Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 June 18: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:04, 19 June 2010

< June 17	June 19 >

June 18

Category:Philosophical works

Propose merging Category:Philosophical works to Category:Philosophical literature, along with its subcategory structure: Category:Philosophical works by author, Category:Philosophy books by author, Category:Philosophical works by era, Category:Ancient philosophical works, Category:Contemporary philosophical works,Category:Medieval philosophical works, Category:Modern philosophical works.

Nominator's rationale: The philosophical literature category was created with the intention of containing all of this. There is no need for a "works" category for philosophy. Every "work" can be classified under literature.

Note: WP:PHILOSOPHY notified.
Note: WP:LITERATURE notified. Greg Bard 22:43, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question - are ALL philosophical works written and therefore literature? Are there no philosophical works within other spheres such as the fine arts or music? Is Die Zauberflöte, for example, not a philosophical work? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Philosophical fiction (however arbitrary) can be well extended into music or spoken epics. But opera libretto and spoken epic are literature. East of Borschov (talk) 11:31, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:A History of the World in 100 Objects

Category:A History of the World in 100 Objects - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete: Articles tagged in this categories are part of the A History of the World in 100 Objects 100-part radio series (15 minutes each). Categorizing pages in this way will inevitably lead to over-categorization. After removing said articles only the main article will be left. jonkerz ♠ 19:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This categorises items in the British Museum selected by its director as the 100 most important of the artefacts. I appreciate that this is like an awards category (which we would delete and listify), but few museum objects will receive an "award" in this way, so that this will not lead to the severe over-categorisation which awards categories and performamce by performer categories produce. Being selected as one of the most important objects in one of the world's most important museums is surely a notable distinction. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and listify trivial association better maintained as a list. This listing has little to do with the objects themselves, rather, it is the opinion of a specific bunch of curators on what they think of as important, a highly subjective rating. 70.29.212.131 (talk) 20:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People born in Shropshire

Propose merging Category:People born in Shropshire to Category:People from Shropshire

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NCCAT#Heritage, biographies are not categorized by place of birth, as it's hardly ever notable. — ξ ^xplicit 19:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Occuli (talk) 19:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. "From" is an inclusive term, covering "born in", "living/ed in", and "used to live in". No split is needed. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wanted (comics)

Category:Wanted (comics) - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete - the category was recently nominated for renaming and I suggested it be deleted as a small category with no likelihood of expansion. Since that nomination closed most of the contents of the category were deleted (per my prods) as not being notable. This would seem to confirm that the category is not needed for the few remaining articles (which are interlinked through their text). Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 18:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jewish sportspeople

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: Withdrawn by nominator. Non-admin close. Cgingold (talk) 15:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~:Propose deleting Category:Jewish sportspeople - Template:Lc1~~

Nominator's rationale: As per Wikipedia:OC#CATGRS there is no substantial and encyclopedic head article (not just a list) and it's one can be written for such a category, then the category should not be created. Withdrawn per User:MacRusgail ethnic rather than religious , however I have removed Category:People by religion and occupation as a parent of these

Also all of the sub categories

Gnevin (talk) 09:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Queries – and so the nom is to do what with these categories? And can the nom provide links to the many previous cfds concerning these? Occuli (talk) 10:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, sorry . I'm not aware of past cfds I've had a look at the history of a few and didn't see any. If your aware of some please add them Gnevin (talk) 10:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sets Jewish people apart from others. Religious beliefs are unrelated to sports, in the same way as LGBT is unrelated to quantum physics, as Wikipedia:OC#CATGRS explains. Cs32en Talk to me 12:47, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - there are certain reasons why Jews as a group are different to say, Christians or Hindus. Cs32en's comments about LGBT are not helpful either, since there are a number of LGBT categories relating to things completely unconnected with sexual preference, e.g. acting, sports etc. A person's sexuality does not directly come into these things, although they may suffer prejudice, which is a different issue.--MacRusgail (talk) 13:55, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Procedual keep all and close debate - Non of the sub-cats are tagged. Nominator didn't look too hard for previous debates, either. Two I picked at random: chess players and fencers. Lugnuts (talk) 14:00, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware you don't have to tag sub-cats when doing a group nom but I can if it's an issue Gnevin (talk) 14:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, you are obliged to tag all of the sub-cats, but it's a moot point since you have withdrawn the nomination. Cgingold (talk) 15:18, 18 June 2010 (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:Jewish American sportspeople

