Category:People by drama school in the United States
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:Keep.
Jafeluv (
talk) 09:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: This should be deleted as
WP:OVERCATEGORIZATION, as well as its subcat. It is the only "People by (school type) in the United States" type category and I think it is a bad precedent to set. Tavix |
Talk 22:16, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep – and find/create the respective 'People' categories for the various schools (the companion to 'Foo alumni' is 'Foo faculty'). Eg
Category:Juilliard School people, which was at large.
Occuli (
talk) 18:20, 20 May 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 from Tuvalu
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. We don't split country categories this way. In our categories, country residents are all "(X) people," and lower-level administrative division residents are "People from (X)." I'm not sure we have a compelling reason to do it this way, but if we're going to change it, it likely won't be started with Tuvalu.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 06:49, 12 June 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Merge I can see how one might perhaps make a distinction between Tuvaluan people in Tuvalu and members of the diaspora but
Category:Tuvaluan diaspora already exists.
Pichpich (
talk) 22:00, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Creator's rationale:Category:Tuvaluan people implies the person is either born in Tuvalu or is a citizen of Tuvalu (entitled to a Tuvaluan passport).
Category:Tuvaluan diaspora addresses Tuvaluans who live in other countries. In my opinion
Category:Tuvaluan people is not appropriate for nationals of other countries (
palagi) who live/lived in Tuvalu. The use of “Immigrants to __” has a specific connotation, which may not be appropriate. The use of ‘from’ is a neutral term that, in my opinion, does not imply nationality or intention to migrate. I created the category because I noticed that “People from __” categories existed in relation to other Pacific countries. The use of a category of “People from __” allows both
Category:Tuvaluan people and other people who live/lived in Tuvalu to sit in the same category.
MozzazzoM(talk) 11:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)reply
People who lived for some limited time in Tuvalu yet weren't born there or never acquired citizenship can't reasonably be considered as "from Tuvalu" anyways.
Pichpich (
talk) 10:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Creator's rationale: permanent residence in a country (without being born there or acquiring citizenship) can reasonable qualify a person to be described as "People from _". While all of the people currently in
Category:People from Tuvalu are of Tuvaluan nationality, there are other categories of "People from_" that list nationals (islanders) and Europeans (
palagi) who, at some point in time, were permanent residents on a Pacific Island.
MozzazzoM(talk) 11:34, 31 May 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:Scientists of Medieval Islam
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:keep, though delete the empty chemists category. I'll close this as something of a continuation of my earlier close in this regard. There does not seem to be enough desire to overturn this at this time, though certainly there's room for more debate on this name. Deletion doesn't seem likely to be endorsed, though. (The "rename" proposal below endorses the concept of these categories, but argues for "of the countries of medieval Islam," which is something that could easily gain traction. Or maybe, "of medieval Islamic countries.")--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 06:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominators Rationale. This category has a tendency to have Jewish and Christian scientist in it who do not belong. It is much better to keep the old categories by nationality plan, and avoid these almost but not quite religious categories.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 21:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
I found one person who was a Jew born in Barcelona more than 200 years after the Christian reconquest of that place. The creator of these categories seems to be POV pushing for Spain to be considered part of "Medieval Islam" even long after areas were under Christian kings. The notions behind these categories are suspect.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 21:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Besides, these categories contain hundreds of scholars that lived in a scientific culture that spanned many centuries across great regions so I don't think using the debatable categorization of one person as a valid argument for the claim that it's a "POV pushing" agenda.
Al-Andalusi (
talk) 22:53, 23 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep This was discussed fairly recently (
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 April 2#Islamic Golden Age). The categories may need cleanup and may lend itself to POV pushing. But they're not and shouldn't be understood as quasi-religious: they refer to a specific and fairly long period of intense and transnational intellectual activity in the Islamic world. I'm more than ready to listen to alternative names for the categories but deletion is not an option.
Pichpich (
talk) 22:31, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep "Scientists in Medieval Islam" = "Scientists in Medieval Islamic civilization" as used by scholars of the field.
Al-Andalusi (
talk) 22:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)reply
If this means "Scientists in Medieval Islamic civilization" than we should name the category "Scientists in Medieval Islamic civilization".
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep the Islam referred to is Islamic civilization, not the Islamic religion. The category names are consistent with corresponding article names.-
Aquib (
talk) 18:11, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
This is an unjustified use of Islam, Islam refers to the religion. This is a confusing and not easily justified method of categorizing people. This is especially true because medieval culture in Timbuctu and Delhi is very different.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 04:49, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Rename per the "Proposal to reach consensus" in the
Cfd on Category:Physicians of medieval Islam, which also affects these categories. (I have also added a further category (Chemists) to this discussion, as indicated above.)
