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, though no one seemed to have particularly strong opinions on the matter.
Good Ol’factory(talk) 00:41, 2 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: I am sure that a similarly gendered category for TV presenters was deleted at CFD, but I can't find the discussion. I am neutral on this one for now, because I think that there is a case to be made that gender is a
WP:DEFINING characteristic of this occupation.
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 19:12, 12 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Comment. I would say, personally, that gender is only a defining characteristic to be subcategorized separately, if there have been serious discussions about gender for this category, or if the distribution between the two genders is very skewed.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment. If we had categories for "Individual men" etc then category intersection (
WP:CATSCAN) could generate a list of articles about Indian male presenters etc. Has this ever been seriously considered? Otherwise, we're going to continually be having these discussions at CFD.
DexDor (
talk) 11:43, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Merge per nom. Given that no one has identified a reason not to merge, it probably should be done.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 00:13, 30 June 2014 (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:Diagnostic test
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: Had one page, which I moved to "Medical tests". Also nominating "Medical diagnostic" parent category, which has no other children.
Martin BerkaT|
C 20:27, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment Thanks for disclosing the one article that was moved.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 00:27, 25 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Support Although this does have a potential lead article,
Diagnostic test, I'm not clear how you would have a hard and fast rule for breaking this out from medical tests in general.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 00:27, 25 June 2014 (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:Jewish composers and songwriters
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. The problem here isn't the "Jewish" part, so I'd kindly thank the advocates to avoid the accusations of anti-Semitism that typically bedevil almost any discussion of a Jewish-related category — rather, it's the smoosh of "composers and songwriters" that's the issue. There is not, in fact, a single other category in all of Wikipedia that combines the two occupations into an umbrella category of this type, except for two geographical subcats of this — in all other cases, composers and songwriters are two separate category trees which are not lashed together into a "composers and songwriters" parent, and in fact this one already has subcats for both
Category:Jewish composers and
Category:Jewish songwriters too. Those two subcategories should certainly be retained, but this one is not needed as a parent for them. Delete, and recat all entries in the appropriate composers or songwriters subcats instead of this.
Bearcat (
talk) 18:40, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete/split. I have added the American and European subcats into this nomination. There are parent categories for
Category:Jewish American musicians but not for European Jews by occupation. –
FayenaticLondon 19:18, 23 June 2014 (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:Discontinued versions of Microsoft Windows
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:withdrawn. –
FayenaticLondon 16:46, 25 June 2014 (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:Global sports
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: Unclear criteria for inclusion.
NickSt (
talk) 18:09, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Almost all sports have at least some form of "global" following — so, indeed, it would take an arbitrary cutoff (and thus an
WP:OC#ARBITRARY violation) to determine whether any given sport was "global" enough to belong in this category or not. Delete.
Bearcat (
talk) 18:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose - I have added inclusion criteria and disclaimer:
This is a top level category for sports events that have become globalized on a commercial basis, such as world championships and
Olympic games.
Note: Pages in this category should be moved to subcategories where applicable. This category may require frequent maintenance to avoid becoming too large. It should directly contain very few, if any, articles and should mainly contain subcategories.
The definition given above, "Sports events that have become globalized on a commercial basis, such as world championships and
Olympic games."
Meclee (
talk) 00:28, 24 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment/Request I added this category to the very broad
Category:Sports tree. I think it would be helpful if you placed this in a more specific sub-cat in that tree so we could better understand how this fits.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 00:43, 25 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. The inclusion criteria is ambiguous and subjective.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 19:24, 30 June 2014 (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:Olympic recognised sports
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:delete. –
FayenaticLondon 23:11, 14 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Unclear criteria for inclusion.
NickSt (
talk) 17:39, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Just for a bit of added clarification, since the nominator's rationale has some potential to be misunderstood: while the category name sounds perfectly logical and clear, we already have a category for
Category:Olympic sports, of which this is a subcategory — and what's lacking is a clear and explicit criterion to differentiate the two things. Ergo, delete per nom.
