Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< November 15 November 17 >

November 16

Subcategories of Category:River class frigates

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:
-- Xdamr talk 22:42, 22 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming
Category:Australian River class frigates to Category:River class frigates of the Royal Australian Navy
Category:Canadian River class frigates to Category:River class frigates of the Royal Canadian Navy
Nominator's rationale: Rename The proposed category names more accurately reflect the nature of the categories. The proposed naming style mirrors the style in use for other multi-navy ship classes, like Category:Flower class corvettes (see 5 June 2009 CfD). As it is currently, the Canadian category is especially problematic since there were (a) ships that were built in Canada that didn't serve in the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN), (b) ships that served in the RCN but were built in the UK, and (c) ships that were both built in Canada and served in the RCN. — Bellhalla ( talk) 23:28, 16 November 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.

Category:Traditional/folk music world-wide

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. -- Xdamr talk 19:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Traditional/folk music world-wide ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete or rename. We shouldn't have a slash in a category name like this, and this category seems to be better covered by other categories. If kept, give a better name. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Rename or Merge: Do not delete -- This is an attempt to provide a category for folk music by nationality, but on a wider basis than a purely natioanl one. We do not usually categorise by continent, but the articles are mostly lists on a wider basis than single countries. I see two possibilities: merge with Category:Folk music by nationality (currently its subcategory) or move subcategories to Category:Folk music, and place the articles in a new Category:Lists of folk music traditions. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Give it a better name. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 06:48, 9 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • I admire people trying to do good things on Wikipedia, but this name is awkward. Debresser ( talk) 17:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • I think that if deletion is on the table, notification should be given on the talk page of all categories and pages that are in this category. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 12:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Seems redundant to Category:Folk music. "World wide" seems to be redundant. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 12:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • KEEP I am responsible for the category and its name: I apologise for its evident unweildiness and for failing to complete a daunting task to date. Check my record: I have re-categorised and edited hundreds of music pages. There's a reason for the name; categorisation has been made difficult by different use of different terms by different editors: there is controversy and no consensus across several related fields (even including the very meaning of the words "genre" and "style") that has so far remained unresolved and made clear categorisation impossible to achieve. In the present context there is considerable confusion between the categories/genres "world music", "traditional music", "indigenous music" and "folk music". The awkward name of the category is my attempt to achieve better linking between articles so categorised, and it still seems to me the only immediate way to make progress in this necessary aim. Please do not delete or rename in the absence of a consensus over a better way to achieve it. Thanks. Redheylin ( talk) 01:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf ( talk) 23:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • delete and start over. The name is a crying shame, and the contents aren't much better. If there is no consensus across fields to use common terms to name these different types of music, then we shouldn't be trying to group them together in one category. We should be using {{ CatRel}} to link the various categories, not creating an artificial super-category. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:19, 18 November 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.

Category:Government in Leeds

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 Category:Government in Leeds to Category:Local government in Leeds. -- Xdamr talk 19:25, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Government in Leeds to Category:Politics in Leeds
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Standardise with parent Category:Politics of West Yorkshire and others. MRSC ( talk) 08:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC) reply
I stumbled on this renaming proposal whilst sorting out the politics and govt categories for Yorkshire, having already created a Category:Politics of Leeds, and partially depopulated the nominated category. I wouldn't have proceeded had I spotted the CFR underway, but what I have done is to create the appropriate Politics of X categories, and moved out of the Government of X categories the article which don't relate to local government.
To avoid further confusion, there may be a case for renaming the subcats of Category:Local government in England to "local government" rather than just "government", but if so I suggest that this should be done as a group nomination rather than an ad-hoc basis. There are squillions of other similar categories such as Category:Government in Warrington, Category:Government in Bournemouth, Category:Government in Oldham, Category:Government in Bury, Category:Government in Wigan, Category:Government in Dorchester, Category:Government in Weymouth, Category:Government in Pendle etc ... all of which deal solely with local govt, all of which are about local rather than national govt, and should be named accordingly. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 22:24, 5 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf ( talk) 22:55, 16 November 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.

