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 The country at the time is refered to in wikipedia as the
Ottoman Empire. At the time the term Turkey was at times used. When it was used it was used as a synonym for the Ottoman Empire. Thus my 1910 Farmer's Atlas shows a place it designates as Turkey stretching to the Adriatic Sea and covering what is today Albania and other such places. Beyond this, both articles involved identify the location involved as being in the Ottoman Empire, one Moda FC, has a statement saying it is not Turkish on the talk page. On the other the page is identified as being part of the wikipedia project for the Ottoman Empire. Disestablishments by year is a place by year category, and the logical place to identifiy is the place at the time. We use
Turkey in wikipedia to refer to the modern nation-state of that name. Since that nation-state was not formed until 1923, it is particularly odd to identify places disestablished 13 years earlier with it. Whether these things should be in any Turkey categories is another question, they might well be, but it makes way more sense to do place by year categories in a way that they reflect the places in the years involved.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
23:43, 24 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename; why didn't you put this at
WP:CFDS? It's highly important that category names follow article names, and since the article name for this country at this time is Ottoman Empire, the category name should do likewise.
Nyttend (
talk)
02:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Hmm, maybe I was wrong. No one seems to object to it at all. I even notified the Ottoman Empire wikipedia project about it, but no one seems to have taken notice.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
23:46, 6 January 2013 (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:Legislatures of non-governmental organizations
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 or Rename to omit the word legislatures -- I do not think most of the things categorised make laws, so that they are not legislatures. Possibly "General assmeblies of religious bodies". Alternatively, we could purge World Zionist Council, and make it "Governing assemblies of Christian denominations".
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:27, 27 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Peterkingiron you make a good point, these articles are not in the strictest scene really about legislatures of religious bodies but rather governing assemblies of varying kinds of religious bodies. So I would be happy to go with "Category:Governing assemblies of religious bodies" or even "Category:Governing assemblies of religious organizations" for the new name of the category. But I think "Governing assemblies of Christian denominations" is to narrow a category as it would require we remove both "
World Zionist Congress" and "
General Assembly (Unitarian Universalist Association)" from this category and this category is rather sparsely populated at the moment. That being said, I do think it has the potential to be widely populated and of great use. --
Devin Murphy (
talk)
05:34, 30 December 2012 (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.
Muppet subcategories
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.
Alternative rename to "Foo based on The Muppets" format. That seems to be the preferred format nowadays (and now that RL has stopped gnawing on me I need to get back to work proposing the renames I was working on before it started chowing down). -
The BushrangerOne ping only23:33, 24 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Standardisation based upon the name "The Muppets". That said, it occurs to me that this is group of characters as well as a media franchise. So I'm not sure if the "based on" works here. See:
Category:Frank Sinatra television specials. Would we say "Books based on Frank Sinatra"? If so, then I would support the "X based on The Muppets" structure, but, that sounds "odd" to me. So instead, I think I support "The Muppets X" - jc3704:26, 31 December 2012 (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.
Buildings of 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.
Comment Oculi is correct of course, but some of the subcategories in their examples dont follow that convention. it does seem to make sense to have former be "of" as they are no longer "in", but is that a conscious convention on our part, or just random, as "in" and "of" seem to be often interchangeable? would be a lot of work to settle either way.
Mercurywoodrose (
talk)
23:07, 25 December 2012 (UTC)reply
I think "in" is better than "of", because "of" could be applied to a building that is associated with one place but located in another, e.g. "Buildings of Kettering, Ohio" could be applied to a building that I recently visited that has been moved to another city. That being said, this nomination is done for reasons of consistency; if I'd found a few "in" categories among a large number of "of" categories, I'd be nominating the "ins" for renaming to "ofs".
