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:Gaelic Athletic Association competitions
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: Two versions of the same thing. There is no particular difference between GAA competitions and Gaelic games competitions. Gaelic games is probably the wider term referring to all sports and the GAA to the organisation (at least as this is expressed by Wikipedia at
Gaelic games and
Gaelic Athletic Association). Also, the GAA category contains
Category:Camogie cup competitions (which would be organised by the
Camogie Association) so the existence of two similar categories is excessive.
86.40.104.240 (
talk)
21:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Comment BHGs reasons sound reasonable, and reflect the category structure I would expect to find, but after having learnt in recent times that 'all hurling is GAA hurling' I went looking for examples. The trees in question do appear to be largely duplicating most of the same articles, and the only non-GAA articles I have yet found in
Category:Gaelic games competitions are Camogie events like
Ashbourne Cup organised by the
Camogie Association which neither the article or website for seem to indicate is part of the GAA. Yet, these are in the
Category:Gaelic Athletic Association competitions tree anyway. Is this just a matter of Camogie being badly categorised, or something else I am missing? --
Qetuth (
talk)
12:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Well, I'm glad we cleared that up... I think IP has identified a problem - these categories are in practice being used as duplicates, but it sounds like careful cleaning and rescoping is a better answer than a straight merge (ie, is there some objective criterion such as 'officially endorsed' that can be used for the GAA category?). Or perhaps many of the subcats of the non-GAA category should be downmerged into the GAA one. --
Qetuth (
talk)
23:21, 31 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:VDM Publishing writer names
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.
American Hurlers by "GAA county"
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 I debated with myself about whether to introduce this proposal to CFD. I was originally going to leave it at just Ireland. That can now be regularised at other discussions (assuming that they pass). However, when I looked into the
GAA County of
New York GAA, I realised that this too was necessary. I saw that it only contains 4 articles, none is which is a person born or from New York city or state; all are from Ireland. However, each has played for the GAA governing body called the "New York County Board" (in GAA logic, New York is a county. Don't even ask.). That there is a need for disambiguation is accented by the incorrect inclusion of the parent category
Category:Sportspeople from New York. Other members of that category cater explicitly for people from the city or state (e.g.
Category:Golfers from New York,
Category:Tennis people from New York,
Category:Kickboxers from New York). So this is the exception. It seeks to give the false impression that it is about people from the city or state. To disabuse people of that notion, the GAA suffix is necessary. Per the precedent of
Category:Tipperary GAA hurlers held at
here.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
21:20, 27 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose this proposal: From
Brendan Hennessy: "Hennessy spent most of his playing days in New York where he played in a number of National Hurling League finals in the 1950s until the 70's." I don't think he could be said to not be from New York if he spent most of his playing days there. If you trace back far enough most people from New York would be found to be from elsewhere. At which point would it be appropriate to refer to someone as a New Yorker and not Italian or Irish or whichever? As hurling in New York goes there doesn't appear to be any scope for confusion. They don't fly over and back every time they want to play and train, they live there if they play, they work there, etc. It is their life. It is not as if there are hurlers who could lay any greater claim to being from New York. --
86.40.104.240 (
talk)
22:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Comment I have not said that they don't play there. Quite the opposite. What I have said is that they are not from there. If Brendan Hennessy was asked in Clancy's Bar, East 44th Street, "Where are you from?", would he be more likely to say Kerry or New York?
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
22:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose without prejudice to a future renaming request. I'd prefer to put all these discussions on hold and deal with the centrally rather than one at a time, all touching on roughly the same subject matter. --
HighKing (
talk)
16:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Reply NY, NY is a special case. It's not a county as generaly understood. It's extra-territorial and so deserves special consideration. And what do you think that Brendan Hennessy might say in that bar?
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
21:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Reply all of which were rejected at the Tipperary precedent. And what do you think that Brendan Hennessy might say in that bar? I ask the question here because if I ask it at your talk page it's likely to be deleted as soon as it's read.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
21:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Thanks to BHG for kindly pointing out the omission from the nomination. The nomination has been amended to include the state also. New York, New York - so good I had to do it twice. Apologies for the inconvenience that this oversight may have caused. As the premise is now true, I look forward to her amending her vote.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
21:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)reply
LL, please do a little research of your own rather than simply giving a snarky reply based on your continued failure to check what you are talking about. It's tedious enough that you did not do so before making the nomination, but it is disruptive time-wasting for you to continue to do it after your error has been pointed out to you. The premise is still false.
