent cat (Category:LGBT-related films by country to gather the various country LGBT-related film subcats (which I did not create) but at this point am agnostic on whether or not the subcategories need to exist. If they exist the "by country" parent category needs to exist to properly sort it into the "by country" category trees, and to prevent the categories from being hidden at the back pages. --Lquilter (talk) 19:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I created the Thailand cat to help populate Category:LGBT culture in Thailand, and to better identify a notable and growing segment of the Thai film industry. I can't comment on the rationales for the other categories, but with regard to their place in LGBT country culture cats, the category is about more than just film. — WiseKwai 06:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. If kept, the categories need to be renamed to match existing naming conventions. -Sean Curtin (talk) 06:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eastern Orthodox Christians by nationality

Propose renaming Category:Eastern Orthodox Christians by nationality to Category:Eastern Orthodox Christians by jurisdiction

Nominator's rationale: Rename. As one might expect, most Russians who are Orthodox Christians belong to the Russian Orthodox Church, most Greeks to the Church of Greece, etc. However, churches are emphatically not set up on ethnic criteria -- this was condemned as a heresy ("philetism") in 1872 -- but rather, jurisdictions are supposed to follow traditional and geographic boundaries. These borders most often happen to correspond with national boundaries, but not always (for instance the great majority of ethnic Romanians in Moldova continue to belong to the Russian Orthodox Church, which has held sway there since 1944, while most Slavic Macedonians are part of the Serbian Orthodox Church) The point is that we should follow jurisdictinal rather than ethnic lines, because the Church itself does so. Biruitorul (talk) 16:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I concerned how this would work, though I see sense in trhe basic idea. Would it not mean merging the Estonians into the Russians for example? Some, like the Category:Antiochian Orthodox Christians presumably are set up this way anyway. What do you do with the USA, which, heresy or not, has several different organisations (no category yet) ? Johnbod (talk) 03:46, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- As for Estonia: yes, I would say either include the Estonian Orthodox Church of Moscow Patriarchate directly in the Russian Orthodox category, or make it a subcategory thereof; likewise with the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church, which should go into a Constantinople category/subcategory. Do keep in mind that Orthodox in most of Moldova, much of Ukraine, and all of Belarus and Kazakhstan (and I believe Latvia) are also under Moscow. With America (which has indeed laboured under philetism for decades), we can have a category for members of the Orthodox Church in America (although its autocephaly is not universally acknowledged), and make the Antiochians and the GOARCH subcategories of their parent patriarchates. That's the general idea--the move from nationality to jurisdiction--but of course the matter is rather complex and requires some thought. Incidentally, I have a concrete example of why the current system falls short: Andrew Natsios, a Greek American, was born and raised in the Greek Archdiocese, but is now an Antiochian parishioner. So it would make sense to put him in an Antiochian jurisdiction category, since he isn't Arabic (and neither are a third of the Archdiocese's members), but he isn't a Greek Orthodox anymore, either. Biruitorul (talk) 05:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But that will mean some very fiddly checking, by people who know the differences. Any volunteers? Johnbod (talk) 01:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly well-versed in Orthodox denominations, but individuals of uncertain adherence could always go in the Category:Eastern Orthodox Christians until a more precise subcategory is found. Biruitorul (talk) 02:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Journalists killed in action

Propose renaming Category:Journalists killed in action to ~~Category:Journalists killed while covering war~~ Category:Journalists killed while covering military conflicts

Nominator's rationale: Rename. "Killed in action" is a military term, and should only be applied to those participating in military action. The new name is also consistent with the names of its subcats. jwillbur 16:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if renaming to "...military conflicts" rather than "war" would be better? Avoids any quibbling over whether the conflict was an actual "war" or not. Otto4711 (talk) 19:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Journalists killed covering military conflicts. The category needs to be plural and this probably reads cleaner then the proposal as nominated. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support renaming. I think Category:Journalists killed covering military conflicts is probably better than Category:Journalists killed while covering war, but both are much better than Category:Journalists killed in action Alex Bakharev (talk) 23:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with everyone above. "Journalists killed while covering war" was the best I could come up with, but "Journalists killed while covering military conflicts" is much better. I have changed the nom. jwillbur 00:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per amended nom Johnbod (talk) 03:47, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Authoritarian political parties