Nyttend (
talk)
02:16, 26 December 2012 (UTC)reply
The category says hotels, not buildings. Just because it has been placed with a given parent does not mean its contents actually merit that placement. I think it is more logical to assume it is wrongly parented than that it is misnamed.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
04:49, 1 January 2013 (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:Serbian culture by place
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 associated with Kraków
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:OpenOffice.org
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale The country at the time is refered to in wikipedia as the
Ottoman Empire. At the time the term Turkey was at times used. When it was used it was used as a synonym for the Ottoman Empire. Thus my 1910 Farmer's Atlas shows a place it designates as Turkey stretching to the Adriatic Sea and covering what is today Albania and other such places. Beyond this, both articles involved identify the location involved as being in the Ottoman Empire, one Moda FC, has a statement saying it is not Turkish on the talk page. On the other the page is identified as being part of the wikipedia project for the Ottoman Empire. Disestablishments by year is a place by year category, and the logical place to identifiy is the place at the time. We use
Turkey in wikipedia to refer to the modern nation-state of that name. Since that nation-state was not formed until 1923, it is particularly odd to identify places disestablished 13 years earlier with it. Whether these things should be in any Turkey categories is another question, they might well be, but it makes way more sense to do place by year categories in a way that they reflect the places in the years involved.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
23:43, 24 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename; why didn't you put this at
WP:CFDS? It's highly important that category names follow article names, and since the article name for this country at this time is Ottoman Empire, the category name should do likewise.
Nyttend (
talk)
02:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Hmm, maybe I was wrong. No one seems to object to it at all. I even notified the Ottoman Empire wikipedia project about it, but no one seems to have taken notice.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
23:46, 6 January 2013 (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:Legislatures of non-governmental organizations
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 or Rename to omit the word legislatures -- I do not think most of the things categorised make laws, so that they are not legislatures. Possibly "General assmeblies of religious bodies". Alternatively, we could purge World Zionist Council, and make it "Governing assemblies of Christian denominations".
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:27, 27 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Peterkingiron you make a good point, these articles are not in the strictest scene really about legislatures of religious bodies but rather governing assemblies of varying kinds of religious bodies. So I would be happy to go with "Category:Governing assemblies of religious bodies" or even "Category:Governing assemblies of religious organizations" for the new name of the category. But I think "Governing assemblies of Christian denominations" is to narrow a category as it would require we remove both "
World Zionist Congress" and "
General Assembly (Unitarian Universalist Association)" from this category and this category is rather sparsely populated at the moment. That being said, I do think it has the potential to be widely populated and of great use. --
Devin Murphy (
talk)
05:34, 30 December 2012 (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.
Muppet subcategories
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.
Alternative rename to "Foo based on The Muppets" format. That seems to be the preferred format nowadays (and now that RL has stopped gnawing on me I need to get back to work proposing the renames I was working on before it started chowing down). -
The BushrangerOne ping only23:33, 24 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Standardisation based upon the name "The Muppets". That said, it occurs to me that this is group of characters as well as a media franchise. So I'm not sure if the "based on" works here. See:
Category:Frank Sinatra television specials. Would we say "Books based on Frank Sinatra"? If so, then I would support the "X based on The Muppets" structure, but, that sounds "odd" to me. So instead, I think I support "The Muppets X" - jc3704:26, 31 December 2012 (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.
Buildings of 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.
Comment Oculi is correct of course, but some of the subcategories in their examples dont follow that convention. it does seem to make sense to have former be "of" as they are no longer "in", but is that a conscious convention on our part, or just random, as "in" and "of" seem to be often interchangeable? would be a lot of work to settle either way.
Mercurywoodrose (
talk)
23:07, 25 December 2012 (UTC)reply
I think "in" is better than "of", because "of" could be applied to a building that is associated with one place but located in another, e.g. "Buildings of Kettering, Ohio" could be applied to a building that I recently visited that has been moved to another city. That being said, this nomination is done for reasons of consistency; if I'd found a few "in" categories among a large number of "of" categories, I'd be nominating the "ins" for renaming to "ofs".
Nyttend (
talk)
02:16, 26 December 2012 (UTC)reply
The category says hotels, not buildings. Just because it has been placed with a given parent does not mean its contents actually merit that placement. I think it is more logical to assume it is wrongly parented than that it is misnamed.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
04:49, 1 January 2013 (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:Serbian culture by place
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 associated with Kraków
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:OpenOffice.org
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.