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.
Keep It appears to be part of a tree covering Shipwrecks by country. Since Switzerland is a country there needs to be an entry for it; and you can be shipwrecked on a lake just as easily as on the sea. I agree that maritime is not the best description for this country but if deleted the article may become unfindable.
Twiceuponatime (
talk)
09:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC).reply
Keep Although Switzerland is landlocked, it has extensive traffic on its lakes and the Rhine is navigable to Berne. Therefore any maritime accident occuring within Swiss territory would fit nicely in this category. A "maritime incident" is not necessarily a "shipwreck".
Mjroots (
talk)
07:57, 19 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Any accident occuring within a Swiss lake or river would not be a maritime incident. The term "maritime" is a piece of specialist terminology with a very precise meaning referring to seas, and does not cover all
bodies of water as the above editors seem to imply; it shouldn't be used as a more 'sophisticated' word for "water". I agree with
Mangoe's suggestion below.
The Celestial City (
talk)
16:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Further comment The subsuming of shipwrecks under "maritime incidents" is problematic at best. When one is talking about a case such as this where there is a wreck but no incident per se to write about, it seems reasonable to include it in the former category but not the latter. Indeed the similar case of the
Hasholme Logboat is categorized only under
Category:Maritime archaeology and is not listed as a wreck at all. If we pull the
Bevaix Boat out of the incident category then there is no reason for it to exist, and as there is no incident, I would suggest that decategorization.
Mangoe (
talk)
17:41, 20 December 2010 (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:Lords/Barons of Armenian Cilicia
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 American people of Filipino 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 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:Journal of Economic Literature Categories
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.
Oppoae You yourself suggested this alternative name in the previous discussion, where the main objection was to length and unwieldiness.
JQ (
talk)
08:30, 18 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment 1T: On the latter proposal, respectfully oppose. It is very convenient to refer to
JEL classification codes on Econ-page disputed points, of which there is no lack,
[1] and
[2]. Why weigh down those discussions linked to the "JEL classification codes" page with "Journal of Economic Literature" freight? Per discussion below, I withdraw this. --
Thomasmeeks (
talk)
21:33, 18 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment 2T: I do think that it is a fair question (& AR's?) to ask what the likely
value added would be from "Category:Journal of Economic Literature Categories" over categories that display the JEL logo in the upper right hand corner, such as at
Category:Monetary economics. As it is now, an Econ article should be able to find some broad or narrow JEL-codes category, since the JEL codes seem designed to be
taxonomically complete. If any classification claiming to be on Econ has no JEL-category attestation, that might be reason for stripping it of a JEL classification logo.
Comment 3T:
JEL classification codes footnote 2 has criteria for classifying by category. If the "Category:Journal of Economic Literature Categories" is a move to restrict allegedly econ articles to those articles that fit only JEL classification(s), I'd oppose the above proposal. Let the orphan non-JEL-classifiable articles (say the
World Series Theory of Economic Forecasting) go their Wikipedia way (say to deletion), untroubled by any niceties as to where it fits into the scheme of a merely world-wide-use classification system. That is to say, don't give strictly WP articles as valid econ articles if they are not definable into 1 or more JEL categories. I'm not sufficiently informed as to the rationale of Category:Journal of Economic Literature Categories, but it could have a good scholarly use for the future on WP. Thanks. --
Thomasmeeks (
talk)
21:33, 18 December 2010 (UTC)reply
I see (and regret that I did not read from the top closely enough). So, the same problem applies to multiple different sections of
JEL classification codes. I would support some way of addressing that problem as directly as possible. (I wish that I could give a less
wp:weaselly response at this point.) If there is a precedent for a Category of categories, that might be cited here or above. --
Thomasmeeks (
talk)
13:54, 19 December 2010 (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:Female athletes
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:MTA
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:Terrorist incidents against Israelis and Jews
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:Delete. Singles out attacks against a certain ethnic group and a nationality which may have absolutely nothing to do with each other.
TM00:59, 17 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete. All other subcats of "Terrorist attacks by target" are locations, not people; as the nom point out, this conflates two separate groups in a POV way, and without that POV conflation, adequate categories already exist (see "terrorism in Israel/in Gaza/in the West Bank," "attacks on synagogues" or whatever).
Roscelese (
talk)
04:08, 17 December 2010 (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.