Bearcat (
talk) 18:47, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
I see that you've added
Offshore powerboat racing (to
Category:Former Summer Olympic sports as well). I'd have to question this - is it useful? Has there been any olympic involvement with powerboating, such that the olympics are now of any relevance to powerboaters? It's also uncited. As is well known, the IOC express disinterest in sports with engines. Yet at
olympic sports there's a list (with a broken cite) that some such sports "have their governing bodies recognized by the IOC, though not contested in the Olympic Games". Now if that's a thing, then
Category:Olympic recognised sports has some justification. I'm not seeing it though – there's not enough citation and I'm not convinced that such a grouping is at all notable. "We know it exists but it's nothing to do with us" is not a strong statement of relevance, especially not to the sport itself (the list might survive at
olympic sports). It's like asking the Royal Horticultural Society for their views on welding, provided that no-one is going to be doing any welding at the Chelsea flower show.
Andy Dingley (
talk) 11:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Additional info.
ARISF is Association of IOC Recognised International Sports Federations (
Official site). Here is list of recognized sports:
[2]NickSt (
talk) 15:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete/listify. Sports etc (e.g.
tug of war,
chess) should not be categorized under the Olympics.
DexDor (
talk) 05:35, 4 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete This is too passing of a phenomenon to be worth categorizing by.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 04:17, 12 July 2014 (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:Stick fighting
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. Basic English grammar: Hyphenate compound noun phrases. If I were engaged in "stick fighting", I'd be fighting against sticks, not using sticks to fight with. Cleanup of
stick-fighting to use the consistent spelling was a simple matter. An argument can be made for
Category:Stickfighting, actually, since most well-established sporting-related compounds are eventually de-hyphenated and fully compounded. External sources vary, and some do use "stickfighting", others "stick-fighting". The article presently at
Nguni stick-fighting used "stickfighting" as well as "Stick Fighting" and various other constructions, some acceptable some not. Some sources at
Bataireacht hyphenate. Regardless, it needs to be compounded one way or the other. See also:
World Extreme Cagefighting (note it's not "Cage Fighting"),
shin-kicking (not "shin kicking"),
kickboxing (not "kick boxing"),
American football &
Category:American football (not "foot ball"). Some spaced-apart sport and game names should be spaced, because they are not compound noun phrases, but simple nouns with modifiers, usually descriptive classifications by goals/rules, sanctioning body, motorized or not, with animal or not, type of venue/surface, combination of two sports, etc.:
combat sports (
Category:Combat sports),
submission wrestling,
Olympic fencing,
alpine skiing,
motorcycle racing,
equestrian vaulting,
speed golf, etc. Even in some of those cases, compounding is frequent anyway: see
World Chessboxing Association vs.
World Chess Boxing Organisation, and
shootfighting vs.
shoot boxing. Contrast
cricket-spitting (the human spitting of crickets) and
cockroach racing (cockroaches racing each other). A few spaced-apart cases can be found in our articles and categories that are closer to "stick fighting" in linguistic structure, but they're overwhelmingly outnumbered by the compounded ones (hyphenated or fully compounded), and represent
WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS stuff that needs to be cleaned up in turn. I recently moved
ferret-legging,
dwarf-tossing,
cricket-spitting,
keg-tossing, and some others to hyphenated names for the same reason as this CfR (and moved
wood chopping to
woodchopping as most sources seemed to fully compound it as the name of a sport.) PS: Note that constructions of the form
hammer throw,
caber toss and
shot put are usually not hyphenated, vs., e.g., "hammer-throwing", though they are sometimes fully compounded, e.g. "woodchop" as attested as an alternate name at
woodchopping. —
SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 07:47, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Update: Reliable sources are inconsistent, even on the same page, so we might as well go with the hyphenation rules favored by major style guides, absent clear evidence that the term is usually completely compounded. For example see, this
martial arts encyclopedia entry, which reads: "Mani Stick Fighting: This little-known stick-fighting martial art...". Note however that stub at
mani stick fighting is actually an unintentional content fork from
juego de maní; I'm working on merging them to the latter (the only source for "mani stick-fighting" or "mani stick fighting" is the aforementioned source with inconsistent spelling). —
SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 10:36, 23 June 2014 (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.