Category:Low-carbon transport

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: Merge into both parent categories. The category can be recreated if and when there is some clear definition of what it should contain that does not overlap an existing category. Note that the category only contained one sub category. The sole article was included in that category. So this is also a case of OCAT. Vegaswikian ( talk) 23:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Suggest merging Category:Low-carbon transport to Category:Electric vehicles
Nominator's rationale: Downmerge. So far, there is no description of the category nor any examples not from the targetted subcategory. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC) reply
I would have supported deletion but held out in case a subject matter expert could cite some sort of international standard, comparable to Category:LEED certified buildings. Of course, where I live, almost all electricity is coal-fired, so electric vehicles do not in fact contribute to lowering carbon emissions.- choster 22:43, 30 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf ( talk) 22:50, 16 November 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.

Category:Locomotives of Foo

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:
Full list of changes...
-- Xdamr talk 19:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Locomotives of the United States to Category:American locomotives
Category:Locomotives of France to Category:French locomotives
Category:Locomotives of South Africa to Category:South African locomotives
Category:Locomotives of Turkey to Category:Turkish locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the form used for the other categories in Category:Locomotives by country. Vegaswikian ( talk) 00:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose rename the others instead to Locomotives of Foo. 76.66.201.240 ( talk) 03:56, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose If the category is about 'locomotives' then that should be the first term e.g. Locomotives of Foo. Makes searching much easier if your interest is 'locomotives'. Twiceuponatime ( talk) 09:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose — for several reasons (1) WP:NCCAT suggests that in ‘by country’ categories, it should be “Locomotives of Foo” rather than “Fooian Locomotives”; (2) It is “Locomotives of Foo” on Commons, so not having to remember two different forms is an aid to users; (3) Avoiding the adjectival form of country names is an aid to users for whom English is a foreign language. Iain Bell ( talk) 10:54, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Therefore I propose renaming all Fooian locomotives to Locomotives of Foo in the Category:Locomotives by country tree. Iain Bell ( talk) 11:19, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
EDIT: For the record, the 113 categories affected have all been tagged and are:
By the way, my spell checker doesn't like “Argentinian”; it prefers “Argentinean”. Iain Bell ( talk) 16:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Actually, I now realise it says that subcats of Category:Rail transport by country should be named "... in Foo". I'm not sure whether we should take that to mean just the immediate subcats or extend it to sub-sub-cats as well - anyone have any strong opinion on "on" vs. "in"? Either way I think the vast number of "noun preposition Foo" forms listed at WP:NCCAT means we should follow suit unless there's a good reason not to. Olaf Davis ( talk) 21:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose change to US category. "American" in WP refers to North and South America, NOT to US, for which the present title (or with phrases reversed) is correct. Neutral on rest. Peterkingiron ( talk) 22:19, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Support Iain Bell's idea. Put the what that is being categorized before the how they are being categorized. Plus it avoids adjectival forms, which can cause confusion. I also believe Olaf Davis's interpretation is correct, that it should be Locomotives in Foo, as locomotives are the sort of durable good that can, and often are, imported and not necessarily domestically made, which is implied by the use of "of". oknazevad ( talk) 23:04, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Rename all per rationale explained in two of yesterdays nominations. Basically the arguments are that 1. This is the accepted form for this parent category 2. We use "American" for all category names that use the adjective to mean US, and this nomination is not the right forum to change that. Post instead on Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion for such global proposals. In the mean time, Vegaswikian is right. Debresser ( talk) 01:15, 25 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Which bit of Vegaswikian's comment are you agreeing with? "tag the other categories" has already been done; "close this nomination as withdrawn" seems unnecessary since they've been added here - or are you saying we should close and reopen with the newly added categories?. "If the others are not nominated, then this should be renamed for constancy" - the others have been nominated, so this seems somewhat moot... Olaf Davis ( talk) 20:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf ( talk) 22:44, 16 November 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.

Category:Haunted places in Britain

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 Category:Haunted places in Britain to Category:Reportedly haunted places in the United Kingdom. No consensus for change to 'Paranormal', though broad agreement on 'United Kingdom'. Renamed to match parent article, List of reportedly haunted locations, and avoid outrageously POV/OR concerns over whether there really are such things as wee ghosties and things that go bump in the night... -- Xdamr talk 19:19, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Haunted places in Britain to Category:Paranormal places in the United Kingdom
Nominator's rationale: Rename. (1) Suggest changing "haunted" to "paranormal" to match parent category Category:Paranormal places. "Haunted" is a bit more definite-sounding (and thus POV) than "paranormal". "Haunted" suggests a knowledge of the reason the place is paranormal. (2) Suggest making this a country category ("United Kingdom") rather than an island one ("Britain", meaning "Great Britain", I assume). Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:11, 16 November 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.

