Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 28

August 28

Category:Military history of ancient Gaul‎

• Propose upmerging Category:Military history of ancient Gaul to Category:Ancient Gaul‎ Category:Roman governors of Gaul‎

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT, only one entry in this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:55, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

• Comment considering the amount of written military history of the Romano-Gallic Wars, there certainly is room for populating this catergory. (ie. Vercingetorix et al; Category:Gallic Wars, etc) -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 05:14, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Don't think so because the category means to focus on pre-Roman Gaul, Category:Ancient Gaul‎ is succeeded by Category:Roman Gaul‎. The one article in category Category:Military history of ancient Gaul has actually been misclassified. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:26, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
    • The Wars of Julius Caesar precede Roman Gaul (ie. Vercingetorix would fit in Ancient Gaul under that division of time). Further, "ancient" in the context of Europe, the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia, means before the Middle Ages, so "Roman Gaul" should be a subcategory of "Ancient Gaul". And we still have a mass of Romano-Gallic warring prior to Julius Caesar's conquest of Gaul, as Hannibal defeats Rome and allies in Gaul, long before Gaul becomes Roman. Not to mention Punic and Ancient Greek military endeavours in Gaul. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 04:58, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
      • The first battle of Hannibal took place near current Piacenza, in Roman territory, so I agree with Peterkingiron below that it's unlikely we will be able to find many articles that precede Category:Gallic Wars. Agree that the category name Ancient Gaul may be ambiguous, maybe a (separate) CfD can be openened to rename it into e.g. Prehistoric Gaul. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:54, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
• Delete -- We know little of Gallic war, otehr than with Rome. I therefore doubt if there will anything that cannot go in Category:Gallic Wars. At present we have an article on Roman governors, but that must be adequately categoirised elsewhere. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:40, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Category:Infobox philosopher maintenance

• Propose deleting Category:Infobox philosopher maintenance - Template:Lc1
  

Nominator's rationale: This "temporary" category has existed since 2011. It contains normal Wikipedia articles (e.g. Richard Aaron) that do not belong under Category:Wikipedia maintenance. There is no explanation on the category page or its talk page as to why this unusual category is needed. DexDor (talk) 20:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Category:Fictional domestic workers

• Propose renaming:

List of fictional butlers to List of fictional butlers and valets

Category:Fictional nannies to Category:Fictional governesses and nannies;

Category:Fictional maids to Category:Fictional maids and valets

Category:Fictional chauffeurs to Category:Fictional chauffeurs and coachmen

Category:Fictional domestic workers‎‎ to Category:Fictional domestic workers and household staff

• Propose creating:

Category:Fictional governesses

Category:Fictional valets

Category:Fictional gardeners

Nominator's rationale: Being more inclusive is better then creating more categories. --172.251.77.75 (talk) 19:49, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

• Comment Category:Fictional child care occupations sounds like the jobs rather than the characters, so I'd prefer the alternative in the first nom. In the fourth nom, I think that Category:Fictional chauffeurs and footmen (plural) is grammatically better. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
• Comment, verging on Oppose - I don't entirely agree with the nom's argument that fewer specific cats is necessarily better, but even if that's so, some of the suggested combinations are rather arbitrary. Category:Fictional butlers can stand alone, as could Category:Fictional valets, as there are plenty of both - and they are not the same. I can't see any sense in combining chauffeurs and footmen. Category:Fictional chauffeurs and coachmen would make better sense, but is it really necessary to push them together? And if footmen are to be specified but not as a separate cat they would probably seem to go more naturally either with houseboys & maids or with household staff. But I'd really rather have separate cats for most if not all of these. Jsmith1000 (talk) 00:27, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose The first needs to be split: nanny (child carer) and governess (private teacher) are not the same. The rest are just about confusing the issue. Footmen are different from chuffeurs, though in small households they might to more than one job. It a person is both valet and coachman, he should have categories for both. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:46, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Category:GasTerra Flames

• Propose renaming Category:GasTerra Flames to Category:Donar (basketball club)

Nominator's rationale: Rename. The team isn't named GasTerra Flames anymore it is now officialy Donar! H-Hurry (talk) 19:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Category:Ante-Nicene Christian saints

See also: CfD Ante-Nicene Christian female saints, 27 August

• Propose renaming Category:Ante-Nicene Christian saints to Category:Ancient Christian saints
• Propose renaming Category:Ante-Nicene Christians to Category:Ancient Christians