Category:Authoritarian political parties - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Criteria for inclusion will always be highly subjective and pov-ish. Soman (talk) 11:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was actually considering adding this to Sanacja. Some category for the for the single party or The Party (politics) would be useful. We have Category:Parties of single-party systems, but what about wannabies? Parties who support authoritarianism, may have excessive parties, but are no monopolies? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the problem lies in delimitation. No state is 100% free (by its nature as an organ holding repressive power), nor is any state 100% unfree (by the sheer fact that any regime, even dictatorship, needs some degree of popular legitimacy). Single-party system parties is a valid cat, cause its delimitation is based on more or less formalized one-party systems. 'Authoritarian' is highly dubious criteria. --Soman (talk) 15:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kbdank71 (talk) 15:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the necessity of POV in applying the current definition and the difficultly of formulating an alternative definition. Snocrates 20:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per both deleters. How authoritarian do you have to be? "anti-democracy" might be better, not that I amk suggesting it. Johnbod (talk) 01:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the above and another reason: ambiguity are the parties authoritarian or are they advocating authoritarian government. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Articles supported by WPRhodesia

Rename to Category:WikiProject Rhodesia articles, the standard WikiProject convention. -- Prove It ^(talk) 14:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Israel Aircraft Industries

Propose renaming Category:Israel Aircraft Industries to Category:Israel Aerospace Industries

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Proper current name of company. Main article is at Israel Aerospace Industries. Snocrates 09:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NRK

Propose renaming Category:NRK to Category:Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation

Category:NRK television programmes to Category:Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation television programmes.

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Expand abbreviations per WP:NCCAT. Main article is at Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation. Snocrates 09:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Previously discussed, I'm fairly sure (ca 6 months ago) - does anyone have the link? If not this, another Norweigian network. Johnbod (talk) 12:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Well remembered: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 June 26#Category:NRK. (Found through "What links here" at the category page, incidentally.) I note that Kbdank closed it as a "rename/merge" but ~~nothing happened thereafter!~~ the category was recreated and populated by Kristinewes in September, who also then got Category:Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation deleted as empty. Speedy rename per last discussion. Bencherlite ^Talk 12:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per June 28th discussion. -- Prove It ^(talk) 16:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Rename and Salt. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per above, & thanks for the tip Bencherlite. Johnbod (talk) 03:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per Bencherlite's good research. Barring re-creation is appropriate. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Orlando television anchors

Propose renaming Category:Orlando television anchors to Category:Orlando, Florida television anchors

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per convention of parent Category:Orlando, Florida. Snocrates 09:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fort Wayne television anchors

Propose renaming Category:Fort Wayne television anchors to Category:Fort Wayne, Indiana television anchors

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Expand name of city per conventions and parent Category:Fort Wayne, Indiana. Snocrates 09:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is the TV anchors/presenters branch an exemption to the performers-by-performance ban?-choster (talk) 07:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:New York television anchors

Propose renaming Category:New York television anchors to Category:New York City television anchors

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Category is defined as television anchors who worked in New York City, not ones who worked somewhere in New York state. Snocrates 09:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Famous pandas

Propose renaming Category:Famous pandas to Category:Famous giant pandas

Nominator's rationale: Pandas actually refer to at least two different animals, red panda and giant panda. This category is mostly about famous giant pandas. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment / initial oppose: Category appears to include both giant and red pandas; e.g., Babu (red panda). Are you proposing a new category for famous red pandas or just removing red pandas from the category? I agree though that just having a category for "pandas" could be problematic as the two groups are only distantly related. Snocrates 03:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose before we get into discussing panda apartheid, there are sufficiently few articles here to really generate another level of categorization. After all, we've lumped all the apes together mixing gorillas with chimps with bonobos, etc. and as for distant relation, all fish are lumped together which no doubt have more distant relationships than dumping all mammals (much less all pandas, apes, rodents, etc.) together. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment did you look at the biological classification boxes? They are not related. It would be like classifying dogs with cats, or whales with seals. These two pandas are more closely related to other things with categories than each other. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 19:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Famous bears is closer to the giant panda, while the red panda is closer to Category:Famous seals. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 19:10, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the classification boxes they seem at least as closely related to each other than are all fish that could fit inCategory:Famous fish. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Situation's not exactly the same, is it? Category:Famous fish has all of two articles, and Category:Famous apes has a diverse number of different types of "apes". Category:Famous pandas, on the other hand, has exactly one red panda who is only notable because he escaped and was on the loose, and the rest are giant pandas who are notable for the simple fact that they live in zoos outside China. Why not go for the more accurate name? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 23:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The red panda is not closely related to the giant panda. It is closer to seals, so this category makes no sense as is. The giant panda is closer to bears, so it would make more sense to merge giant pandas with bears than to keep red pandas and giant pandas together. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 20:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Well unless I've missed an article, the concern for excluding red pandas really only pertains to exactly one article right now - Babu (red panda). Babu the Red Panda seems to be notable only because he escaped and spent four days on the loose. So I'm guessing that there aren't going to be many red pandas becoming famous anytime soon, unlike most captive giant pandas outside China - the birth of each giant panda outside China seems to be notable in and of itself because of the amount of news coverage devoted to each birth. So I would propose that we recategorise Babu (red panda) to the top level Category:Famous animals, the same place where Nereus the Walrus sits. It seems red pandas are genetically very unique, at least according to the Red Panda article. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 07:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support as they are biological, physically, and in human culture, distinct. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 19:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The two species are not closely related, and a narrowest taxonomic cat that would hold them both looks like it might have to cover all of suborder Caniformia and subsume a bunch of other cats including Category:Famous seals. As to Babu (red panda), I don't see a problem bumping him up to Category:Famous animals as Hong Qi Gong suggests. ×Meegs 15:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Captains of Norwich City F.C.