The result of the discussion was:merge, though no one seemed to have particularly strong opinions on the matter.
Good Ol’factory(talk) 00:41, 2 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: I am sure that a similarly gendered category for TV presenters was deleted at CFD, but I can't find the discussion. I am neutral on this one for now, because I think that there is a case to be made that gender is a
WP:DEFINING characteristic of this occupation.
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 19:12, 12 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Comment. I would say, personally, that gender is only a defining characteristic to be subcategorized separately, if there have been serious discussions about gender for this category, or if the distribution between the two genders is very skewed.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment. If we had categories for "Individual men" etc then category intersection (
WP:CATSCAN) could generate a list of articles about Indian male presenters etc. Has this ever been seriously considered? Otherwise, we're going to continually be having these discussions at CFD.
DexDor (
talk) 11:43, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Merge per nom. Given that no one has identified a reason not to merge, it probably should be done.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 00:13, 30 June 2014 (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:Diagnostic test
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: Had one page, which I moved to "Medical tests". Also nominating "Medical diagnostic" parent category, which has no other children.
Martin BerkaT|
C 20:27, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment Thanks for disclosing the one article that was moved.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 00:27, 25 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Support Although this does have a potential lead article,
Diagnostic test, I'm not clear how you would have a hard and fast rule for breaking this out from medical tests in general.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 00:27, 25 June 2014 (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:Jewish composers and songwriters
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. The problem here isn't the "Jewish" part, so I'd kindly thank the advocates to avoid the accusations of anti-Semitism that typically bedevil almost any discussion of a Jewish-related category — rather, it's the smoosh of "composers and songwriters" that's the issue. There is not, in fact, a single other category in all of Wikipedia that combines the two occupations into an umbrella category of this type, except for two geographical subcats of this — in all other cases, composers and songwriters are two separate category trees which are not lashed together into a "composers and songwriters" parent, and in fact this one already has subcats for both
Category:Jewish composers and
Category:Jewish songwriters too. Those two subcategories should certainly be retained, but this one is not needed as a parent for them. Delete, and recat all entries in the appropriate composers or songwriters subcats instead of this.
Bearcat (
talk) 18:40, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete/split. I have added the American and European subcats into this nomination. There are parent categories for
Category:Jewish American musicians but not for European Jews by occupation. –
FayenaticLondon 19:18, 23 June 2014 (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:Discontinued versions of Microsoft Windows
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:withdrawn. –
FayenaticLondon 16:46, 25 June 2014 (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:Global sports
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: Unclear criteria for inclusion.
NickSt (
talk) 18:09, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Almost all sports have at least some form of "global" following — so, indeed, it would take an arbitrary cutoff (and thus an
WP:OC#ARBITRARY violation) to determine whether any given sport was "global" enough to belong in this category or not. Delete.
Bearcat (
talk) 18:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose - I have added inclusion criteria and disclaimer:
This is a top level category for sports events that have become globalized on a commercial basis, such as world championships and
Olympic games.
Note: Pages in this category should be moved to subcategories where applicable. This category may require frequent maintenance to avoid becoming too large. It should directly contain very few, if any, articles and should mainly contain subcategories.
The definition given above, "Sports events that have become globalized on a commercial basis, such as world championships and
Olympic games."
Meclee (
talk) 00:28, 24 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment/Request I added this category to the very broad
Category:Sports tree. I think it would be helpful if you placed this in a more specific sub-cat in that tree so we could better understand how this fits.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 00:43, 25 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. The inclusion criteria is ambiguous and subjective.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 19:24, 30 June 2014 (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:Olympic recognised sports
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:delete. –
FayenaticLondon 23:11, 14 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Unclear criteria for inclusion.
NickSt (
talk) 17:39, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Just for a bit of added clarification, since the nominator's rationale has some potential to be misunderstood: while the category name sounds perfectly logical and clear, we already have a category for
Category:Olympic sports, of which this is a subcategory — and what's lacking is a clear and explicit criterion to differentiate the two things. Ergo, delete per nom.
