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. Two issues here. (1) The category is for mythological dwarfs, but is liable to be confused with
Category:People with dwarfism. As an illustration of this problem, note that the category currently contains a commons category link to
Category:People with dwarfism (!). I suggest matching the name to the main article
Dwarf (mythology). The nominated category and the undisambiguated
Category:Dwarfs should be disambiguation categories. (2) The normal pluralisation of "dwarf" is "dwarfs". "Dwarves" has been used to a lesser extent historically, and Tolkien especially popularised its usage, but the OED still says the primary plural is "dwarfs". Other dictionaries tend to simply list both plurals, but usually "dwarfs" is listed first. We could have a redirect on
Category:Dwarves (mythology).
Good Ol’factory(talk)23:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Emergency medical services vehicles
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:Merge or reverse merge. Can anyone explain the difference between these two, if any? The nominated category has existed for longer.
Category:Ambulances was recently created as a subcategory, but it had very little in it, so I dutifully moved a bunch of stuff into the new subcategory, only to find that everything from the nominated category could accurately be moved into the new category. If there is no difference, we need to merge one way or the other. I don't really have a preference as to which is kept, though the main article is at
Ambulance. Both categories have been tagged.
Good Ol’factory(talk)23:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Support merge to
Category:Ambulances. From the look of the article,
ambulance is a slightly broader term which includes non-emergency patient transit vehicles, so I don't see any problem with keeping that name, which is also recognizable and concise. --
Pnm (
talk)
03:32, 20 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Civil wars currently ongoing
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:Merge. Generally we avoid categorizing by "current" or "former" status. Recently, the similar
Category:Military operations currently ongoing was deleted. It's often hard to know (especially when one is "in the moment") of the precise moment when a civil war comes to an end, making the application of this category tricky in some circumstances. I think it's better to just class these as part of the "Modern era" civil wars.
Good Ol’factory(talk)22:45, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Cross-Strait interactions
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:Expatriate Liverpool F.C. players
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. Having categories for foreign players for a certain team is just a step too far - not even worthy of an article, let alone a category.
GiantSnowman18:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep. An interesting sub-category for the big clubs. Wikipedia would be a useful place to find out about which countries having represented universal football clubs. Lots of categories need deleting before this one.
Roslagen (
talk)
18:52, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Delete. I agree with the nominator that this is "a step too far". Categorize by players on a team—Yes. Categorize by expatriate football players in a particular country—maybe. Categorize by the intersection of the two—no. I would say it is overcategorization.
Good Ol’factory(talk)20:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Georgian clothing
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.
Rename - my first thought when seeing the cat name was that it would be about clothing worn in England in the 18th century, so the name needs to be made less confusing --
ChrisTheDude (
talk)
23:48, 16 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina
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:Shopping malls in Winston-Salem, North Carolina
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:Shopping malls in Cary, North Carolina
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: Cary and Durham categories are somewhat small (Cary has only two in it), and Raleigh category larger. As a defined metropolitan area with a widely-used name, all three should be merged into one category. This would also match it with the other "X in Research Triangle, North Carolina" categories that are already established. Ten Pound Hammer,
his otters and a clue-bat • (
Otters want attention)20:06, 29 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Upmerge 2, Leave 1: Propose upmerging Cary and Durham to the state-level cat and leaving Charlotte unchanged. I appreciate your effort to try and eliminate all these small categories but I'm not sure grouping malls by metropolitan areas is the right solution. If you look at the states under
Category:Shopping malls in the United States, they tend to have no subcats or 1-2 for major cities. In contrast,
Category:Shopping malls in North Carolina is much more granular but the state doesn't have the article count to justify that structure.
RevelationDirect (
talk)
04:49, 31 January 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:People (basic income guarantee)
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 per nom; it is not even as if the issue can be called clear-cut. At the extreme, large numbers of modern countries have some sort of basic income guarantee via welfare systems, so the great majority of politicians who have never advocated abolishing these could in theory be roped in.
