Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 May 23: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:34, 24 May 2009

< May 22	May 24 >

May 23

Lunar images

Category:Images of moons - Template:Lc1

Category:Lunar images - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Categories only contain featured images. Commons makes these categories unnecessary. Mike Peel (talk) 20:51, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sportsperson from County Kilkenny

Propose renaming Category:Sportsperson from County Kilkenny to Category:County Kilkenny Sportspeople

Nominator's rationale: Rename. A category for sportspeople from County Kilkenny. Mrchris (talk) 19:42, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge to Category:People from County Kilkenny as Category:Sportspeople is not subcategorised by place (apart from a very few). Occuli (talk) 20:10, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge to Category:People from County Kilkenny and Category:Irish sportspeople. Sortspeople are generally divided by nationality, not by county. Note - if the consensus is to rename, "sportspeople" should have a lower case s. Grutness...wha? 21:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

European Space Agency images

Category:European Space Agency images - Template:Lc1

Category:ESA multimedia gallery images - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Both Category:European Space Agency images and Category:ESA multimedia gallery images are empty categories, which are no longer necessary. Raising for discussion in case they're supposed to be empty... Mike Peel (talk) 19:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Deutsche Eishockey-Liga players

Propose renaming Category:Deutsche Eishockey-Liga players to Category:Deutsche Eishockey Liga players

Nominator's rationale: hyphen seems unnecessary from looking at info on hyphen use in the German language (though I m not at all sure about this) - see [[1]]; and that the name of the league in German uses no hyphen, of which I m certain - see [[2]] and [[3]] Mayumashu (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:ABC Family syndicated sitcoms

Category:ABC Family syndicated sitcoms - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete - per extensive precedent we do not categorize TV shows based on any network or syndication other than first-run. Otto4711 (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More broadcasters

Category:American Basketball Association broadcasters - Template:Lc1

Category:National Hockey League broadcasters - Template:Lc1

Category:National Football League announcers - Template:Lc1

Category:Canadian Football League announcers - Template:Lc1

Category:American Football League announcers - Template:Lc1

Category:Major League Baseball announcers - Template:Lc1

Category:Boston Bruins sportscasters - Template:Lc1

Category:Los Angeles Dodgers announcers - Template:Lc1

Category:Brooklyn Dodgers announcers - Template:Lc1

Category:MLB Network personalities - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete - the leagues whose games one broadcasts is not defining of the broadcaster. Substantially identical to all of the various broadcaster by team and broadcaster by network categories that have been deleted. Note the Bruins category, a leftover that used "sportscasters" instead of "broadcasters" plus a few trying to sneak past as "announcers". Otto4711 (talk) 16:59, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – is some upmerge not envisaged? Or is being a 'sports announcer' not defining either? (Some of these are very large. The NHL one has 2 subcats and 275 top level articles.) IMO 'National Hockey League broadcaster' is defining, but 'Boston Bruins' is becoming too specific. Occuli (talk) 17:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Every article within the various categories that I checked (and admittedly I did not check every single one) is categorized both by the specific team or league along with being categorized at the sport level (e.g. as an ABA announcer and as a basketball announcer or broadcaster). One of the NHL subcats is the Bruins cat, also up for deletion. Otto4711 (talk) 17:35, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jaime Jarrin and Naoko Funayama, to pick 2 at random, would be removed from the entire 'announcer' tree if the above are all deleted. I must say I am more in sympathy with Spanneraol below than with the nom, and must go for Keep all as the nom seems under-researched. Occuli (talk) 18:33, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or if your actual concern is that some few people might get dropped from the structure you could always say Merge all to the appropriate parent. It is unreasonable to expect a nominator to check several thousand articles prior to making a nomination and base an opinion on ten categories based on your happening to find two articles "at random". Otto4711 (talk) 19:00, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't see the problem with this category. The nominators opinion that the "leagues whose game one broadcasts is not defining of a broadcaster" is patently false. Several announcers are known as football announcers or baseball announcers. Vin Scully is certainly known as a Dodgers/baseball announcer... The entire nomination is in error and misguided. Should be kept. Spanneraol (talk) 18:10, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are known as "baseball announcers" which is why they are and should be in Category:Baseball announcers. Perhaps you should review the many, many previous discussions of this sort of category, since as an apparent newcomer to CFD you may be ignorant of the history here. Otto4711 (talk) 19:00, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with sub categories by team or league? Just cause Otto is on a deletionist kick doesn't mean we should take his word for it. Wrong prior decisions doesn't mean we can't make the correct decision this time. Again, Vin Scully, Jaime Jarrin are defined as Dodgers announcers.. and certain people are defined by broadcasting certain leagues. The nomination makes no sense and if other similar categories were deleted based on wrong headed thinking they should be overturned and restored. Spanneraol (talk) 23:37, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well again, a review of the history of such decisions would no doubt be illuminating for you, then maybe you would know better than to bust out shit like "deletionist kick", noob. Sportscasters and other performers can broadcast for any number of different leagues and teams and often move from broadcasting one team or league to another team or league, or broadcast multiple teams or leagues at the same time. A separate category for every team or league will result in multiple clutterful categories on biography articles, leading to a reduction in the efficacy of the categories for those articles and the overall system. Categories are not intended to be indices of every professional engagement that every person engages in. There are always going to be a person or two that people can point at and say "oh well, what about this person? What about that person?" That doesn't make the multi-year discussion that's developed the current consensus against these types of categories "wrong headed thinking", and maybe you ought to think a little harder before the next time you insult the work of any number of editors. Otto4711 (talk) 01:34, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indianapolis, Indiana

