Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 April 15

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 04:36, 14 March 2023 (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)

April 15

[edit]
[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename Category:People related to Campinas, São Paulo to Category:People from Campinas, São Paulo. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:48, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:People related to Campinas, São Paulo to Category:People from Campinas, São Paulo
Nominator's Rationale: Rename, as per convention of category:People by city. Brandon97 23:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page, if any, or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:History of computing software

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Rename. --Xdamrtalk 23:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:History of computing software to Category:History of software
Nominator's Rationale: Rename, there is no ambiguity in the shorter title, so it would be better. (I created this category today, and I am presently populating it.) greenrd 23:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Quebec authors

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Rename all. --Xdamrtalk 00:10, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Quebec authors to Category:Quebec writers
Nominator's Rationale: Rename. Convention of Category:Writers. Brandon97 22:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Repurpose to categorise talk pages, per recent precedents. --Xdamrtalk 23:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Delete Random category for articles that share a source. Not necessary or useful. Casperonline 22:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename Category:British Folk Rock Albums to Category:British folk rock albums. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British Folk Rock Albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Merge into Category:Folk rock albums, or Rename to Category:British folk rock albums. -- Prove It (talk) 21:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page, if any, or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Delete. --Xdamrtalk 23:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:EQUIS (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Rename to Category:European Quality Improvement System, expanding the acronym. -- Prove It (talk) 20:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Natural bodybuilding

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Delete. --Xdamrtalk 23:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Natural bodybuilding (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The category is populated by two biographies, which are both now on AFD. The definition of "natural bodybuilding" seems arbitrary, and any relevant articles can go in the parent category about bodybuilding. YechielMan 18:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:May 27

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Delete. --Xdamrtalk 23:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:May 27 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Yet another month-day date category, redundant to the May 27 article. See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 April 10#Category:July 1. Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-15 12:16Z

Delete - the category as noted before is an "incredibly useless" category, not only does it have only one link on the actual page (which links to a user page), but what has happened on May 27th is already noted on the page it redirects to. Radio Orange 15:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Bencherlite 14:28, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Doczilla 17:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as already explained above. Aequo 18:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Chiefs of Staff of the United States Army

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Merge. --Xdamrtalk 00:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chiefs of Staff of the United States Army (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Tanks by nationality

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename Category:Tanks by nationality to Category:Tanks by country. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Tanks by nationality to Category:Tanks by country
Nominator's Rationale: Rename. I found the thought that tanks had a nationality rather odd. While not always used, the 'by country' form is the most common in Category:Categories by country. Vegaswikian 07:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page, if any, or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Anti-creationism

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Keep. --Xdamrtalk 00:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anti-creationism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Doesn't seem an appropriate category to use. Arbitrary/Subjective. ZayZayEM 07:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC) This category is subjective. It does not clearly define the anti-creationist movement as a collective or organised movement (c.f. intelligent design movement). It appears to be a collection of various people, groups and texts that lambast creationism (whether from a legitimate view), as well as those that actively promote good science, and a few that do a bit of columns A and B. Please consider the status from an alternative viewpoint. Matters which may seem clearcut, may not be so clearcut from people with less, or different familiarity. My version of what "anti-creationism" is may be quite different from someone else's (particularly a creationist's!).[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:People with an eidetic memory

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename Category:People with an eidetic memory to Category:People with eidetic memory. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People with an eidetic memory (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Rename to Category:People with eidetic memory for consistency with the preferred medical/psychological terminology. Doczilla 06:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page, if any, or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Fictional characters with an eidetic memory

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename to Category:Fictional characters with eidetic memory. Noted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 April 17#Category:Fictional characters with an eidetic memory for implementation when that is closed. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:53, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters with an eidetic memory (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Rename to Category:Fictional characters with eidetic memory for consistency with the preferred medical/psychological terminology. Doczilla 06:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum. Additional reason to change name: Now that the CfD on real people has closed, this one needs to be renamed for consistency with Category:People with eidetic memory (see the CfD directly above this one). Doczilla 09:39, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is most disruptive. Given that the debate of the 17th is a deletion nomination I suggest this is left open until that result is known, after which the rename proposed here can be considered. Xdamrtalk 00:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply. This one came first. If either were to be postponed, it should be the CfD introduced last, meaning the deletion proposal. Besides which, what's disruptive about it anyway? The name can change even if it only gets deleted a few days later. So what? (And I doubt it will get deleted. So far we have a consensus to rename, whereas the deletion proposal at this point looks like it's heading for no consensus.) Doczilla 09:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's disruptive insofar as we have to have this discussion, rather than simply closing the debate as usual - probably 'disruptive' was a little harsh, I meant it in its gentlest sense. (Note - I might have been slightly unclear, it is the nom of the 17th that I was largely referring to).
I agree with your reading of the later nomination, all I suggest is that we wait until that has closed—admittedly more for form's sake than because I believe that there is much of a chance of the 17th resulting in deletion, nevertheless there's little point in renaming a category which could be deleted a day or two down the line.
Xdamrtalk 12:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page, if any, or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Catholic Churches in New Mexico

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Rename. --Xdamrtalk 00:02, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Catholic Churches in New Mexico to Category:Roman Catholic churches in New Mexico
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Rename to Category:U.S. Open (golf). --Xdamrtalk 00:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:U.S. Open (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Music fundraising, Hurricane Katrina

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Rename per SMcCandlish. --Xdamrtalk 00:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Music fundraising, Hurricane Katrina (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Rename' - Yes, the name of the article is a bit clumsy and may not be fully understood by visiting editors/readers. - Radio Orange 15:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Members of the Liberal Party

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename Category:Members of the Liberal Party to Category:Mexican liberales (convention of Category:People by political orientation and nationality) which appears to address the case for deletion also. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Members of the Liberal Party (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

There was no such thing as a Liberal Party in Mexico. A liberal party, yes, but that was just a description for a group of people who happened to be liberal, it was not an organized political party where one could be a member of. (And apart from that there were really a lot more liberals than just Díaz) Mixcoatl 19:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page, if any, or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.