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.
Rationale: Although both of these formulations are commonly used, the "apostrophe - s" variant gets three times as many G-hits. It also conforms with what seems to be the preferred formulation for these types of categories. Notified creator with {{
subst:cfd-notify}}Cgingold (
talk)
22:57, 3 May 2008 (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:Name - Round 2
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.
Delete - This newly created category is utterly and completely redundant with
Category:Names and should be Speedy Deleted. There is nothing that needs to be merged. (I had no idea a VW could move so fast!)
Cgingold (
talk)
22:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)reply
The speedy merge request will delete this sooner then the discussion here. So leaving that would be the fastest way to have this category deleted.
Vegaswikian (
talk)
22:56, 3 May 2008 (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:English debaters
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 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:Fictional quarantine zones
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 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:The Chronicles of Narnia creatures
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category has two articles, including a list of all the creatures in Narnia, and one other article of a fictional creature from European myth, so a ceatures of Narnia category is really not necessary anymore,
Judgesurreal777 (
talk)
21:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete - the list is already in an additional Narnia category,
Monopod (creature) does not belong in the category and I have
boldly redirected
Pavender to the list article, which contained all of the information already. Category is unnecessary.
Otto4711 (
talk)
21:30, 4 May 2008 (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:Name
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 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:Fathers rights activists
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.
Nominator's rationale:Rename. Rename for correct grammar, and consistent with other similar categories that correctly use the
apostrophe. —
MapsMan [
talk |
cont ] — 17:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
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:The Fast and the Furious films
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 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:American Pie films
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 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:An American Tail
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.
KeepWP:CLN states that "These methods [categories, lists, templates] should not be considered to be in conflict with each other. Rather, they are synergistic, each one complementing the others." Here we have a category grouping together 6 closely related articles, exactly what a category should be doing, to which the template should be added (in the spirit of complementary synergism).
-- roundhouse0 (
talk)
15:11, 5 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete. The article does an ample job for navigation and no case is made for this being an exception to precedent. Yes, six films is fine for a category, but that in and of itself is not a reason to have a category, just a reason to not delete as being too small.
Vegaswikian (
talk)
18:28, 9 May 2008 (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:Welsh Labour
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.
Nominator's rationale:Rename. Organisation is called either "Welsh Labour" or the "Wales Labour Party", but main article is at
Wales Labour Party. "Welsh Labour" could be ambiguous, or at least moreso than using the proposed name. "Welsh Labour Party politicians" sounds better to me — using "Welsh" as an adjective rather than "Wales" — but "Welsh Labour Party" is not one of the two names usually used. Notified creator with {{
subst:cfd-notify}}Good Ol’factory(talk)10:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Keep - I named the category Welsh Labour as that's the parties name. As an organisation its not called the Wales Labour Party, and if you look back through the main articles history, someone moved it to an anglicanised literature version which doesn't relate to its actual organisation name. The party is officially called Llafur Cymru which translates to English as Welsh Labour and their website address is welshlabour.org. Wiki precedent is to name organisations as they name themselves, so hence - Welsh Labour. (Note: for those who make their decisions based on Ghits, its 61,700 for Welsh Labour, and 5,310 for Wales labour Party). Rgds, --
Trident13 (
talk)
10:42, 6 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Very good arguments for renaming the article, but this is not one of the rare cases where using different names for article and category can be justified, at least in the case of the first nominated; I'm a bit softer on the second.
Johnbod (
talk)
03:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)reply
As I have explained, the article was renamed by an anglo-phile to an anglicanised version of the organisations actual registered name. The article should be renamed to match the organisations real name, not the category to match the fact someone can't think that not everything is English or British orientated. Rgds, --
Trident13 (
talk)
07:50, 7 May 2008 (UTC)reply
That's not what the category page says, and
Peter Hain is no more Welsh than my cat. In fact there is no distinct Wales Labour Party for members to join; it is just the Labour Party in Wales.