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: Withdrawn by nominator. Non-admin close. Cgingold (talk) 15:24, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~:Propose deleting Category:Jewish American sportspeople - Template:Lc1~~

Nominator's rationale: As per Wikipedia:OC#CATGRS there is no substantial and encyclopedic head article (not just a list) and it's one can be written for such a category, then the category should not be created Gnevin (talk) 09:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC) Withdrawn per User:MacRusgail ethnic rather than religious , however I have removed Category:People by religion and occupation as a parent of these Gnevin (talk) 14:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - There are categories for Jewish people by profession. Judaism is a religion, not an ethnicity, of course, but there is a slight blurring of the line in this case.--MacRusgail (talk) 13:57, 18 June 2010 (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.

Singaporean people by descent

Propose renaming:

Nominator's rationale: Rename: These categories should be renamed for consistency with similar categories that have already been renamed. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 07:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Many of the individuals are not of the 'ethnic descent' described, but of that ethnicity (i.e. they speak the language of the ethnic group as a first language, amongst other things) I do agree that we should not, ideally, categorise both for ethnic descent and ethnicity separately as it is nearly impossible to distinguish in most cases, as bios typically lack the required info. I think we need, eventually, to rename the categories to, for example, Category:Sinagporean people of Cantonese ethnicity or ancestry to cover both ethnic descent and ethnicity. What the heck, I ll suggest it here now as alternative rename, with the goal of setting precedent to rename the whole tree - Rename each to Category:Singaporean people of Fooian ethnicity or ancestry etc. except Rename Category:Singaporean Jewish people to Category:Singaporean Jews Mayumashu (talk) 20:42, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mayumashu. Certainly these all need some kind of rename. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I'm not really understanding the distinction between ethnicity and ethnic descent. Could you explain? — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 13:50, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:New Zealand Democratic Party

Propose renaming Category:New Zealand Democratic Party to Category:New Zealand Democratic Party for Social Credit

Propose renaming Category:New Zealand Democratic Party activists to Category:New Zealand Democratic Party for Social Credit activists

Nominator's rationale: Rename. The name of this party has changed to New Zealand Democratic Party for Social Credit. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 05:07, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Rename to match revised title of parent article. Alansohn (talk) 15:47, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Christian Heritage New Zealand

Propose renaming Category:Christian Heritage New Zealand to Category:Christian Heritage Party of New Zealand

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Propose using full name to match main article Christian Heritage Party of New Zealand. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 05:06, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Military installations in Canada

Propose merging Category:Military installations in Canada to Category:Military facilities in Canada

Nominator's rationale: Merge. Clear duplicaiton. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 05:00, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Socialist Workers Party (UK)

Propose renaming Category:Socialist Workers Party (UK) to Category:Socialist Workers Party (Britain)

Propose renaming Category:Socialist Workers Party members (UK) to Category:Socialist Workers Party (Britain) members

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Slight change the disambiguator proposed to match the category names to the article Socialist Workers Party (Britain). (From what I can tell, the page was moved from using the "(UK)" disambiguator because this particular party only organises in England, Scotland, and Wales. The Socialist Workers Party (Ireland) has traditionally been the organiser for the same causes in Northern Ireland. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:57, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support, makes sense, since Irish SWP organizes in N.Ireland. --Soman (talk) 12:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pirate Party UK