Johnbod (
talk)
03:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
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. Two issues here. (1) The category is for mythological dwarfs, but is liable to be confused with
Category:People with dwarfism. As an illustration of this problem, note that the category currently contains a commons category link to
Category:People with dwarfism (!). I suggest matching the name to the main article
Dwarf (mythology). The nominated category and the undisambiguated
Category:Dwarfs should be disambiguation categories. (2) The normal pluralisation of "dwarf" is "dwarfs". "Dwarves" has been used to a lesser extent historically, and Tolkien especially popularised its usage, but the OED still says the primary plural is "dwarfs". Other dictionaries tend to simply list both plurals, but usually "dwarfs" is listed first. We could have a redirect on
Category:Dwarves (mythology).
Good Ol’factory(talk)23:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Emergency medical services vehicles
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:Merge or reverse merge. Can anyone explain the difference between these two, if any? The nominated category has existed for longer.
Category:Ambulances was recently created as a subcategory, but it had very little in it, so I dutifully moved a bunch of stuff into the new subcategory, only to find that everything from the nominated category could accurately be moved into the new category. If there is no difference, we need to merge one way or the other. I don't really have a preference as to which is kept, though the main article is at
Ambulance. Both categories have been tagged.
Good Ol’factory(talk)23:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Support merge to
Category:Ambulances. From the look of the article,
ambulance is a slightly broader term which includes non-emergency patient transit vehicles, so I don't see any problem with keeping that name, which is also recognizable and concise. --
Pnm (
talk)
03:32, 20 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Civil wars currently ongoing
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:Merge. Generally we avoid categorizing by "current" or "former" status. Recently, the similar
Category:Military operations currently ongoing was deleted. It's often hard to know (especially when one is "in the moment") of the precise moment when a civil war comes to an end, making the application of this category tricky in some circumstances. I think it's better to just class these as part of the "Modern era" civil wars.
Good Ol’factory(talk)22:45, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Cross-Strait interactions
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:Expatriate Liverpool F.C. players
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. Having categories for foreign players for a certain team is just a step too far - not even worthy of an article, let alone a category.
GiantSnowman18:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep. An interesting sub-category for the big clubs. Wikipedia would be a useful place to find out about which countries having represented universal football clubs. Lots of categories need deleting before this one.
Roslagen (
talk)
18:52, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Delete. I agree with the nominator that this is "a step too far". Categorize by players on a team—Yes. Categorize by expatriate football players in a particular country—maybe. Categorize by the intersection of the two—no. I would say it is overcategorization.
Good Ol’factory(talk)20:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Georgian clothing
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.
Rename - my first thought when seeing the cat name was that it would be about clothing worn in England in the 18th century, so the name needs to be made less confusing --
ChrisTheDude (
talk)
23:48, 16 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina
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:Shopping malls in Winston-Salem, North Carolina
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:Shopping malls in Cary, North Carolina
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: Cary and Durham categories are somewhat small (Cary has only two in it), and Raleigh category larger. As a defined metropolitan area with a widely-used name, all three should be merged into one category. This would also match it with the other "X in Research Triangle, North Carolina" categories that are already established. Ten Pound Hammer,
his otters and a clue-bat • (
Otters want attention)20:06, 29 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Upmerge 2, Leave 1: Propose upmerging Cary and Durham to the state-level cat and leaving Charlotte unchanged. I appreciate your effort to try and eliminate all these small categories but I'm not sure grouping malls by metropolitan areas is the right solution. If you look at the states under
Category:Shopping malls in the United States, they tend to have no subcats or 1-2 for major cities. In contrast,
Category:Shopping malls in North Carolina is much more granular but the state doesn't have the article count to justify that structure.
RevelationDirect (
talk)
04:49, 31 January 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:People (basic income guarantee)
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 per nom; it is not even as if the issue can be called clear-cut. At the extreme, large numbers of modern countries have some sort of basic income guarantee via welfare systems, so the great majority of politicians who have never advocated abolishing these could in theory be roped in.
Johnbod (
talk)
03:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.