Category:Name and title maintenance templates

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 Category:Name and title maintenance templates to Category:Wikipedia page name maintenance templates. -- Xdamr talk 19:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Name and title maintenance templates to Category:to be determined by consensus
Nominator's rationale: "Name and title" is completely redundant. That's like saying "cats and felines". My initial proposal is Category:Page name maintenance templates, but consensus might prefer "title" over "name" or want to prefix it, as many categories do, to make it clear that it's a WP self-ref: Category:Wikipedia page name maintenance templates. We might also want to just drop the word "maintenance". I really don't care, I just want to get rid of the silly redundancy. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont] ‹(-¿-)› 19:59, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
That one is taken, incorrectly if you ask me, so make that Category:Title related templates. Debresser ( talk) 14:04, 19 November 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.

D-Block

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 all per nom. -- Xdamr talk 19:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: To expand and match parent article, D-Block Records. — ξ xplicit 07:37, 16 November 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.

Category:IDM musicians

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 Category:IDM musicians to Category:Intelligent dance music musicians. -- Xdamr talk 19:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:IDM musicians to Category:Intelligent dance musicians
Nominator's rationale: To expand and match parent article is intelligent dance music, as IDM is ambiguous. — ξ xplicit 07:22, 16 November 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.

Brazilian jazz (genre) and Cuban jazz (genre)

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: withdrawn. I totally misunderstood the categories. That's what I get for being human. — ξ xplicit 21:51, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose merging:
Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: Merge the first group as obvious duplicates. Renaming the second group to remove unnecessary disambiguation from categories. The parent article and category, jazz and Category:Jazz, don't contain it, so neither should its subcategories. — ξ xplicit 06:53, 16 November 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.

Category:Unknown Intensity

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. — ξ xplicit 01:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Unknown Intensity to Category:Tropical cyclones of unknown intensity
Nominator's rationale: Rename and move to talk page. Name needs to be clarified. I also suggest that it become an administrative category and be moved to the talk page of the article, similar to how Category:Date of birth unknown and other similar "unknown" categories are treated. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Support Renaming but i would oppose it becoming an admistrative category as the WPTC are now categorising their articles by RSMC intensity and there are some Cyclones where there is not an RSMC intensity due to their being no best track available. Jason Rees ( talk) 17:28, 16 November 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.

Category:Old School hip hop artists

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. -- Xdamr talk 19:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Old School hip hop artists ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Equivalent to this discussion, though this category is much older. There's no clear inclusion criteria for this category. The description reads: "Rap/Hip-hop Artists who were popular during the Old school hip hop time period about 1979-1984." Popular to what extent? What if they weren't popular, would they not be considered old school? To recycle concerns brought in the last discussion, would rappers who continued their career past the old school hip hop era be exempt from this category? What about those who make old school hip hop past that era, would they not fall into this inclusion criteria either? Unclear, no definitive inclusion criteria, delete. — ξ xplicit 06:34, 16 November 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.

Alt-country

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 all. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: To clarify and match parent article, alternative country. — ξ xplicit 06:16, 16 November 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.

Category:The Mester's Animation

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. — ξ xplicit 01:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:The Mester's Animation ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Only entries are Category:Movies made by The Mester's Animation and Category:Video Games made by The Mester's Animation (cf below) as well as some userspace pages. ... discospinster talk 02:49, 16 November 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.

Category:Movies made by The Mester's Animation

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Movies made by The Mester's Animation ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Only entry is Category:Space Story Trilogy (cf below). ... discospinster talk 02:46, 16 November 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.

Category:Space Story Trilogy

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Space Story Trilogy ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Four entries that are all in userspace. ... discospinster talk 02:42, 16 November 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.

Category:Video Games made by The Mester's Animation

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Video Games made by The Mester's Animation ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. There's only one article and it's in userspace. ... discospinster talk 02:37, 16 November 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.

Category:Unicorporated Communities in the U.S.