Davshul (
talk) 10:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Al-Andulusi went and deleted the Cfd banners from all these categories. This is part of a consistent set of actions that violate wikipedia policy on his part. I would also note that the "keep" vote above my last comment is unsigned.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
If we do keep this category we ought to at least rename it so it is obviously not limited to people who are Muslims if that is the intent. Even Al-Andulusi admits that the category means something that can be expressed more correctly in another phrase.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
What do you mean by too many of these? Your comment suggests merging to some target but what would you suggest?
Category:Scientists of medieval Islam is also nominated for deletion so I'm guessing this is not what you favour.
Pichpich (
talk) 10:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)reply
comment I just removed a living person from one of these categories. When exactly does "Medieval Islam" end? These categories seem to be not well defined.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:21, 25 May 2011 (UTC)reply
"Islamic mathematics and Arabic mathematics are modern historical terms for the mathematical sciences in Islamic civilization from the beginning of Islam (A.D. 622) until the 17th century." That you are ignorant of its definition does not mean it is ill defined. —Ruud 22:25, 25 May 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:Danish Ministers of Clime and Energy
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.
Speedy rename. Typos can be speedied.
Neutralitytalk 23:55, 19 May 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:French rock
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 and rename sounds ok but
Category:Canadian rock music should most definitely not be thrown in there. This is a "by nationality" category, not "by language" and this is also the focus of the article
French rock, i.e. rock produced in France and mostly but not necessarily in French. There are French bands who sing in English (e.g.
Stuck in the Sound).
Pichpich (
talk) 22:06, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
You mean I wrote all that for nothing? :-)
Pichpich (
talk) 00:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Comment this needs more renaming, since it is unclear that this is not about French-language rock or French-ethnic rock, rather than French-national rock.
65.95.13.213 (
talk) 04:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
The current system promotes ambiguous names.
65.95.13.213 (
talk) 05:07, 21 May 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:Jessica Lange
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 Per numerous precedents, there's no need for an eponymous category. (See
the relevant guideline)
Pichpich (
talk) 12:14, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom and not likely to b populated. --
Alan Liefting (
talk) - 23:48, 19 May 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:Famous body parts
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.
Oppose Honestly, both choices are bad. I don't know who thought of the "Individual animals" solution but I thought it was a fairly clever way around the problem. Of course
Category:Individual body parts doesn't really work. I'd love to have a third option but if we need to choose between "notable" and "famous", I think the latter is closer to the intended meaning.
Pichpich (
talk) 22:12, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Famous is a culturally loaded term: I don't think that would work at all.
Curb Chain (
talk) 02:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Notable is just as loaded though.
Pichpich (
talk) 09:29, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
No it is not because notable means that it has be discussed in secondary sources. Famous means that certain person(s) considers it better than others for some reason.
Curb Chain (
talk) 01:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)reply
You're confusing the Wikipedia meaning of "notable" with its
actual definition. They've become quite different (notably different) but 99% of our readers, if not more, have never read
WP:GNG. If anything, famous is more objective than notable: you can sort of hope to measure how well something is known but establishing that something is remarkable inevitably requires subjectivity.
Pichpich (
talk) 02:31, 21 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Our wikipedia culture does not use the word "famous". Notable is more common than the word famous; thus, renaming it to notable is more hamonizable than the other world "famous".
Curb Chain (
talk) 04:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)reply
I think this is precisely my point. The last thing we want is to start naming categories based on common usage in the Wikipedia namespace. Using a specific term because it makes sense to Wikipedia insiders is a particularly bad idea. We're building this project for readers, not longtime editors.
Pichpich (
talk) 22:03, 23 May 2011 (UTC)reply
But like I said, famous is cultural, notable means there is something that has been noted, not pandering to a specific culture.
Curb Chain (
talk) 07:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
It's a stretch to say that it sounds good but I could live with that. I still have a slight preference for the status quo.
Pichpich (
talk) 00:58, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
The "to me" part of that sentence makes it not a stretch at all.
Good Ol’factory(talk) 01:40, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Support this suggestion if notable does not pass.
Curb Chain (
talk) 04:54, 21 May 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:Wikipedians on Mars
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 deleted on creator's request (non-admin close).
Pichpich (
talk) 01:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Author's delete I never understood that joke categories could be created! I'm sorry if this caused any confusion.
Jaguar (
talk) 13:39, 19 May 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:Wikipedians of Swedish 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.
Nominator's rationale - Delete - "Wikipedians by descent" category, which were all previously deleted
here.
VegaDark (
talk) 05:53, 19 May 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:Matiene
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:People by drama school in the United States
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:Keep.