Category:Pirate Party UK - Template:Lc1

Category:Pirate Party (Finland) - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Eponymous categories that only contains the main articles Pirate Party UK and Pirate Party (Finland), respectively.. The articles are also in the same categories that the categories are in, so there is no need to upmerge anything. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- at least in the UK case. This is a NN party that got nowhere in the last general election. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:03, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Liberal Unionist Party politicians (UK)

Propose renaming Category:Liberal Unionist Party politicians (UK) to Category:Liberal Unionist Party politicians

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Disambiguation is unneeded: main article is at Liberal Unionist Party and there is no Liberal Unionist Party (disambiguation). Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per nom. --Soman (talk) 12:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Conservative Party donors

Category:Conservative Party donors - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Generally we don't categorize people by which organisations or causes they have made donations to. If kept, should rename to Category:Conservative Party (UK) donors to match parent Category:Conservative Party (UK) and Conservative Party (UK). Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:00, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Frank Miller

Propose renaming Category:Frank Miller to Category:Frank Miller (comics)

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Propose renaming to match to main article Frank Miller (comics). Frank Miller is a disambiguation page. When I saw this I thought it was about Frank Miller (politician) and couldn't believe there was an eponymous category about him. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:34, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Rename to match title of parent article. Alansohn (talk) 04:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unnecessary eponymous category per WP:OC. The contents of this category do not come close to the complexity that makes an eponymous category necessary. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 18:38, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rename to match title of main article. With 7 well-defined subcats and sub-subcats there is more than enough to justify an eponymous category. Occuli (talk) 14:17, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cook Island people

Propose renaming Category:Cook Island people to Category:Cook Islands people

Nominator's rationale: Checking on-line didn t seem to turn up any definite answers to this grammar issue. I m basing this nomination on that other WP cats use: 'Cooks Islands' and not 'Cook Island' as the adjective form, in Category:Cook Islands culture, Category:Cook Islands society, and Category:Cook Islands law Mayumashu (talk) 01:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. As far as I know, "Cook Island" is the correct adjective except when referencing "Cook Islands Māori" (the language). The people are "Cook Island Māori". Certain organisations have also been given an official name that includes "Cook Islands" as an adjective, such as the Cook Islands Government. User:Grutness was a bit of an expert on this issue, as I recall, and he was strongly in favour of "Cook Island" being accepted as the standard in generic usages. You can find usages of either on the web, but official sources from New Zealand, the Cook Islands, and UNICEF tend to use "Cook Island" (though exceptions can be found). Some Cook Island(s) gov't sources are: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], and UNICEF. At the end of the day I don't have a strong preference one way or the other but I suppose they should be standardised to one or the other. "Cook Islands" is probably more intuitive, if not completely correct. For similar reasons we have favoured "Kiribati" even though "i-Kiribati" is technically correct. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:48, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 :'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Delete''': Articles tagged in this categories are part of the [[A History of the World in 100 Objects]] 100-part radio series (15 minutes each). Categorizing pages in this way will inevitably lead to over-categorization. After removing said articles only the main article will be left.  [[User:Jonkerz|jonkerz]][[User talk:Jonkerz|♠]] 19:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' This categorises items in the British Museum selected by its director as the 100 most important of the artefacts.  I appreciate that this is like an awards category (which we would delete and listify), but few museum objects will receive an "award" in this way, so that this will not lead to the severe over-categorisation which awards categories and performamce by performer categories produce.  Being selected as one of the most important objects in one of the world's most important museums is surely a notable distinction.  [[User:Peterkingiron|Peterkingiron]] ([[User talk:Peterkingiron|talk]]) 21:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
+*'''Delete and listify''' trivial association better maintained as a list. This listing has little to do with the objects themselves, rather, it is the opinion of a specific bunch of curators on what they think of as important, a highly subjective rating. [[Special:Contributions/70.29.212.131|70.29.212.131]] ([[User talk:70.29.212.131|talk]]) 20:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 ==== Category:People born in Shropshire ====