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 per G6, empty, obvious typo, etc. Bencherlite Talk 16:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Unicorporated Communities in the U.S. ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. The category was being used to contain all unincorporated communities in the United States, but we already have state-specific categories for that. It's also misspelled and a duplicate of Category:Unincorporated communities in the United States. TheCatalyst31 Reaction• Creation 01:15, 16 November 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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_November_16&oldid=1144514060"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< November 15 November 17 >

November 16

Subcategories of Category:River class frigates

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:
-- Xdamr talk 22:42, 22 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming
Category:Australian River class frigates to Category:River class frigates of the Royal Australian Navy
Category:Canadian River class frigates to Category:River class frigates of the Royal Canadian Navy
Nominator's rationale: Rename The proposed category names more accurately reflect the nature of the categories. The proposed naming style mirrors the style in use for other multi-navy ship classes, like Category:Flower class corvettes (see 5 June 2009 CfD). As it is currently, the Canadian category is especially problematic since there were (a) ships that were built in Canada that didn't serve in the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN), (b) ships that served in the RCN but were built in the UK, and (c) ships that were both built in Canada and served in the RCN. — Bellhalla ( talk) 23:28, 16 November 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.

Category:Traditional/folk music world-wide

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. -- Xdamr talk 19:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Traditional/folk music world-wide ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete or rename. We shouldn't have a slash in a category name like this, and this category seems to be better covered by other categories. If kept, give a better name. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Rename or Merge: Do not delete -- This is an attempt to provide a category for folk music by nationality, but on a wider basis than a purely natioanl one. We do not usually categorise by continent, but the articles are mostly lists on a wider basis than single countries. I see two possibilities: merge with Category:Folk music by nationality (currently its subcategory) or move subcategories to Category:Folk music, and place the articles in a new Category:Lists of folk music traditions. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Give it a better name. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 06:48, 9 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • I admire people trying to do good things on Wikipedia, but this name is awkward. Debresser ( talk) 17:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • I think that if deletion is on the table, notification should be given on the talk page of all categories and pages that are in this category. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 12:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Seems redundant to Category:Folk music. "World wide" seems to be redundant. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 12:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • KEEP I am responsible for the category and its name: I apologise for its evident unweildiness and for failing to complete a daunting task to date. Check my record: I have re-categorised and edited hundreds of music pages. There's a reason for the name; categorisation has been made difficult by different use of different terms by different editors: there is controversy and no consensus across several related fields (even including the very meaning of the words "genre" and "style") that has so far remained unresolved and made clear categorisation impossible to achieve. In the present context there is considerable confusion between the categories/genres "world music", "traditional music", "indigenous music" and "folk music". The awkward name of the category is my attempt to achieve better linking between articles so categorised, and it still seems to me the only immediate way to make progress in this necessary aim. Please do not delete or rename in the absence of a consensus over a better way to achieve it. Thanks. Redheylin ( talk) 01:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf ( talk) 23:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
  • delete and start over. The name is a crying shame, and the contents aren't much better. If there is no consensus across fields to use common terms to name these different types of music, then we shouldn't be trying to group them together in one category. We should be using {{ CatRel}} to link the various categories, not creating an artificial super-category. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:19, 18 November 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.

Category:Government in Leeds

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 Category:Government in Leeds to Category:Local government in Leeds. -- Xdamr talk 19:25, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Government in Leeds to Category:Politics in Leeds
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Standardise with parent Category:Politics of West Yorkshire and others. MRSC ( talk) 08:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC) reply
I stumbled on this renaming proposal whilst sorting out the politics and govt categories for Yorkshire, having already created a Category:Politics of Leeds, and partially depopulated the nominated category. I wouldn't have proceeded had I spotted the CFR underway, but what I have done is to create the appropriate Politics of X categories, and moved out of the Government of X categories the article which don't relate to local government.
To avoid further confusion, there may be a case for renaming the subcats of Category:Local government in England to "local government" rather than just "government", but if so I suggest that this should be done as a group nomination rather than an ad-hoc basis. There are squillions of other similar categories such as Category:Government in Warrington, Category:Government in Bournemouth, Category:Government in Oldham, Category:Government in Bury, Category:Government in Wigan, Category:Government in Dorchester, Category:Government in Weymouth, Category:Government in Pendle etc ... all of which deal solely with local govt, all of which are about local rather than national govt, and should be named accordingly. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 22:24, 5 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf ( talk) 22:55, 16 November 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.

