User talk:Timrollpickering/Archive 13

User:Timrollpickering

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Timrollpickering. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 10

→

This is an archive of past discussions on my talk page. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Ken Richards

Hi Timrollpickering, would you know whether Ken Richards attended Heol Gam Secondary Modern School, or Bridgend Grammar School for Boys back in the 1950s? Would you have any details on his death at the relatively you age of 37? Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 07:13, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Not sure - he's on the list of former pupils for the current school but it doesn't break it down into which pre merger component each went to. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt response. Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 07:26, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Proposed rename results in outright deletion?

Excellent outcome. </sarcasm> Next time you want to try and help, don't. Srobak (talk) 13:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Shopping malls in Wayne County

By renaming and deleting the above category, the info about the specific data is lost for Wayne County! I had created the category and linked it appropriately. This change should be undone!Jllm06 (talk) 18:02, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

CFDW

Re this. I don't think this is your fault (probably the error of the nominator), but you've told Cydebot to merge Category:Methodist church buildings established in the 19th century into Category:19th-century Lutheran church buildings. That's bad, and will require some manual fixings. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:20, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

It looks like User:Vegaswikian has nicely taken care of this. I imagine he noticed it because it was his nomination. Thanks, and keep up the nice work. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 07:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Renamed category

A pair of days ago you closed a request to rename the category "South American wars of independence" to "Spanish American wars of independence", for reasons explained at the rename request. However, it is needed to rename as well Category:Battles of the South American wars of independence and Category:People of South American wars of independence. My apologies if I had to list all categories at the top of the request, perhaps you did not see them because of that. Cambalachero (talk) 21:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Basically yes - the categories needed to be on the list. It's probably best to list the outstanding ones at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy under clause C2C - the convention set by the renaming. Timrollpickering (talk) 21:29, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Category:Redirects from pseudonym

Hello. User:Cydebot deleted Category:Redirects from pseudonym with the edit summary "Robot - Removing category Redirects from pseudonym per CFD at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 3." I don't oppose the deletion but it was never discussed in a CFD in the link provided. I skimmed over a few other days and couldn't find it there either. Do you know what went wrong? I brought it up at User talk:Cyde#Category:Redirects from pseudonym and User:Good Olfactory told me to bring it up with you. McLerristarr | Mclay1 05:14, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Housekeeping after category changes

Hi, is there a "how to" somewhere for admins about implementing CFD discussions? I would like to suggest checking "what links here" on deleted or renamed categories. Several times recently I have checked this and found navbox templates or portals that linked to superseded categories. I fixed these, but it would be good to make this a standard part of the procedure for CFDs. (Other XFDs would also be nice in due course!) - Fayenatic (talk) 18:46, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Administrator instructions is the main place. It may be best done by getting the bot to do it automatically but I'm not sure how easy that would be to set up. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks; I suspect that it would always need to be manual.

Another thing: I just noticed that you may have forgotten to list the de-categorised descendants here and here as you said you would here. - Fayenatic (talk) 19:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

It's listed on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working/Manual to be done by someone with access to good listifying tools. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Good, thanks; I thought there would be a reason.

I found that the Admin instructions already included the step that I suggested, but with vague hints about bots having been available; I have added hints on doing it manually. I don't want to get up anyone's noses about this, but is there somewhere that attention could be drawn to this for admins who usually do closure? perhaps that page is likely to be on their watchlist already. - Fayenatic (talk) 19:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 6#Category:Digimon by family

Because I didn't list them properly, I don't think the subcategories have been picked up for deletion by the bot. The following categories need to be filtered off pages and deleted:

I'd get the bot to do it myself, but I don't know how. Sorry to bug you. J Milburn (talk) 23:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

No worries, they've been added to the task page. Timrollpickering (talk) 00:16, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much. J Milburn (talk) 00:34, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article John McGeady, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Giant Snowman 13:14, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Category:Companies of China

Hi, IMHO the decision at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 8#Category:Companies of China was regrettable. Please would you paste a copy of the deleted category page into User:Fayenatic london/Sandbox so that I can review what hierarchy links were lost altogether? I may take it to DRV. The nomination and two subsequent supportive comments were made at a point when it was not correctly placed in a couple of hierarchies; only one editor commented in favour of deletion afterwards. - Fayenatic (talk) 23:18, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Copy pasted although it displays appallingly. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I've never used DRV before and see that I should first discuss the case with you as the closing admin, which I'm very happy to do. It seems to me that deletion would not have been the outcome if the following arguments had been marshalled:

