Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 September 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gidonb (talk | contribs) at 13:26, 27 September 2011 (→Category:Maidstone: cat). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< September 12 September 14 >

September 13

Athlete-politicians by sport

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: self-close: it appears that the categories were speedily deleted as G5s. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:05, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Athlete-politicians by sport - Template:Lc1
Category:Political office-holders who played football in top division of nation - Template:Lc1
Category:Politicians — olympic wrestlers - Template:Lc1
Category:Politicians/mixed martial artists - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. I believe this level of subdivision takes the athlete-politicians category scheme too far. If we assume that categorizing someone as an "athlete-politician" is not overcategorization (and this is a debatable point), surely we don't want to take it one step further into possible overcategorization territory. (See also the related nomination below.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Category:Sportsmen-politicians The category has been nominated for deletion at least 2 times before — the arguments/persons in the previous discussions indicate that there is sufficient interest in the category. (But it might be nice if there was a personal user setting, so that a user can hide a category that one does not like to see on the screen. Perhaps it would ruin my mama's day (or mine) if one's eyes had to be bothered by reading category:porn actresses-turned-politicians.)--Arvein (talk) 08:43, 14 September 2011 (UTC) User was blocked as sockpuppet.[reply]
  • Comment: There must be a limit to everything. But no one has made a good case for where the sub-categorization must stop. In Iran, champion wrestlers get elected to political office. In Norway, I do not know about any wrestlers who became Norway-champions, and then were elected to political office; maybe there is one, maybe more. Yes, this in not only my wikipedia or Good Ol’factory's wikipedia. (Prediction: one day the category:athlete-politician will be obsolete, when wikipedia will revamp its search engine so that one can search category:athlete + category:politician. But until then I will have to deal with my sockpuppet investigation due to critical edits to Norway-related topics Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Sju_hav#14_September_2011.)--Arvein (talk) 08:25, 15 September 2011 (UTC) User was blocked as sockpuppet.[reply]
  • Delete This is the type of intersection that is supposed to be limited to those for whom both their athletics career and policical career are fully notable. This requires close scrutiny, and thus should not be unduly subdivided.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:44, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as CSD G5, also remember Category:Politician/wrestlers. Geschichte (talk) 19:17, 18 September 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.

Athlete-politicians

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 Fooian. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:12, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming
nominated categories
Nominator's rationale: Rename. There have been some vigorous no-consensus discussions over whether the "athlete-politicians" category tree should be kept or deleted: here and here. As long as the tree is going to exist by default, we should at least get things right.
(1) In the category tree, Category:Athletes is not used because of its ambiguity, but in most countries, "FOOian athletes" means FOOians who compete in athletics, ie, track and field and related sports: see subcategories of Category:Athletes by nationality. So for most countries we should not be using "athletes" to mean "sports competitors in general". "Sportsperson–politicians" therefore seems to be more correct than "athlete–politicians", since most of the individuals in this tree are not track and field athletes. I haven't suggested renaming the American category since "athlete-politicians" is the terminology that is generally used in the USA.
(2) Some of these use "FOOian ..." and some use "... from FOO". All should be consistent. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:56, 13 September 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:Maidstone

Propose renaming Category:Maidstone to Category:Maidstone (district)
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Current name is ambiguous. Is this for the borough or the district or the county town? Add to that the other uses on Maidstone (disambiguation)? I'll let those in the know decide if there is a better name then the one proposed. The links in the category imply that this is for either the district or the borough. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:48, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rotana

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 rename C2D. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Rotana to Category:Rotana Group
Nominator's rationale: Rename Rotana is ambiguous and in fact Rotana is a disambiguation page. The intended scope of the category is clearly Rotana Group. Pichpich (talk) 22:29, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As creator of the category, no objection. In fact Rotana Group is more accurate as a category werldwayd (talk) 22:40, 13 September 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:Novels set in Falkirk

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: Upmerge. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:11, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Novels set in Falkirk to Category:Novels set in Scotland
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge Falkirk is a very small town so there's no need for such fine-grained classification. Pichpich (talk) 22:26, 13 September 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:Electoral divisions in the United Kingdom

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:11, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Electoral divisions in the United Kingdom to Category:Constituencies in the United Kingdom
Nominator's rationale: Rename. There is no overwhelming consistency to the subcategories of Category:Constituencies and Category:Constituencies by country but Electoral divisions seems to have only be used for the UK and Singapore categories. The rest seem to be divided between constituencies, electoral districts and electorates. I think Constituencies would be the best choice for the UK because all of its subcategories follow the form Category:United Kingdom Parliamentary constituencies, Category:Scottish Parliamentary constituencies etc. Tim! (talk) 20:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment When I created this category, I deliberately chose not to use "constituencies" because local government electoral divisions are not called that; "electoral divisions" was intended to encompass both "parliamentary constituencies" and "council wards". But there currently seems to be only one article about wards, so I guess "constituencies" is a good enough cover term. jnestorius(talk) 10:16, 14 September 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:Film soundtrack record labels