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.
Keep It appears to be part of a tree covering Shipwrecks by country. Since Switzerland is a country there needs to be an entry for it; and you can be shipwrecked on a lake just as easily as on the sea. I agree that maritime is not the best description for this country but if deleted the article may become unfindable.
Twiceuponatime (
talk)
09:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC).reply
Keep Although Switzerland is landlocked, it has extensive traffic on its lakes and the Rhine is navigable to Berne. Therefore any maritime accident occuring within Swiss territory would fit nicely in this category. A "maritime incident" is not necessarily a "shipwreck".
Mjroots (
talk)
07:57, 19 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Any accident occuring within a Swiss lake or river would not be a maritime incident. The term "maritime" is a piece of specialist terminology with a very precise meaning referring to seas, and does not cover all
bodies of water as the above editors seem to imply; it shouldn't be used as a more 'sophisticated' word for "water". I agree with
Mangoe's suggestion below.
The Celestial City (
talk)
16:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Further comment The subsuming of shipwrecks under "maritime incidents" is problematic at best. When one is talking about a case such as this where there is a wreck but no incident per se to write about, it seems reasonable to include it in the former category but not the latter. Indeed the similar case of the
Hasholme Logboat is categorized only under
Category:Maritime archaeology and is not listed as a wreck at all. If we pull the
Bevaix Boat out of the incident category then there is no reason for it to exist, and as there is no incident, I would suggest that decategorization.
Mangoe (
talk)
17:41, 20 December 2010 (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:Lords/Barons of Armenian Cilicia
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 American people of Filipino 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 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:Journal of Economic Literature Categories
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.
Oppoae You yourself suggested this alternative name in the previous discussion, where the main objection was to length and unwieldiness.
JQ (
talk)
08:30, 18 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment 1T: On the latter proposal, respectfully oppose. It is very convenient to refer to
JEL classification codes on Econ-page disputed points, of which there is no lack,
[1] and
[2]. Why weigh down those discussions linked to the "JEL classification codes" page with "Journal of Economic Literature" freight? Per discussion below, I withdraw this. --
Thomasmeeks (
talk)
21:33, 18 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment 2T: I do think that it is a fair question (& AR's?) to ask what the likely
value added would be from "Category:Journal of Economic Literature Categories" over categories that display the JEL logo in the upper right hand corner, such as at
Category:Monetary economics. As it is now, an Econ article should be able to find some broad or narrow JEL-codes category, since the JEL codes seem designed to be
taxonomically complete. If any classification claiming to be on Econ has no JEL-category attestation, that might be reason for stripping it of a JEL classification logo.
Comment 3T:
JEL classification codes footnote 2 has criteria for classifying by category. If the "Category:Journal of Economic Literature Categories" is a move to restrict allegedly econ articles to those articles that fit only JEL classification(s), I'd oppose the above proposal. Let the orphan non-JEL-classifiable articles (say the
World Series Theory of Economic Forecasting) go their Wikipedia way (say to deletion), untroubled by any niceties as to where it fits into the scheme of a merely world-wide-use classification system. That is to say, don't give strictly WP articles as valid econ articles if they are not definable into 1 or more JEL categories. I'm not sufficiently informed as to the rationale of Category:Journal of Economic Literature Categories, but it could have a good scholarly use for the future on WP. Thanks. --
Thomasmeeks (
talk)
21:33, 18 December 2010 (UTC)reply
I see (and regret that I did not read from the top closely enough). So, the same problem applies to multiple different sections of
JEL classification codes. I would support some way of addressing that problem as directly as possible. (I wish that I could give a less
wp:weaselly response at this point.) If there is a precedent for a Category of categories, that might be cited here or above. --
Thomasmeeks (
talk)
13:54, 19 December 2010 (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:Female athletes
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:MTA
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:Terrorist incidents against Israelis and Jews
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:Delete. Singles out attacks against a certain ethnic group and a nationality which may have absolutely nothing to do with each other.
TM00:59, 17 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete. All other subcats of "Terrorist attacks by target" are locations, not people; as the nom point out, this conflates two separate groups in a POV way, and without that POV conflation, adequate categories already exist (see "terrorism in Israel/in Gaza/in the West Bank," "attacks on synagogues" or whatever).
Roscelese (
talk)
04:08, 17 December 2010 (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.