Johnbod (
talk)
02:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Can you tell me where its called The Labour Party in Wales? I assume using the logic of your cat, we should also rename the article and categories associated with the
Scottish Labour Party? (An article and categories named after the registered organisation) I assume you and your cat are getting this "logic" from the main English based Labour Party website, who because the English think everything is either English or British call it the Labour Party in Wales? Its registered and called Welsh Labour, and has a registered address in Cardiff - that's why the category was called Welsh Labour. The article needs renaming to the registered name of the organisation. Rgds, --
Trident13 (
talk)
07:50, 7 May 2008 (UTC)reply
I'm not saying it is called "The Labour Party in Wales". I suggest you read what I do say more carefully. This is not the place to sort out issues with the article.
Johnbod (
talk)
13:55, 7 May 2008 (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.
Georgia again
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.
That would be nice, but even abbreviation expansions aren't a speedy criteria right now unless it's an abbreviation for a country. Maybe that's what you meant.
Good Ol’factory(talk)03:27, 7 May 2008 (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:Middle-earth food and drink
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.
Comment - please see
here for my remarks supporting keeping or reorganising. In particular, these sort of categories are useful for editors to keep track of redirects and organise them by topic area, so if deletion is the result, I propose to move the category to be a subcategory of
Category:Middle-earth redirects (an administrative category), thus removing it from the view of readers. This takes one edit, as opposed to the bot removing the categories from all the redirects, so could whoever closes the debate please notify me of the result. Thanks.
Carcharoth (
talk)
07:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Keep An elegant method of categorising articles and in particular sections of articles. (I don't see that the reader is in any way disadvantaged by a variety of browsing possibilities.) The proportion of redirects seems immaterial - some may in future be fleshed out into articles.
-- roundhouse0 (
talk)
14:57, 4 May 2008 (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:Fictional professions
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.
Nominator's rationale: This is supposed to be a category about fictional professions, but is instead occupied by two articles about characters, not their professions. This category is therefore empty.
Judgesurreal777 (
talk)
03:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. There's no info about any profession, fictional or otherwise, in either of these articles. I suspect the creator may have confused superpowers with professions.
Cgingold (
talk)
01:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)reply
I should note that the category description needs to make it clear that the category is not for fictional military occupations, should any such articles exist.
Otto4711 (
talk)
21:23, 4 May 2008 (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:Back to the Future locations
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 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:Articles needing coordinates from November 2007
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 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.
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.
Rationale: Although both of these formulations are commonly used, the "apostrophe - s" variant gets three times as many G-hits. It also conforms with what seems to be the preferred formulation for these types of categories. Notified creator with {{
subst:cfd-notify}}Cgingold (
talk)
22:57, 3 May 2008 (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:Name - Round 2
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.
Delete - This newly created category is utterly and completely redundant with
Category:Names and should be Speedy Deleted. There is nothing that needs to be merged. (I had no idea a VW could move so fast!)
Cgingold (
talk)
22:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)reply
The speedy merge request will delete this sooner then the discussion here. So leaving that would be the fastest way to have this category deleted.
Vegaswikian (
talk)
22:56, 3 May 2008 (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:English debaters
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 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:Fictional quarantine zones
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 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:The Chronicles of Narnia creatures
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category has two articles, including a list of all the creatures in Narnia, and one other article of a fictional creature from European myth, so a ceatures of Narnia category is really not necessary anymore,
Judgesurreal777 (
talk)
21:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete - the list is already in an additional Narnia category,
Monopod (creature) does not belong in the category and I have
boldly redirected
Pavender to the list article, which contained all of the information already. Category is unnecessary.
Otto4711 (
talk)
21:30, 4 May 2008 (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:Name
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 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:Fathers rights activists
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.
Nominator's rationale:Rename. Rename for correct grammar, and consistent with other similar categories that correctly use the
apostrophe. —
MapsMan [
talk |
cont ] — 17:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
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:The Fast and the Furious films
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 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:American Pie films
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 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:An American Tail
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.
KeepWP:CLN states that "These methods [categories, lists, templates] should not be considered to be in conflict with each other. Rather, they are synergistic, each one complementing the others." Here we have a category grouping together 6 closely related articles, exactly what a category should be doing, to which the template should be added (in the spirit of complementary synergism).
-- roundhouse0 (
talk)
15:11, 5 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete. The article does an ample job for navigation and no case is made for this being an exception to precedent. Yes, six films is fine for a category, but that in and of itself is not a reason to have a category, just a reason to not delete as being too small.
