Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 June 11

< June 10	June 12 >

June 11

Category:Images of the Star of David

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 to Category:Images of geometric stars and Category:Jewish images. Category:Images of six-pointed stars also deleted as empty. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Images of the Star of David (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: only one image. It will empty Category:Images of six-pointed stars if deleted. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge to Category:Images of geometric stars and Category:Jewish images, neither of which is overpopulated. This would empty this category and Category:Images of six-pointed stars, opening the way for both to be deleted. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 22:35, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete once the member images are ported to Wikimedia Commons. These are all public domain or GFDL and don't belong on Wikipedia, but rather on Commons. CaseyPenk (talk) 06:46, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We needn't wait. They will be moved to Commons eventually but, in the meantime, we can keep them categorized by upmerging them to Category:Images of geometric stars and Category:Jewish images. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:41, 20 June 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:Music, dance

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: result. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:19, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Music, dance (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: No foreseeable use for cat or text. Chris857 (talk) 14:31, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I removed the user talk page. Page was created by a newbie editor unfamiliar with WP. ...sigh... -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:47, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. We were all newbies once. :) CaseyPenk (talk) 06:39, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Test effort. Super Mario Man 22:33, 12 June 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:Disappointing video game sequels

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:18, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Disappointing video game sequels (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Categories should not be subjective. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 06:02, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, disappointment is up to personal opinions.--Makecat _Talk 07:51, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, although I'm cracking up at the singling out of Hitman: Absolution (a game which has yet to be released). CaseyPenk (talk) 05:58, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wholly subjective. Super Mario Man 21:53, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clearly biased as the cat does not include MOO3. For shame, people! Benkenobi18 (talk) 08:32, 15 June 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:Suzhou Rail Transit

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: keep. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Suzhou Rail Transit (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. Only contains two pages. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:10, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have created one more article. The category has many articles on the Chinese Wikipedia, so I think it has potential for growth.--Makecat _Talk 02:42, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I created a couple more articles based on the Chinese Wikipedia. Please do forgive my poor Chinese skills. I know there is a need for these articles, so any contributions to the member articles would be appreciated. CaseyPenk (talk) 06:26, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
keep, has more articles now. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 23:56, 13 June 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:Suzhou Subway

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: convert to category redirect. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:41, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Suzhou Subway (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: It was renamed after Suzhou Rail Transit officially, and no pages was left in the category. Makecat _Talk 02:04, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:11, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Suzhou Rail Transit, to clear up any confusion browsers may have. CaseyPenk (talk) 06:27, 12 June 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.

Labor to Labour

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 rename C2C. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:29, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Labor in Bangladesh to Category:Labour in Bangladesh

Nominator's rationale: Rename. The predominant spelling of the word in these countries is "labour". Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy rename all? per MOS:TIES. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:28, 11 June 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:SVG flags

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 to Category:Flag images. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:44, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:SVG flags (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: per WP:SMALLCAT.. Contains only one image. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:00, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There are a bunch more of these on Wikipedia, some of which I have added to the category, but I imagine these should just be merged to Category:Flag images. I'm not sure what the perceived advantage of subcategorizing by file type might be, unless this is some sort of flip-side tracking device to accompany Category:Flag images that should be in SVG format. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:20, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge to Category:Flag images -- 70.24.251.208 (talk) 06:59, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a useful sorting mechanism until Category:Flag images that should be in SVG format is deprecated. Separating between SVG and non-SVG helps image creators direct their attention to the appropriate areas. Once all flags are in SVG format, we can upmerge both categories. But as it is, Category:Flag images is diffused into useful subcategories. If we decide to upmerge Category:SVG flags, then we must logically upmerge Category:Flag images that should be in SVG format (which is not a step that would help editors). So, I suggest we keep the diffusion structure as a motivational tool and sorting mechanism. CaseyPenk (talk) 06:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I diffused the handful of member flags of Category:Flag images into the appropriate sub-category. Now the sub-categorization scheme is at least implemented consistently. CaseyPenk (talk) 06:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question: if the nominated category is upmerged why must Category:Flag images that should be in SVG format be upmerged as well? It seems to me we only need one of these to appropriately track the issue; i.e., if they are not in Category:Flag images that should be in SVG format, then they should be in SVG format. I don't see why we need a category to group this explicitly. If they are in the correct format, they could just go in Category:Flag images without any further comment via the category name. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 07:10, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge per Olfactory's convincing argument (see discussion directly above this one). The default should be SVG, and any non-compliant PNGs or JPGs should be labelled as such and subject to "ostracization" if you will. CaseyPenk (talk) 08:18, 12 June 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.