Nominator's rationale: This is in order to close the gap with the next category Category:Christian saints of the Middle Ages‎ and Category:Christians of the Middle Ages. Ante-Nicene only goes to 325, while Ancient includes the 4th and 5th century as well and Middle Ages starts with the 6th century (at least it usually does so in by-century categories). Interestingly, the header of Category:Ante-Nicene Christian saints says: In some cases, saints from the time of the decline and final collapse of the Western Roman Empire in 476 may also appear. That seems like an extra reason for the proposed rename. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:44, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

• Question. Which is wrong? The name or the introduction? Vegaswikian (talk) 20:31, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
  • The naming is wrong, as two centuries (the 4th and 5th) belong to neither of seemingly consecutive periods. The introduction text tries to solve what the category name is lacking (by allowing to include 4th and 5th century articles after all, in contrast to the category name), also the actual categorization tries to solve what the name is lacking (by putting the 4th century in Ante-Nicene - that applies to female saints only - and by putting the 5th category in the Middle Ages, neither of which is quite appropriate), so the only good solution left is to rename. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Question Would the problem be solved by the creation of Category:Post-Nicene and Ante-Schism Christian saints? A bit long-winded I admit. It's just that a secular period-naming structure does not fit the events of Christianity too well. The defining events fall outside broad secular time constructs. Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

• The answer is yes, of course. At the same time I wonder if this distinction is really needed, since the saints and Christians categories neatly follow the secular periods starting with the Middle Ages. So why not follow the secular periods before the Middle Ages as well? I can see a point for history of Christianity to distinguish between before and after the edict of Milan in 313 (btw not so much for Nicene in 325), but for individual persons this is far less relevant. Also, on the side, I agree that this name is a bit long-winded; in the History of Christianity this has been solved by distinguishing Early and Late Ancient. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:35, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

• Rename. "Ante-Nicene" is pre-325, "ancient" is pre-476, and Medieval is post-476. So the current classification system yields an odd gap between 325 and 476. Church histories talk about "ante-Nicene Fathers," "Nicene Fathers," and "post-Nicene Fathers." But as far as I can tell, no one applies this terminology to saints. Clodhopper Deluxe (talk) 10:30, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Category:Birds of the United Kingdom

• Propose renaming Category:Birds of the United Kingdom to Category:Birds in the United Kingdom

Nominator's rationale: This rename is to make clearer that the category is for articles about birds in the UK (e.g. Ospreys in Britain), not for articles about birds whose range includes the UK (e.g. White-faced storm petrel). See related discussion Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_August_8#Category:Birds_of_Lithuania. Note: It might also make sense to rename this from UK to GB, but I suggest we leave that to a separate discussion. DexDor (talk) 06:04, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

• Comment Not sure that birds actually recognise this political boundary. Probably better to rename to GB, or possibly to Britsh Isles? Twiceuponatime (talk) 07:51, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

A rename from UK to GB or BI should consider the 3 subcats (which fit into a by-country category tree). Hence, IMO a separate CFD discussion would be better (trying to do 2 things at once is likely to result in a no-consensus result). DexDor (talk) 21:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

OK, in that case rename to Category:Birds in the United Kingdom. Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:23, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

• rename to Category:Birds in the United Kingdom, it is a topic category for the subject of birds, so for example contains articles such as Seabird Colony Register and Wild Birds Protection Act 1902. Tim! (talk) 16:35, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
• Commnet -- We have recently been eliminating nby country fauna categories. I do not see why my country should be an exception. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:48, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Please read the nomination of the August 8th CFD. DexDor (talk) 19:08, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment. Is that really clearer (for native English speakers)? If I had to guess I would say "Birds in the UK" equals birds observed in the UK, and "Birds of the UK" equals birds endemic to the UK. trespassers william (talk) 23:00, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia uncategorized templates

• Propose deleting Category:Wikipedia uncategorized templates - Template:Lc1
  
• Propose deleting Category:Uncategorized infobox templates
• Propose deleting Category:Uncategorized navigational boxes
• Propose deleting Category:Uncategorized userbox templates

Nominator's rationale: There is no instruction at Special:UncategorizedTemplates to use these categories and IMO it makes more sense to categorize templates directly in Category:Wikipedia templates or leave them so they show up at the special page. The subcats are described on the talk page as "pretty silly". I've checked these categories several times and found them all to be empty - that may be because someone continually empties them, but it's more likely that no-one places templates in them. Deleting these categories would be a (small) step in simplifying things. See related discussion Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_June_17#Category:Uncategorized_redirect_templates. DexDor (talk) 05:42, 28 August 2014 (UTC)