Propose renaming Category:Indianapolis, Indiana to Category:Indianapolis

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per main article. E.g. Rome and Category:Rome, not Category:Rome, Lazio. I see no reason why the main article and main category should have different names. I will also list subcategories; please be patient with me. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Subcategories:

For those who object and want to make this a broader discussion of migrating all such categories, I'd be happy to do so, but it will take a lot of tagging and discussion. At the very least, that discussion can start here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:30, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per nearly every cfd we have had on this topic in the last year or so (regardless of the name of the article). Eg the exact same one + a 2nd Indianapolis one on the same page, nominated by Koavf in July 2008. Eg this one, another on the same page, this one. Eg this one + 4 others (Schools, Universities and colleges, Omaha, Museums) on 25 Feb 2009. Occuli (talk) 11:32, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
oppose per every other CfD we have on the subject of US city categories. Nominators working on US categories should first become knowledgeable of them and stop wasting their and our time. And no, it does not matter that the US ones may be handled differently than those of some other countries. WP is 'big enough' to handle local variation. Hmains (talk) 22:19, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Category:Geology of Eastern Washington

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 delete via G7 per author request below. VegaDark (talk) 14:50, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Category:Geology of Eastern Washington - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Incorrect name. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 04:55, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Deletion—as the original creator of this category, I agree with the rationale and have no problem with its deletion. Williamborg (Bill) 05:32, 23 May 2009 (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.

@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 :* Yes, they are known as "baseball announcers" which is why they are and should be in [[:Category:Baseball announcers]]. Perhaps you should review the many, many [[CFD#By_media_outlet|previous discussions]] of this sort of category, since as an apparent newcomer to CFD you may be ignorant of the history here. [[User:Otto4711|Otto4711]] ([[User talk:Otto4711|talk]]) 19:00, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 ::*What's wrong with sub categories by team or league? Just cause Otto is on a deletionist kick doesn't mean we should take his word for it. Wrong prior decisions doesn't mean we can't make the correct decision this time. Again, Vin Scully, Jaime Jarrin are defined as Dodgers announcers.. and certain people are defined by broadcasting certain leagues. The nomination makes no sense and if other similar categories were deleted based on wrong headed thinking they should be overturned and restored. [[User:Spanneraol|Spanneraol]] ([[User talk:Spanneraol|talk]]) 23:37, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
+:::* Well again, a review of the history of such decisions would no doubt be illuminating for you, then maybe you would know better than to bust out shit like "deletionist kick", noob. Sportscasters and other performers can broadcast for any number of different leagues and teams and often move from broadcasting one team or league to another team or league, or broadcast multiple teams or leagues at the same time. A separate category for every team or league will result in multiple clutterful categories on biography articles, leading to a reduction in the efficacy of the categories for those articles and the overall system. Categories are not intended to be indices of every professional engagement that every person engages in. There are always going to be a person or two that people can point at and say "oh well, what about this person? What about that person?" That doesn't make the multi-year discussion that's developed the current consensus against these types of categories "wrong headed thinking", and maybe you ought to think a little harder before the next time you insult the work of any number of editors. [[User:Otto4711|Otto4711]] ([[User talk:Otto4711|talk]]) 01:34, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 ==== Category:Indianapolis, Indiana ====