Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 February 21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 21:13, 21 May 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

February 21

[edit]

Disney roller coasters

[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: Keep all. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:52, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Roller coasters at Disney California Adventure to Category:Disney roller coasters
Propose merging Category:Roller coasters at Disneyland Park (Anaheim) to Category:Disney roller coasters
Propose merging Category:Roller coasters at Hong Kong Disneyland to Category:Disney roller coasters
Propose merging Category:Roller coasters at Tokyo Disneyland to Category:Disney roller coasters
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Very few articles grouped in these categories. I feel it is an example of overcategorisation. Similar categories to the parent like Category:Six Flags roller coasters have many more articles but are fine without subcategories. This is also an attempt to standardise the subcategories of Category:Roller coasters by operating company. Themeparkgc  Talk  22:57, 21 February 2011 (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:MickWithoutGlasses's articles

[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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:MickWithoutGlasses's articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. I'm pretty sure past consensus is that we don't use categories to organize one particular editor's user space. A user can create a list within his or her user space to list his draft articles if organization is needed. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:14, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Consider that killed; it was being filed in articlespace, but everything in it was a sandbox page (which aren't supposed to have articlespace categories on them), so when I decategorized the sandbox pages the category was suddenly empty. For what it's worth, I actually suspect that the band in question is somewhere between non-notable and non-existent, but this obviously isn't the right forum for that discussion. Bearcat (talk) 10:30, 25 February 2011 (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:Sports teams in Portland

[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:Sports teams in Portland, Oregon. Several California cities have this classification, such as category:Sports teams in San Diego, California. Many big US cities don't, so we might wish to decide whether we want any of these. But for now, I'm just going to add the state.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Sports teams in Portland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete or rename Deletion is my first choice because I think the parent category Category:Sports in Portland, Oregon is just fine. But I can see why some may prefer the finer category, in which case its name must absolutely be renamed Category:Sports teams in Portland, Oregon. Pichpich (talk) 19:06, 21 February 2011 (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:Frank Farian artists

[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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Frank Farian artists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete or possibly rename to something like Category:Musicians associated with Frank Farian. The current title suggests that Farian "owned" the artists (in the way record labels "own" artists). As far as I understand, Farian never owned a record label and most entries in the category are simply artists that Farian worked with. That's just too loose an association. For instance, nobody in their right mind would view Stevie Wonder as a "Frank Farian artist" and Ralph Ruppert is not even an artist. Farian did form a number of well-know groups such as Milli Vanilli, Boney M. and Far Corporation so one option is to delete the current category and form a much narrower one such as Category:Musical groups formed by Frank Farian. Pichpich (talk) 18:29, 21 February 2011 (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:I-house architecture in the United States

[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: keep. Category:I-houses will need to be nominated separately, as it wasn't tagged.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:I-house architecture in the United States to Category:I-houses
Nominator's rationale: According to its article, the I-house is an American phenomenon. As a result, the I-houses category is always going to be virtually empty; to navigate to articles about individual I-houses, one will always have to go an extra step down to the I-houses in the USA category, which is redundant. Nyttend (talk) 16:20, 21 February 2011 (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:Redirects to template from non-template namespace

[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: settle this fight elsewhere. The category is clearly not the subject of this argument. Figure out what you want the template(s) to do, and then when it's all sorted out or mediated, we'll consider what to do with the category.--Mike Selinker (talk) 17:07, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Redirects to template from non-template namespace (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: I nominated this category for deletion before, see here. Then I withdrew the nomination, because the category was at that time populated by Template:R from other template. Now that that template has been deleted following this discussion, I renominate this category for deletion.
Well, maybe I wasn't really misusing {{R to template}}, but it probably was originally designed to populate a category that would hold all of the T:xx redirects that are now found in the parent category, Category:Cross-namespace redirects. Now, Mclay1, you need to take a good look at the {{R to portal}}, the {{R to project}} and the others. They all populate SUB-CATEGORIES of the parent category, Category:Cross-namespace redirects, and so, they are all ONLY supposed to be added to redirects that cross from the main ARTICLE NAMESPACE (or perhaps another namespace) into other namespaces. In that parent category are P:xx, H:xx, C:xx, and MOS:xx shortcut redirects that should eventually populate the sub-categories, along with T:xx shortcut redirects that need to be put in a template sub-category. These are all pseudo-namespaces and cross-namespace redirects, and so, the sub-categories that I mentioned before are their rightful "homes". So when you look more closely, the redirect-category templates {{R to category}}, {{R to portal}}, {{R to help}} and {{R to project}} are ONLY supposed to be added to cross-namespace redirects.  — Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX )  17:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm right. Template:R to portal categories into Category:Redirects to portals or Category:Redirects to portal space. Category:Redirects to portal space is a subcategory of Category:Cross-namespace redirects but Category:Redirects to portals is not. It's the same for all the others. Category:Cross-namespace redirects isn't only for redirects from the main namespace anyway, it's for any cross-namespace redirects. McLerristarr | Mclay1 17:59, 28 February 2011 (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.