The nominated category was only one of many descendants of category: China, and had closely-associated parents and children, and they should have been considered together rather than one in isolation. This was the first objection raised in the 2010 CFD.
Deletion has removed the child categories (Category:Defunct companies of China, Category:Companies of the People's Republic of China, Category:Companies of China by industry, Category:Categories named after companies of China) from their former grandparents (Category:Companies of Asia, Category:Economy of China, Category:Organizations based in China).
To maintain the hierarchy, and considering the majority arguments raised in the latest CFD, it would have been better to merge with the subordinate categories for PRC rather than just delete.
However, this was considered to be against WP:NPOV in the 2010 CFD.
Moreover, other parts of the China category tree include Taiwan as well as PRC, HK and Macau under China, e.g. Category:Death in China and Category:Drugs in China. This seems helpful to me. Category:China has top-level sub-cats for PRC and ROC.
Category:Companies of Taiwan has previously been added to and removed from Companies of China without discussion or explanation. WP:NC-CHINA does not seem to settle the issue.
It might therefore have been best to focus the CFD discussion on whether Taiwan categories should be included in China categories.

Would you willing to reinstate the deleted category, and add Companies of Taiwan into it? - Fayenatic (talk) 23:11, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I'd be reluctant to do so myself as the discussion itself went the way it did and the previous CFD reads to me as a rejection of merging the PRC categories into the "China" categories without saying anything about the fate of the latter categories. There's a bit of a problem with the whole China structure because the use of PRC and RC names is counter-intuitive to many and a DRV may be a way to get some clarity on this. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:26, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've started Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 July 17#Category:Companies of China - Fayenatic (talk) 16:01, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Former pupils of Howell's School Llandaff

Category:Former pupils of Howell's School Llandaff, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 20:14, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Old fooian and related category nominations

In looking at some of the latest comments, there is some rather odd timing that hints of WP:CANVASS. While the notices posted by User:Ephebi about these discussions are neutral, they appear to only be posted on user talk pages of those opposed to the change based on the opinions listed. While I realize that you have commented in some of these discussions this pass, given that you have been doing most of the closings, I wonder what wisdom you might have to offer on this. My current leaning is to close the lot as a tainted discussion. I'm also concerned since some of the responses are just being added to discussions solely on the topic and not really considering the merits of individual discussions. That further suggests a negative impact to the discussion in violation of WP:CANVASS. Please respond on my talk page and copy this request there if you like. That way if I need to ask other admins for opinions, the discussion will be in one place. Thanks. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:35, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

School alumni categories

Hi there; please stop adding school alumni categories to BLPs if you cannot provide a reference to substantiate it. Regards, Giant Snowman 13:42, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

They're added to the entries on the list on the school's article; if those in error then please remove the offending entries. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Alumni

Though your edit summaries say "cat" you seem to be on a mission against the word "alumni". Any reason for the purge? Bazj (talk) 13:58, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

It's to standardise the headers across the articles as quite a mixture have been used. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

A quick search on google suggests you're converting in the wrong direction...

"notable alumni" site:en.wikipedia.org - 17400 results
"notable former pupils" site:en.wikipedia.org - 572 results

Bazj (talk) 17:21, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

That takes no account of national variations and that in the UK "alumni" is predominantly used in the universities but its use in schools is very patchy and fiercely contested in places as shown by various CFDs over the years. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:27, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_July_16#Category:African_American_women

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_African_American_women indicated that the article should be turned in a category. I know you closed Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_July_16#Category:African_American_women, so I thought it would be the best idea to ask you to delete the page, as the first person.Curb Chain (talk) 06:42, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Deleted category: Irish people of Jewish Descent

I recently re-created the category Category:Irish people of Jewish descent. You'll notice the link is red, because it was delted as per you discussion here. However, as you may notice there are many categories with the formula 'X people of Jewish descent'. And while you may disagree with labeling living people, or misuse of categories, being of Jewish descent can only be true or false. I agree 'sloppy application' of the 'X Jews' categories are given, but that is because of people who identify themselves as being (or not being) Jewish. With Jewish descent however, you cannot dispute the fact that one of your anncestors may have been Jewish, in the same way if your anncestor was African. Whatever a person says about themselves, giving that person a 'x of jewish descent' cat is true - because its true. You get what I mean.