I fear that the only snarky remarks in this debate have come from the opposing side. But let us us pass on in the interests of peace. To the substantive objection. BHG says "So
Category:Sportspeople from New York refers to the whole state, not just the city ... so the scope is therefore correct.". This is not in dispute, especially since the amended nomination now includes both city and state. What I fail to understand is how this justifies an "oppose" vote. Rather it points to the conclusion that the articles it contains refers to people from that state. Since this is demonstrably not true in the case of the New York GAA hurlers, how is it justifiable to include them? Had the category been named "Sportspeople from New York or who may have visited the state or who may have been an illegal immigrant there at some time", I'd understand the oppose vote. But is is not so named and a reasonable person would not so construe it. As the scope of "New York hulers" (and virtually every other "Foo county hurlers" cat) is "people who have played
hurling for
New York GAA", then it is only intended to contain people who play for that county board. It is silent about their birthplace / residence / or use of Star Trek teleportation devices. This is as it should be. If BHG wants to create a category for people who have lived in New York at some time and who happen to play hurling either in New York or elsewhere, she is perfectly entitled to do so. But this is not that category. And the proposed suffix of "GAA" would make that exclusion patently obvious. Why anyone would want to reject the patently obvious, when even expert editors like BHG make errors on the subject, is frankly beyond my ken.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
20:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Question The more I learn about hurling, the more confusing it seems to become. Is the intended scope meant to be the state, the county, their union, their intersection, or something else? The cat desc, both the long-standing original and LLs update, indicate county, but BHG is arguing here for state. Following the links to see what the category currently claims should be included, indicates an
area that stretches well out of the state (
Category:Sportspeople from Connecticut as well maybe?), and checking the actual articles finds half of them make no mention of ever playing in, or for, New York, save their presence in this category. Nor does it appear to be supported by their references (those that aren't dead, anyway). --
Qetuth (
talk)
12:43, 29 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:British rail transport magazines
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:United Kingdom Gospel singers
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:Bestsellers
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.
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:Gaelic Athletic Association competitions
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: Two versions of the same thing. There is no particular difference between GAA competitions and Gaelic games competitions. Gaelic games is probably the wider term referring to all sports and the GAA to the organisation (at least as this is expressed by Wikipedia at
Gaelic games and
Gaelic Athletic Association). Also, the GAA category contains
Category:Camogie cup competitions (which would be organised by the
Camogie Association) so the existence of two similar categories is excessive.
86.40.104.240 (
talk)
21:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Comment BHGs reasons sound reasonable, and reflect the category structure I would expect to find, but after having learnt in recent times that 'all hurling is GAA hurling' I went looking for examples. The trees in question do appear to be largely duplicating most of the same articles, and the only non-GAA articles I have yet found in
Category:Gaelic games competitions are Camogie events like
Ashbourne Cup organised by the
Camogie Association which neither the article or website for seem to indicate is part of the GAA. Yet, these are in the
Category:Gaelic Athletic Association competitions tree anyway. Is this just a matter of Camogie being badly categorised, or something else I am missing? --
Qetuth (
talk)
12:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Well, I'm glad we cleared that up... I think IP has identified a problem - these categories are in practice being used as duplicates, but it sounds like careful cleaning and rescoping is a better answer than a straight merge (ie, is there some objective criterion such as 'officially endorsed' that can be used for the GAA category?). Or perhaps many of the subcats of the non-GAA category should be downmerged into the GAA one. --
Qetuth (
talk)
23:21, 31 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:VDM Publishing writer names
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.
American Hurlers by "GAA county"
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 I debated with myself about whether to introduce this proposal to CFD. I was originally going to leave it at just Ireland. That can now be regularised at other discussions (assuming that they pass). However, when I looked into the
GAA County of
New York GAA, I realised that this too was necessary. I saw that it only contains 4 articles, none is which is a person born or from New York city or state; all are from Ireland. However, each has played for the GAA governing body called the "New York County Board" (in GAA logic, New York is a county. Don't even ask.). That there is a need for disambiguation is accented by the incorrect inclusion of the parent category
Category:Sportspeople from New York. Other members of that category cater explicitly for people from the city or state (e.g.