Bearcat (
talk) 18:47, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
I see that you've added
Offshore powerboat racing (to
Category:Former Summer Olympic sports as well). I'd have to question this - is it useful? Has there been any olympic involvement with powerboating, such that the olympics are now of any relevance to powerboaters? It's also uncited. As is well known, the IOC express disinterest in sports with engines. Yet at
olympic sports there's a list (with a broken cite) that some such sports "have their governing bodies recognized by the IOC, though not contested in the Olympic Games". Now if that's a thing, then
Category:Olympic recognised sports has some justification. I'm not seeing it though – there's not enough citation and I'm not convinced that such a grouping is at all notable. "We know it exists but it's nothing to do with us" is not a strong statement of relevance, especially not to the sport itself (the list might survive at
olympic sports). It's like asking the Royal Horticultural Society for their views on welding, provided that no-one is going to be doing any welding at the Chelsea flower show.
Andy Dingley (
talk) 11:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Additional info.
ARISF is Association of IOC Recognised International Sports Federations (
Official site). Here is list of recognized sports:
[2]NickSt (
talk) 15:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete/listify. Sports etc (e.g.
tug of war,
chess) should not be categorized under the Olympics.
DexDor (
talk) 05:35, 4 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete This is too passing of a phenomenon to be worth categorizing by.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 04:17, 12 July 2014 (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:Stick fighting
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. Basic English grammar: Hyphenate compound noun phrases. If I were engaged in "stick fighting", I'd be fighting against sticks, not using sticks to fight with. Cleanup of
stick-fighting to use the consistent spelling was a simple matter. An argument can be made for
Category:Stickfighting, actually, since most well-established sporting-related compounds are eventually de-hyphenated and fully compounded. External sources vary, and some do use "stickfighting", others "stick-fighting". The article presently at
Nguni stick-fighting used "stickfighting" as well as "Stick Fighting" and various other constructions, some acceptable some not. Some sources at
Bataireacht hyphenate. Regardless, it needs to be compounded one way or the other. See also:
World Extreme Cagefighting (note it's not "Cage Fighting"),
shin-kicking (not "shin kicking"),
kickboxing (not "kick boxing"),
American football &
Category:American football (not "foot ball"). Some spaced-apart sport and game names should be spaced, because they are not compound noun phrases, but simple nouns with modifiers, usually descriptive classifications by goals/rules, sanctioning body, motorized or not, with animal or not, type of venue/surface, combination of two sports, etc.:
combat sports (
Category:Combat sports),
submission wrestling,
Olympic fencing,
alpine skiing,
motorcycle racing,
equestrian vaulting,
speed golf, etc. Even in some of those cases, compounding is frequent anyway: see
World Chessboxing Association vs.
World Chess Boxing Organisation, and
shootfighting vs.
shoot boxing. Contrast
cricket-spitting (the human spitting of crickets) and
cockroach racing (cockroaches racing each other). A few spaced-apart cases can be found in our articles and categories that are closer to "stick fighting" in linguistic structure, but they're overwhelmingly outnumbered by the compounded ones (hyphenated or fully compounded), and represent
WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS stuff that needs to be cleaned up in turn. I recently moved
ferret-legging,
dwarf-tossing,
cricket-spitting,
keg-tossing, and some others to hyphenated names for the same reason as this CfR (and moved
wood chopping to
woodchopping as most sources seemed to fully compound it as the name of a sport.) PS: Note that constructions of the form
hammer throw,
caber toss and
shot put are usually not hyphenated, vs., e.g., "hammer-throwing", though they are sometimes fully compounded, e.g. "woodchop" as attested as an alternate name at
woodchopping. —
SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 07:47, 23 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Update: Reliable sources are inconsistent, even on the same page, so we might as well go with the hyphenation rules favored by major style guides, absent clear evidence that the term is usually completely compounded. For example see, this
martial arts encyclopedia entry, which reads: "Mani Stick Fighting: This little-known stick-fighting martial art...". Note however that stub at
mani stick fighting is actually an unintentional content fork from
juego de maní; I'm working on merging them to the latter (the only source for "mani stick-fighting" or "mani stick fighting" is the aforementioned source with inconsistent spelling). —
SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 10:36, 23 June 2014 (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.