More to the point - my re-creation of the Irish people of Jewish descent (if you click the red link above), is actually different from the version that was deleted July 9th. My version has a properly structured cat links (following standard cats of 'X people of Jewish descent'), it links to the 'Irish people by ethnic or national origin' and 'people of jewish descent by nationality', both of which are container categories. You will also notice that the category is no longer empty, and in fact has Bob Geldof in it.

I believe that all the points I have made above, counteract all of the arguements used by yourself and others to delete the (not so well maintained version) originally. Please will you allow the category to reopen in the way which was created by me? Colt .55 (talk) 20:59, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Ps. You were only able to delete the category because it was empty. All of you arguements could apply to any of the 'X people of Jewish descent' but you wouldn't have got away with it, because they are too well maintained.

I am only the admin who closed the discussion as delete. Pasting the same extended comments on several people's talkpages is not helpful. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Category:Female accountants

I fail to see how this discussion shows a consensus to keep. I can see a 'no consensus' close, but not a keep. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:27, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I wonder what brought this category to Jimbo's attention! - Fayenatic (talk) 16:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_July_15#Category:African_American_women_in_politics

Can you close this discussion? Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 15#Category:African American women in politics I'm not sure what you would say the consensus is, but there has been an article made for this category at African American women in politics. --Henriettapussycat (talk) 23:03, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

So how long does a discussion have to be open before it's by admin? --Henriettapussycat (talk) 23:03, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Closing CfD's

It would be nice if the closing admin would try to give answers to questions posed in the CfD, especially when they are about proper CfD projecdure as mine at the end of the Florida Gators track and field cats merger was. I want to know how to start nominations to split and seem to be speaking into a vacuum.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:55, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Query

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 24 still lists one query unclosed. This is the Southern Sudan politicians one (or somesuch like that). Is that going to be either closed or relisted? CycloneGU (talk) 21:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Another admin should close it in due course; I can't as it started with a speedy nomination by myself. A few more days may help get some clear direction. Timrollpickering (talk) 21:11, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

You did? As in you moved it from the Speedy page to there? NEway, no problem, thanks. =) CycloneGU (talk) 22:27, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Why did you merge this category?--A wr (talk) 22:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 27#Some irregular Converts to Islam categories. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:55, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

BLUCK! It really started ro 0annoy me here with all that kind of "i'm more intelligent than thou" attitude thing! thanks anyway.--A wr (talk) 00:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Emptying the Stars category

In response to your comment on my deletion request, the only reason I emptied this category before nominating it is because this was a duplicate of an already-existing category, and I moved the pages to that one. -Dewelar (talk) 22:15, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Helped article in references using Reflinks

Hello Timrollpickering, Can you Filling in references using Reflinks in article Corbin Bleu see, The same article Miley Cyrus, Please help in the coordination of the article. --2.91.7.113 (talk) 03:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

And Corbin Bleu for article: Allowed if the article lacks reliable sources. See here in this version there are better sources article. and in this version there are no sources of YouTube, Amazon. Please help in the coordination of the article seem good. And add good sources. Thanks for the contributions. --2.89.89.178 (talk) 21:13, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Music theory categories

Hi I see you have just taken an interest in at least one of the cats — and you are an admin. Can you help me correct them? The name of the project is Wikipedia:WikiProject Music theory — theory with a small 't'. Unfortunately most of the cats have theory with a large 'T'. I wonder if we can make all of them consistent following the small 't'. Thanks. --Klein zach 13:40, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

List the categories on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy per the instructions there (and make sure to tag each one) - the criteria is CSA & C2C. They should be easy to fix after that. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:42, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I've done that. --Klein zach 15:05, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Notre Dame High School, Sheffield

Most of the Sheffield schools have had '(Sheffield)' changed to ', Sheffield' as a dab (which IMO looks better, as it is just what one would write) and there has been no opposition that I have noticed. I tried to do the same with Notre Dame High School (Sheffield) but Notre Dame High School, Sheffield is a redirect; so an admin is needed with magical tools. Occuli (talk) 10:05, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Moved. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:21, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Excellent. Occuli (talk) 11:14, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