Vegaswikian (
talk)
18:28, 9 May 2008 (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:Welsh Labour
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.
Nominator's rationale:Rename. Organisation is called either "Welsh Labour" or the "Wales Labour Party", but main article is at
Wales Labour Party. "Welsh Labour" could be ambiguous, or at least moreso than using the proposed name. "Welsh Labour Party politicians" sounds better to me — using "Welsh" as an adjective rather than "Wales" — but "Welsh Labour Party" is not one of the two names usually used. Notified creator with {{
subst:cfd-notify}}Good Ol’factory(talk)10:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Keep - I named the category Welsh Labour as that's the parties name. As an organisation its not called the Wales Labour Party, and if you look back through the main articles history, someone moved it to an anglicanised literature version which doesn't relate to its actual organisation name. The party is officially called Llafur Cymru which translates to English as Welsh Labour and their website address is welshlabour.org. Wiki precedent is to name organisations as they name themselves, so hence - Welsh Labour. (Note: for those who make their decisions based on Ghits, its 61,700 for Welsh Labour, and 5,310 for Wales labour Party). Rgds, --
Trident13 (
talk)
10:42, 6 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Very good arguments for renaming the article, but this is not one of the rare cases where using different names for article and category can be justified, at least in the case of the first nominated; I'm a bit softer on the second.
Johnbod (
talk)
03:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)reply
As I have explained, the article was renamed by an anglo-phile to an anglicanised version of the organisations actual registered name. The article should be renamed to match the organisations real name, not the category to match the fact someone can't think that not everything is English or British orientated. Rgds, --
Trident13 (
talk)
07:50, 7 May 2008 (UTC)reply
That's not what the category page says, and
Peter Hain is no more Welsh than my cat. In fact there is no distinct Wales Labour Party for members to join; it is just the Labour Party in Wales.
Johnbod (
talk)
02:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Can you tell me where its called The Labour Party in Wales? I assume using the logic of your cat, we should also rename the article and categories associated with the
Scottish Labour Party? (An article and categories named after the registered organisation) I assume you and your cat are getting this "logic" from the main English based Labour Party website, who because the English think everything is either English or British call it the Labour Party in Wales? Its registered and called Welsh Labour, and has a registered address in Cardiff - that's why the category was called Welsh Labour. The article needs renaming to the registered name of the organisation. Rgds, --
Trident13 (
talk)
07:50, 7 May 2008 (UTC)reply
I'm not saying it is called "The Labour Party in Wales". I suggest you read what I do say more carefully. This is not the place to sort out issues with the article.
Johnbod (
talk)
13:55, 7 May 2008 (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.
Georgia again
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.
That would be nice, but even abbreviation expansions aren't a speedy criteria right now unless it's an abbreviation for a country. Maybe that's what you meant.
Good Ol’factory(talk)03:27, 7 May 2008 (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:Middle-earth food and drink
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.
Comment - please see
here for my remarks supporting keeping or reorganising. In particular, these sort of categories are useful for editors to keep track of redirects and organise them by topic area, so if deletion is the result, I propose to move the category to be a subcategory of
Category:Middle-earth redirects (an administrative category), thus removing it from the view of readers. This takes one edit, as opposed to the bot removing the categories from all the redirects, so could whoever closes the debate please notify me of the result. Thanks.
Carcharoth (
talk)
07:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Keep An elegant method of categorising articles and in particular sections of articles. (I don't see that the reader is in any way disadvantaged by a variety of browsing possibilities.) The proportion of redirects seems immaterial - some may in future be fleshed out into articles.
-- roundhouse0 (
talk)
14:57, 4 May 2008 (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:Fictional professions
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.
Nominator's rationale: This is supposed to be a category about fictional professions, but is instead occupied by two articles about characters, not their professions. This category is therefore empty.
Judgesurreal777 (
talk)
03:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. There's no info about any profession, fictional or otherwise, in either of these articles. I suspect the creator may have confused superpowers with professions.
Cgingold (
talk)
01:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)reply
I should note that the category description needs to make it clear that the category is not for fictional military occupations, should any such articles exist.
Otto4711 (
talk)
21:23, 4 May 2008 (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:Back to the Future locations
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 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:Articles needing coordinates from November 2007
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 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.