Category:Captains of Norwich City F.C. - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete - overcategorized, already listed at Captains of Norwich City F.C.. Chanheigeorge (talk) 02:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Norwich City F.C. players OCAT, and they should all be playing captains. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"they should all be playing captains" - what does that mean? --Dweller (talk) 15:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

many sports have non-playing captains, Davis Cup tennis comes to mind. But these guys are all players for Norwich City F.C. so the merger would work. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Law enforcement agencies of Dubai

Suggest renaming Category:Law enforcement agencies of Dubai to Category:Law enforcement agencies of the United Arab Emirates

Suggest merging Category:Law enforcement in Dubai to Category:Law enforcement in the United Arab Emirates

Nominator's rationale: Rename first; upmerge second. The parents are Category:Law enforcement by country and Category:Law enforcement agencies by country; there is no equivalent "by city" parent categories for Dubai to be placed in as part of a larger scheme. Category for renaming contains only one article but I suggest it may be kept as part of large "by country" scheme of classification. Category for upmerging contains nothing but category to be renamed. Snocrates 00:12, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename & Merge per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 244: / Line 244: @@
 :::Looking at the classification boxes they seem at least as closely related to each other than are all fish that could fit in[[:Category:Famous fish]]. [[User:Carlossuarez46|Carlossuarez46]] ([[User talk:Carlossuarez46|talk]]) 22:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 ::::Situation's not exactly the same, is it?  [[:Category:Famous fish]] has all of two articles, and [[:Category:Famous apes]] has a diverse number of different types of "apes".  [[:Category:Famous pandas]], on the other hand, has exactly ''one'' red panda who is only notable because he escaped and was on the loose, and the rest are giant pandas who are notable for the simple fact that they live in zoos outside China.  Why not go for the more accurate name?  [[User:HongQiGong|Hong Qi Gong]] <small>([[User talk:HongQiGong|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/HongQiGong|Contribs]])</small> 23:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
+::::The red panda is not closely related to the giant panda. It is closer to seals, so this category makes no sense as is. The giant panda is closer to bears, so it would make more sense to merge giant pandas with bears than to keep red pandas and giant pandas together. [[Special:Contributions/132.205.99.122|132.205.99.122]] ([[User talk:132.205.99.122|talk]]) 20:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 *'''Comment''' Well unless I've missed an article, the concern for excluding red pandas really only pertains to exactly one article right now - [[Babu (red panda)]].  Babu the Red Panda seems to be notable only because he escaped and spent four days on the loose.  So I'm guessing that there aren't going to be many red pandas becoming famous anytime soon, unlike most captive giant pandas outside China - the birth of each giant panda outside China seems to be notable in and of itself because of the amount of news coverage devoted to each birth.  So I would propose that we recategorise [[Babu (red panda)]] to the top level [[:Category:Famous animals]], the same place where [[Nereus (walrus)|Nereus the Walrus]] sits.  It seems red pandas are genetically very unique, at least according to the [[Red Panda]] article.  [[User:HongQiGong|Hong Qi Gong]] <small>([[User talk:HongQiGong|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/HongQiGong|Contribs]])</small> 07:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 *'''Support''' as they are biological, physically, and in human culture, distinct. [[Special:Contributions/132.205.99.122|132.205.99.122]] ([[User talk:132.205.99.122|talk]]) 19:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)