Category:Golfers from New York,
Category:Tennis people from New York,
Category:Kickboxers from New York). So this is the exception. It seeks to give the false impression that it is about people from the city or state. To disabuse people of that notion, the GAA suffix is necessary. Per the precedent of
Category:Tipperary GAA hurlers held at
here.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
21:20, 27 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose this proposal: From
Brendan Hennessy: "Hennessy spent most of his playing days in New York where he played in a number of National Hurling League finals in the 1950s until the 70's." I don't think he could be said to not be from New York if he spent most of his playing days there. If you trace back far enough most people from New York would be found to be from elsewhere. At which point would it be appropriate to refer to someone as a New Yorker and not Italian or Irish or whichever? As hurling in New York goes there doesn't appear to be any scope for confusion. They don't fly over and back every time they want to play and train, they live there if they play, they work there, etc. It is their life. It is not as if there are hurlers who could lay any greater claim to being from New York. --
86.40.104.240 (
talk)
22:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Comment I have not said that they don't play there. Quite the opposite. What I have said is that they are not from there. If Brendan Hennessy was asked in Clancy's Bar, East 44th Street, "Where are you from?", would he be more likely to say Kerry or New York?
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
22:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose without prejudice to a future renaming request. I'd prefer to put all these discussions on hold and deal with the centrally rather than one at a time, all touching on roughly the same subject matter. --
HighKing (
talk)
16:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Reply NY, NY is a special case. It's not a county as generaly understood. It's extra-territorial and so deserves special consideration. And what do you think that Brendan Hennessy might say in that bar?
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
21:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Reply all of which were rejected at the Tipperary precedent. And what do you think that Brendan Hennessy might say in that bar? I ask the question here because if I ask it at your talk page it's likely to be deleted as soon as it's read.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
21:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Thanks to BHG for kindly pointing out the omission from the nomination. The nomination has been amended to include the state also. New York, New York - so good I had to do it twice. Apologies for the inconvenience that this oversight may have caused. As the premise is now true, I look forward to her amending her vote.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
21:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)reply
LL, please do a little research of your own rather than simply giving a snarky reply based on your continued failure to check what you are talking about. It's tedious enough that you did not do so before making the nomination, but it is disruptive time-wasting for you to continue to do it after your error has been pointed out to you. The premise is still false.
I fear that the only snarky remarks in this debate have come from the opposing side. But let us us pass on in the interests of peace. To the substantive objection. BHG says "So
Category:Sportspeople from New York refers to the whole state, not just the city ... so the scope is therefore correct.". This is not in dispute, especially since the amended nomination now includes both city and state. What I fail to understand is how this justifies an "oppose" vote. Rather it points to the conclusion that the articles it contains refers to people from that state. Since this is demonstrably not true in the case of the New York GAA hurlers, how is it justifiable to include them? Had the category been named "Sportspeople from New York or who may have visited the state or who may have been an illegal immigrant there at some time", I'd understand the oppose vote. But is is not so named and a reasonable person would not so construe it. As the scope of "New York hulers" (and virtually every other "Foo county hurlers" cat) is "people who have played
hurling for
New York GAA", then it is only intended to contain people who play for that county board. It is silent about their birthplace / residence / or use of Star Trek teleportation devices. This is as it should be. If BHG wants to create a category for people who have lived in New York at some time and who happen to play hurling either in New York or elsewhere, she is perfectly entitled to do so. But this is not that category. And the proposed suffix of "GAA" would make that exclusion patently obvious. Why anyone would want to reject the patently obvious, when even expert editors like BHG make errors on the subject, is frankly beyond my ken.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
20:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Question The more I learn about hurling, the more confusing it seems to become. Is the intended scope meant to be the state, the county, their union, their intersection, or something else? The cat desc, both the long-standing original and LLs update, indicate county, but BHG is arguing here for state. Following the links to see what the category currently claims should be included, indicates an
area that stretches well out of the state (
Category:Sportspeople from Connecticut as well maybe?), and checking the actual articles finds half of them make no mention of ever playing in, or for, New York, save their presence in this category. Nor does it appear to be supported by their references (those that aren't dead, anyway). --
Qetuth (
talk)
12:43, 29 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:British rail transport magazines
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:United Kingdom Gospel singers
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:Bestsellers
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.