Category:Film soundtrack record labels - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Since most major record labels will release soundtracks along with albums by their signed artists, I don't see how categorizing them as a "film soundtrack record label" is defining to the label. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 17:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think it was originaly created exclusivly for record labels that only released soundtracks. Lugnuts (talk) 16:35, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include heading in category that makes the only-soundtracks issue explicit. Of course this may or may not help since most people never check category headings and some go balistic on you when you try to enforce them.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:49, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Nearly every major label releases film soundtracks, and that's what this category is filled with. There are very few soundtrack-only labels, and I don't see a need for a category exclusive to such things.--Mike Selinker (talk) 23:02, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Goobi

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Goobi - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete The category is named after a piece of software but there's no reason to think that it will ever contain any article other than Goobi. Pichpich (talk) 12:37, 13 September 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:Isulan

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Isulan - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Only one member; I'm not sure what else could be added. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:21, 13 September 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:Scrubs: Interns episodes

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Scrubs: Interns episodes - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Will only ever contain the main article. Upmerge and delete. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Since Scrubs: Interns is not an episode of the series, it doesn't belong in Category:Scrubs episodes, and it's already in Category:Scrubs (TV series), so this should just be deleted. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 17:35, 13 September 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.

American architects of FOOian descent

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 merge C2C. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:05, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:American architects of Armenian descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of Armenian descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of Finnish descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of Finnish descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of Luxembourgian descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of Luxembourgian descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of Polish descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of Polish descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of Romanian descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of Romanian descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of Ukrainian descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of Ukrainian descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of English descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of English descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of French descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of French descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of Irish descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of Irish descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of German descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of German descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of Italian descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of Italian descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of Russian descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of Russian descent
Propose merging Category:American architects of Asian descent to Category:American architects and Category:American people of Asian descent
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. This is a follow up from this discussion, where there was general agreement that these types of categories for architects should be upmerged. These are the categories that weren't formally nominated with the previous nomination. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:32, 13 September 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.

Ambassadors of Colombia

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 rename C2C/C2D. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:03, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming
nominated categories
Nominator's rationale: Rename. This is a bit of a test nomination to see if this general pattern could be developed for most of the ambassadors categories. I can think of three reasons to prefer the proposed format:
(1) Accuracy. Technically, one does not have to be a FOOian national to be an ambassador of FOO. A Venezuelan national could be selected to act as an ambassador of Colombia. This is particularly relevant in the history of some countries prior to the 20th century, where they commonly employed non-nationals as ambassadors.
(2) Matching to category format. In each case, the parent categories are Category:Ambassadors of Colombia and Category:Ambassadors to FOO. This format can be reflected in the subcategories in this way.
(3) Matching to articles. The majority of the articles are named this way, as with Ambassador of Colombia to Venezuela, Ambassador of Colombia to Belgium, Ambassador of Colombia to the United Kingdom, Ambassador of Colombia to the United States, etc.
A few years ago, this format was consistently applied to the subcategories of Category:Ambassadors of Russia via CFD, and there was some discussion of it being tested out in CFD for other countries, but it never did happen. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:42, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just a quick comment on (1). Maybe it's just me but when I read "Colombian ambassador", I understand that this means "ambassador of Colombia" and not "ambassador who happens to be Colombian". Arguments (2) and (3) are more compelling. Pichpich (talk) 12:52, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • That is very true, and I agree—but I think you will find cases where users have removed such categories from articles, arguing that the person in question was "not a FOOian citizen". So although you can get away with it, the change is partly to avoid such confusion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename – "Colombian ambassador" is ambiguous: one could have a Colombian who was the ambassador of Venezuela to Brazil. And arguments (2) and (3) are also compelling. Occuli (talk) 12:59, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename - First of all I am the one who has created like 80% of those categories, and from the begginig I felt weird about them, but because the categories that were already there did follow the "Category:Colombian ambassador to" format I just went with it, it wasnt until I had created the "Category:Colombian ambassadors to Russia" and it was subsequently renamed "Category:Ambassadors of Colombia to Russia" that I realized that another format would work better, but I didnt want to go edit each and every one of those pages and reformat them myself when there are other methods (like this) to do so. One thing though, I really would like this to become the general pattern for ambassador categories but I couldnt help but notice this then and now that in the already generalized Category:Ambassadors to Russia page, the only category that, how shall I say this, gets "special" exclusion or treatment is the "Category:United States ambassadors to Russia, which just goes against the rest of categories. mijotoba (talk) 17:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename – makes sense. Agathoclea (talk) 19:31, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename, with caveat - be aware that for some countries, using the demonym will be problematic (Dominica/Dom. Rep; DRCongo/RoCongo; PRChina/RoChina). Grutness...wha? 01:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question/comment/suggestion Should we leave category redirects behind? My hunch is that some of the Fooian ambassadors category will be mistakenly recreated. Pichpich (talk) 14:01, 14 September 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_September_13&oldid=452691611"