Jafeluv (
talk) 09:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: This should be deleted as
WP:OVERCATEGORIZATION, as well as its subcat. It is the only "People by (school type) in the United States" type category and I think it is a bad precedent to set. Tavix |
Talk 22:16, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep – and find/create the respective 'People' categories for the various schools (the companion to 'Foo alumni' is 'Foo faculty'). Eg
Category:Juilliard School people, which was at large.
Occuli (
talk) 18:20, 20 May 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 from Tuvalu
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. We don't split country categories this way. In our categories, country residents are all "(X) people," and lower-level administrative division residents are "People from (X)." I'm not sure we have a compelling reason to do it this way, but if we're going to change it, it likely won't be started with Tuvalu.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 06:49, 12 June 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Merge I can see how one might perhaps make a distinction between Tuvaluan people in Tuvalu and members of the diaspora but
Category:Tuvaluan diaspora already exists.
Pichpich (
talk) 22:00, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Creator's rationale:Category:Tuvaluan people implies the person is either born in Tuvalu or is a citizen of Tuvalu (entitled to a Tuvaluan passport).
Category:Tuvaluan diaspora addresses Tuvaluans who live in other countries. In my opinion
Category:Tuvaluan people is not appropriate for nationals of other countries (
palagi) who live/lived in Tuvalu. The use of “Immigrants to __” has a specific connotation, which may not be appropriate. The use of ‘from’ is a neutral term that, in my opinion, does not imply nationality or intention to migrate. I created the category because I noticed that “People from __” categories existed in relation to other Pacific countries. The use of a category of “People from __” allows both
Category:Tuvaluan people and other people who live/lived in Tuvalu to sit in the same category.
MozzazzoM(talk) 11:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)reply
People who lived for some limited time in Tuvalu yet weren't born there or never acquired citizenship can't reasonably be considered as "from Tuvalu" anyways.
Pichpich (
talk) 10:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Creator's rationale: permanent residence in a country (without being born there or acquiring citizenship) can reasonable qualify a person to be described as "People from _". While all of the people currently in
Category:People from Tuvalu are of Tuvaluan nationality, there are other categories of "People from_" that list nationals (islanders) and Europeans (
palagi) who, at some point in time, were permanent residents on a Pacific Island.
MozzazzoM(talk) 11:34, 31 May 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:Scientists of Medieval Islam
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:keep, though delete the empty chemists category. I'll close this as something of a continuation of my earlier close in this regard. There does not seem to be enough desire to overturn this at this time, though certainly there's room for more debate on this name. Deletion doesn't seem likely to be endorsed, though. (The "rename" proposal below endorses the concept of these categories, but argues for "of the countries of medieval Islam," which is something that could easily gain traction. Or maybe, "of medieval Islamic countries.")--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 06:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominators Rationale. This category has a tendency to have Jewish and Christian scientist in it who do not belong. It is much better to keep the old categories by nationality plan, and avoid these almost but not quite religious categories.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 21:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
I found one person who was a Jew born in Barcelona more than 200 years after the Christian reconquest of that place. The creator of these categories seems to be POV pushing for Spain to be considered part of "Medieval Islam" even long after areas were under Christian kings. The notions behind these categories are suspect.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 21:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Besides, these categories contain hundreds of scholars that lived in a scientific culture that spanned many centuries across great regions so I don't think using the debatable categorization of one person as a valid argument for the claim that it's a "POV pushing" agenda.
Al-Andalusi (
talk) 22:53, 23 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep This was discussed fairly recently (
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 April 2#Islamic Golden Age). The categories may need cleanup and may lend itself to POV pushing. But they're not and shouldn't be understood as quasi-religious: they refer to a specific and fairly long period of intense and transnational intellectual activity in the Islamic world. I'm more than ready to listen to alternative names for the categories but deletion is not an option.
Pichpich (
talk) 22:31, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep "Scientists in Medieval Islam" = "Scientists in Medieval Islamic civilization" as used by scholars of the field.
Al-Andalusi (
talk) 22:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)reply
If this means "Scientists in Medieval Islamic civilization" than we should name the category "Scientists in Medieval Islamic civilization".
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep the Islam referred to is Islamic civilization, not the Islamic religion. The category names are consistent with corresponding article names.-
Aquib (
talk) 18:11, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
This is an unjustified use of Islam, Islam refers to the religion. This is a confusing and not easily justified method of categorizing people. This is especially true because medieval culture in Timbuctu and Delhi is very different.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 04:49, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Rename per the "Proposal to reach consensus" in the
Cfd on Category:Physicians of medieval Islam, which also affects these categories. (I have also added a further category (Chemists) to this discussion, as indicated above.)