Category:Low-carbon transport

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: Merge into both parent categories. The category can be recreated if and when there is some clear definition of what it should contain that does not overlap an existing category. Note that the category only contained one sub category. The sole article was included in that category. So this is also a case of OCAT. Vegaswikian ( talk) 23:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Suggest merging Category:Low-carbon transport to Category:Electric vehicles
Nominator's rationale: Downmerge. So far, there is no description of the category nor any examples not from the targetted subcategory. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC) reply
I would have supported deletion but held out in case a subject matter expert could cite some sort of international standard, comparable to Category:LEED certified buildings. Of course, where I live, almost all electricity is coal-fired, so electric vehicles do not in fact contribute to lowering carbon emissions.- choster 22:43, 30 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf ( talk) 22:50, 16 November 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.

Category:Locomotives of Foo

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:
Full list of changes...
-- Xdamr talk 19:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Locomotives of the United States to Category:American locomotives
Category:Locomotives of France to Category:French locomotives
Category:Locomotives of South Africa to Category:South African locomotives
Category:Locomotives of Turkey to Category:Turkish locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the form used for the other categories in Category:Locomotives by country. Vegaswikian ( talk) 00:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose rename the others instead to Locomotives of Foo. 76.66.201.240 ( talk) 03:56, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose If the category is about 'locomotives' then that should be the first term e.g. Locomotives of Foo. Makes searching much easier if your interest is 'locomotives'. Twiceuponatime ( talk) 09:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose — for several reasons (1) WP:NCCAT suggests that in ‘by country’ categories, it should be “Locomotives of Foo” rather than “Fooian Locomotives”; (2) It is “Locomotives of Foo” on Commons, so not having to remember two different forms is an aid to users; (3) Avoiding the adjectival form of country names is an aid to users for whom English is a foreign language. Iain Bell ( talk) 10:54, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Therefore I propose renaming all Fooian locomotives to Locomotives of Foo in the Category:Locomotives by country tree. Iain Bell ( talk) 11:19, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
EDIT: For the record, the 113 categories affected have all been tagged and are:
By the way, my spell checker doesn't like “Argentinian”; it prefers “Argentinean”. Iain Bell ( talk) 16:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Actually, I now realise it says that subcats of Category:Rail transport by country should be named "... in Foo". I'm not sure whether we should take that to mean just the immediate subcats or extend it to sub-sub-cats as well - anyone have any strong opinion on "on" vs. "in"? Either way I think the vast number of "noun preposition Foo" forms listed at WP:NCCAT means we should follow suit unless there's a good reason not to. Olaf Davis ( talk) 21:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose change to US category. "American" in WP refers to North and South America, NOT to US, for which the present title (or with phrases reversed) is correct. Neutral on rest. Peterkingiron ( talk) 22:19, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Support Iain Bell's idea. Put the what that is being categorized before the how they are being categorized. Plus it avoids adjectival forms, which can cause confusion. I also believe Olaf Davis's interpretation is correct, that it should be Locomotives in Foo, as locomotives are the sort of durable good that can, and often are, imported and not necessarily domestically made, which is implied by the use of "of". oknazevad ( talk) 23:04, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Rename all per rationale explained in two of yesterdays nominations. Basically the arguments are that 1. This is the accepted form for this parent category 2. We use "American" for all category names that use the adjective to mean US, and this nomination is not the right forum to change that. Post instead on Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion for such global proposals. In the mean time, Vegaswikian is right. Debresser ( talk) 01:15, 25 October 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Which bit of Vegaswikian's comment are you agreeing with? "tag the other categories" has already been done; "close this nomination as withdrawn" seems unnecessary since they've been added here - or are you saying we should close and reopen with the newly added categories?. "If the others are not nominated, then this should be renamed for constancy" - the others have been nominated, so this seems somewhat moot... Olaf Davis ( talk) 20:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf ( talk) 22:44, 16 November 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.

Category:Haunted places in Britain

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 Category:Haunted places in Britain to Category:Reportedly haunted places in the United Kingdom. No consensus for change to 'Paranormal', though broad agreement on 'United Kingdom'. Renamed to match parent article, List of reportedly haunted locations, and avoid outrageously POV/OR concerns over whether there really are such things as wee ghosties and things that go bump in the night... -- Xdamr talk 19:19, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Haunted places in Britain to Category:Paranormal places in the United Kingdom
Nominator's rationale: Rename. (1) Suggest changing "haunted" to "paranormal" to match parent category Category:Paranormal places. "Haunted" is a bit more definite-sounding (and thus POV) than "paranormal". "Haunted" suggests a knowledge of the reason the place is paranormal. (2) Suggest making this a country category ("United Kingdom") rather than an island one ("Britain", meaning "Great Britain", I assume). Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:11, 16 November 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.