The Category:Beyazit's sons in Ottoman interregnum has been deleted after a discussion. You’ve closed the discussion on the 13th. Everything is fine, except that the creator wasn’t invited to the discussion. I wish next time the creator will also participate in the discussion. Cheers Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 10:54, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Argentine history books

You have closed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 August 9#Category:History books about the Argentine Republic, but you made a mistake. The discussion was not just about that specific category, but an umbrella nomination of all the subcategories of "history books about Argentina" (with the exception of "History books about WWII", a mess that should not be deleted, but have its categorization scheme checked; which is a topic for another time and place). If you agree that there is consensus to upmerge them all as described, you should delete the other categories as well. Cambalachero (talk) 14:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

The other categories have been listed in the queue on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working/Manual as they have to be upmerged to multiple targets. This is a job that needs to be done manually by someone adept with the necessary tools. Usually this kind of task gets implemented within a day or two. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:52, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I was not aware of that Cambalachero (talk) 14:56, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion: nomination of various 'Former pupils' categories

Various categories, some of which you created, have been nominated for renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the categories' entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Occuli (talk) 15:22, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-admin closure

Hi Tim, as many of the leading lights have participated in the discussion, I would like to do a Non-Admin Closure of this Alumni CFD as "rename", but lack the ability to implement it. If it would help, I am willing to close it if you or another admin would follow it through. I always feel I'm too busy editing to get round to an RfA! - Fayenatic (talk) 12:56, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll implement this or any other non-admin closure that comes up - the protection on the working page is purely because in the past people have tried to bypass the discussion process altogether. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:59, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Here goes. - Fayenatic (talk) 13:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Here goes when? I have another one raring to go (and a host of 'cfd notify's to plaster in every conceivable place). Occuli (talk) 13:37, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Done at last -- I scanned some other discussions first. - Fayenatic (talk) 13:46, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes ... very good. Tell me when the rfa occurs. Occuli (talk) 13:48, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. It's "if" rather than "when", especially if people carry on being this helpful with doing what I can't! - Fayenatic (talk) 20:40, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Category class

Re: this edit {{album}} adds class=category automatically in this namespace. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:57, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah - the category being merged in used the other form and I assumed as the longer version it was more complete. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:43, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikiproject Connecticut

Hi Timrollpickering, I'm dropping a line just to ask... are you going to "fix" all 1300 Category-Class Connecticut articles, or just the school related ones? If you're going to do just the school ones, I'd rather they all stay the same if it's alright with you. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 21:46, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

The school alumni cats - I've been working through the tree to add them to both the Schools project and the relevant local project, using the standard template entries. On the Connecticut pages it's just generated the same effect hasn't it? Timrollpickering (talk) 21:54, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I tagged them all by hand. :-) I started without the importance & class flags waaaaaay back when I "revived" the CT project, and just did them that way for all of them (since they don't show up anyway). I don't care if you change them or not, I was just wondering how many you were going to do. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 22:03, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion?

Regarding these edits: [1], [2], [3], (and no doubt many others), you would save the time of vandalism patrollers if you had some sort of "standard" edit comment which explained what you are doing. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:42, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Rev del

~~Can you rev del this please, it's really not nice. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 12:25, 20 August 2011 (UTC)~~

Don't worry, it's been done. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 12:36, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Black Jews != African Diaspora

Hello... this instruction to the bot seemed a little ill-advised. Those two categories are not equivalent. You may want to look over those changes...—Chowbok ☠ 11:22, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

That was per the outcome of this discussion. You would have to ask for the issue to be reconsidered. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:36, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Rutabaga?

Would you have any interest in this important Rutabaga (please see the talk page) discussion? It seems to be going nowhere. It seems that you are interested in history and are a European, so perhaps your input would help? (Saw you at the milk article and thought you may be able to help.) Gandydancer (talk) 00:34, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Premature closure

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_August_8#Category:Female_pool_players needs to be relisted to gain a proper consensus, not closed. It only had !vote. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 18:09, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of past discussion on my talk page. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on my current talk page or the talk page for the article in question. No further edits should be made to this section.