Davshul (
talk) 10:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Al-Andulusi went and deleted the Cfd banners from all these categories. This is part of a consistent set of actions that violate wikipedia policy on his part. I would also note that the "keep" vote above my last comment is unsigned.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
If we do keep this category we ought to at least rename it so it is obviously not limited to people who are Muslims if that is the intent. Even Al-Andulusi admits that the category means something that can be expressed more correctly in another phrase.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
What do you mean by too many of these? Your comment suggests merging to some target but what would you suggest?
Category:Scientists of medieval Islam is also nominated for deletion so I'm guessing this is not what you favour.
Pichpich (
talk) 10:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)reply
comment I just removed a living person from one of these categories. When exactly does "Medieval Islam" end? These categories seem to be not well defined.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:21, 25 May 2011 (UTC)reply
"Islamic mathematics and Arabic mathematics are modern historical terms for the mathematical sciences in Islamic civilization from the beginning of Islam (A.D. 622) until the 17th century." That you are ignorant of its definition does not mean it is ill defined. —Ruud 22:25, 25 May 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:Danish Ministers of Clime and Energy
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.
Speedy rename. Typos can be speedied.
Neutralitytalk 23:55, 19 May 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:French rock
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 and rename sounds ok but
Category:Canadian rock music should most definitely not be thrown in there. This is a "by nationality" category, not "by language" and this is also the focus of the article
French rock, i.e. rock produced in France and mostly but not necessarily in French. There are French bands who sing in English (e.g.
Stuck in the Sound).
Pichpich (
talk) 22:06, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
You mean I wrote all that for nothing? :-)
Pichpich (
talk) 00:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Comment this needs more renaming, since it is unclear that this is not about French-language rock or French-ethnic rock, rather than French-national rock.
65.95.13.213 (
talk) 04:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
The current system promotes ambiguous names.
65.95.13.213 (
talk) 05:07, 21 May 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:Jessica Lange
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 Per numerous precedents, there's no need for an eponymous category. (See
the relevant guideline)
Pichpich (
talk) 12:14, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom and not likely to b populated. --
Alan Liefting (
talk) - 23:48, 19 May 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:Famous body parts
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.
Oppose Honestly, both choices are bad. I don't know who thought of the "Individual animals" solution but I thought it was a fairly clever way around the problem. Of course
Category:Individual body parts doesn't really work. I'd love to have a third option but if we need to choose between "notable" and "famous", I think the latter is closer to the intended meaning.
Pichpich (
talk) 22:12, 19 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Famous is a culturally loaded term: I don't think that would work at all.
Curb Chain (
talk) 02:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Notable is just as loaded though.
Pichpich (
talk) 09:29, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
No it is not because notable means that it has be discussed in secondary sources. Famous means that certain person(s) considers it better than others for some reason.
Curb Chain (
talk) 01:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)reply
You're confusing the Wikipedia meaning of "notable" with its
actual definition. They've become quite different (notably different) but 99% of our readers, if not more, have never read
WP:GNG. If anything, famous is more objective than notable: you can sort of hope to measure how well something is known but establishing that something is remarkable inevitably requires subjectivity.
Pichpich (
talk) 02:31, 21 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Our wikipedia culture does not use the word "famous". Notable is more common than the word famous; thus, renaming it to notable is more hamonizable than the other world "famous".
Curb Chain (
talk) 04:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)reply
I think this is precisely my point. The last thing we want is to start naming categories based on common usage in the Wikipedia namespace. Using a specific term because it makes sense to Wikipedia insiders is a particularly bad idea. We're building this project for readers, not longtime editors.
Pichpich (
talk) 22:03, 23 May 2011 (UTC)reply
But like I said, famous is cultural, notable means there is something that has been noted, not pandering to a specific culture.
Curb Chain (
talk) 07:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)reply
It's a stretch to say that it sounds good but I could live with that. I still have a slight preference for the status quo.
Pichpich (
talk) 00:58, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
The "to me" part of that sentence makes it not a stretch at all.
Good Ol’factory(talk) 01:40, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Support this suggestion if notable does not pass.
Curb Chain (
talk) 04:54, 21 May 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:Wikipedians on Mars
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 deleted on creator's request (non-admin close).
Pichpich (
talk) 01:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Author's delete I never understood that joke categories could be created! I'm sorry if this caused any confusion.
Jaguar (
talk) 13:39, 19 May 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:Wikipedians of Swedish 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.
Nominator's rationale - Delete - "Wikipedians by descent" category, which were all previously deleted
here.
VegaDark (
talk) 05:53, 19 May 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:Matiene
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.