People from Georgia (country) by century

[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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:16th-century Georgian people to Category:16th-century people from Georgia (country)
Propose renaming Category:17th-century Georgian people to Category:17th-century people from Georgia (country)
Propose renaming Category:18th-century Georgian people to Category:18th-century people from Georgia (country)
Propose renaming Category:19th-century Georgian people to Category:19th-century people from Georgia (country)
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 March 10#Category:Georgian people and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 May 28#Category:Georgian culture, where other "Georgian" categories were renamed. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:59, 21 February 2011 (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.

Northern Irish foo

[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 00:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming:

Rationalle: Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 March 2#Northern Irish xxx to xxx of Northern Ireland. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:38, 21 February 2011 (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:Vandals

[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:Vandals of property. There's no consensus for a deletion. There's consensus to do something, so a rename is in order. No one seems certain as to what, so I picked something. Feel free to renominate if you have a better idea. --Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Vandals (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: I'm actually not sure whether this category should be deleted or not. After removing five entries (Domain of Moor, Francesco Morosini, Mohammed Omar, Pope Theophilus of Alexandria, Zvi Mazel), the remaining entries seem to represent a rather diverse group of people who have destroyed something.   Cs32en Talk to me  05:59, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why were they removed? // Liftarn (talk)
Yeah, why? Steinberger (talk) 16:49, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, with no prejudge against creating a category to refer to the subject of the article Vandals. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Hey ho, educated vandalism. Johnbod (talk) 02:20, 28 February 2011 (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:Georgian families

[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 "of" form.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Georgian families to Category:Families of Georgia (country) or Category:Families from Georgia (country)
Propose renaming Category:Georgian noble families to Category:Noble families of Georgia (country) or Category:Noble families from Georgia (country)
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 March 10#Category:Georgian people and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 May 28#Category:Georgian culture, where other "Georgian" categories were renamed. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:55, 21 February 2011 (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:Black Widow albums

[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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Black Widow albums to Category:Black Widow (band) albums
Nominator's rationale: Rename. I suggest renaming to match Black Widow (band). Could potentially be confused with albums released by Black Widow Records (which was named after the band but has released albums not by the band named Black Widow). Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:47, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It does help to reduce confusion and (if it were universally implemented) it would make it more predictable where one will find an albums category for a particular band. (Of course, it's not universally implemented, which makes it very difficult to know where the album category will be when a band name is somewhat or a lot ambiguous.)Good Ol’factory (talk) 20:44, 21 February 2011 (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:Oceaneering rides

[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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Oceaneering rides to Category:Oceaneering International rides
Nominator's rationale: Rename. The format for Category:Amusement rides by manufacturer is "NAME-OF-MANUFACTURER rides", where "NAME-OF-MANUFACTURER" is the same as the WP article about the manufacturer. In this case, the manufacturer name is Oceaneering International. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:26, 21 February 2011 (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:HUSS rides

[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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:HUSS rides to Category:HUSS Park Attractions rides
Nominator's rationale: Rename. The format for Category:Amusement rides by manufacturer is "NAME-OF-MANUFACTURER rides", where "NAME-OF-MANUFACTURER" is the same as the WP article about the manufacturer. In this case, the manufacturer name is HUSS Park Attractions. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:13, 21 February 2011 (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:Chinese nationalists

[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 capitalize Nationalist.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Chinese nationalists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: There is no good objective way to define this category, and the member articles in this category and its subcategories (which I'm also nominating for deletion, below), show that — I'd have to say that all of the figures listed are arguably nationalist and arguably not nationalist. Further, there are many, many arguably nationalist figures that are not currently in the category which have the same issue: arguably nationalist and arguably nonnationalist, because there is no good objective standard. Without the good objective standards, any inclusion or noninclusion is going to be POV. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 02:11, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This nomination is confused. The Kuomintang was the party of the 'Chinese Nationalists', which was the name for the people fighting for the Republic of China (as the 'Chinese Nationalist government') and then specifically for those fighting against the Chinese Communists and against the Japanese Empire. One cannot simply delete history; one could argue for better names or for merges. This takes analysis. Hmains (talk) 06:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I wouldn't have as much quibbles if the category were "Chinese Nationalists" (note capitalization), but "nationalists" in the small letters do not denote KMT or the Nationalist Government (of all of its iterations in Guangzhou, Nanjing, Wuhan, and Chongqing). If it were, in fact, intended to denote KMT only, then it duplicates Category:Members of the Kuomintang (which is a lot clearer as to what it includes). Right now, even assuming that it was intended to speak of the Nationalist government(s), it is going to be underpopulated due to its unclear nature. I still believe that deletion is the best solution, but even if not deleted, it should be renamed and refocused. --Nlu (talk) 19:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rename as Chines Nationalist [foo] ; I agree with the argument that with the capital it represents a specific government, rther than those Chinese who could be called nationalists in a more general sense, which is much broader. DGG ( talk ) 00:52, 26 February 2011 (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:Defunct architecture firms based in the United States

[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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Defunct architecture firms based in the United States to Category:Defunct architecture firms of the United States
Nominator's rationale: Rename to match both parent categories: Category:Defunct companies of the United States by industry and Category:Architecture firms of the United States. Pichpich (talk) 00:56, 21 February 2011 (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.