Category:Name and title maintenance templates

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 Category:Name and title maintenance templates to Category:Wikipedia page name maintenance templates. -- Xdamr talk 19:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Name and title maintenance templates to Category:to be determined by consensus
Nominator's rationale: "Name and title" is completely redundant. That's like saying "cats and felines". My initial proposal is Category:Page name maintenance templates, but consensus might prefer "title" over "name" or want to prefix it, as many categories do, to make it clear that it's a WP self-ref: Category:Wikipedia page name maintenance templates. We might also want to just drop the word "maintenance". I really don't care, I just want to get rid of the silly redundancy. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont] ‹(-¿-)› 19:59, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
That one is taken, incorrectly if you ask me, so make that Category:Title related templates. Debresser ( talk) 14:04, 19 November 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.

D-Block

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 all per nom. -- Xdamr talk 19:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: To expand and match parent article, D-Block Records. — ξ xplicit 07:37, 16 November 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.

Category:IDM musicians

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 Category:IDM musicians to Category:Intelligent dance music musicians. -- Xdamr talk 19:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:IDM musicians to Category:Intelligent dance musicians
Nominator's rationale: To expand and match parent article is intelligent dance music, as IDM is ambiguous. — ξ xplicit 07:22, 16 November 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.

Brazilian jazz (genre) and Cuban jazz (genre)

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: withdrawn. I totally misunderstood the categories. That's what I get for being human. — ξ xplicit 21:51, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose merging:
Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: Merge the first group as obvious duplicates. Renaming the second group to remove unnecessary disambiguation from categories. The parent article and category, jazz and Category:Jazz, don't contain it, so neither should its subcategories. — ξ xplicit 06:53, 16 November 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.

Category:Unknown Intensity

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. — ξ xplicit 01:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Unknown Intensity to Category:Tropical cyclones of unknown intensity
Nominator's rationale: Rename and move to talk page. Name needs to be clarified. I also suggest that it become an administrative category and be moved to the talk page of the article, similar to how Category:Date of birth unknown and other similar "unknown" categories are treated. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Support Renaming but i would oppose it becoming an admistrative category as the WPTC are now categorising their articles by RSMC intensity and there are some Cyclones where there is not an RSMC intensity due to their being no best track available. Jason Rees ( talk) 17:28, 16 November 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.

Category:Old School hip hop artists

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. -- Xdamr talk 19:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Old School hip hop artists ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Equivalent to this discussion, though this category is much older. There's no clear inclusion criteria for this category. The description reads: "Rap/Hip-hop Artists who were popular during the Old school hip hop time period about 1979-1984." Popular to what extent? What if they weren't popular, would they not be considered old school? To recycle concerns brought in the last discussion, would rappers who continued their career past the old school hip hop era be exempt from this category? What about those who make old school hip hop past that era, would they not fall into this inclusion criteria either? Unclear, no definitive inclusion criteria, delete. — ξ xplicit 06:34, 16 November 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.

Alt-country

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 all. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: To clarify and match parent article, alternative country. — ξ xplicit 06:16, 16 November 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.

Category:The Mester's Animation

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. — ξ xplicit 01:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:The Mester's Animation ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Only entries are Category:Movies made by The Mester's Animation and Category:Video Games made by The Mester's Animation (cf below) as well as some userspace pages. ... discospinster talk 02:49, 16 November 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.

Category:Movies made by The Mester's Animation

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Movies made by The Mester's Animation ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Only entry is Category:Space Story Trilogy (cf below). ... discospinster talk 02:46, 16 November 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.

Category:Space Story Trilogy

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Space Story Trilogy ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Four entries that are all in userspace. ... discospinster talk 02:42, 16 November 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.

Category:Video Games made by The Mester's Animation

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Video Games made by The Mester's Animation ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. There's only one article and it's in userspace. ... discospinster talk 02:37, 16 November 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.

Category:Unicorporated Communities in the U.S.

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 per G6, empty, obvious typo, etc. Bencherlite Talk 16:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply
Category:Unicorporated Communities in the U.S. ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. The category was being used to contain all unincorporated communities in the United States, but we already have state-specific categories for that. It's also misspelled and a duplicate of Category:Unincorporated communities in the United States. TheCatalyst31 Reaction• Creation 01:15, 16 November 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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_November_16&oldid=1144514060"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE