- 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 just this category. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:27, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. The Metrolink system does not serve San Diego County and is unlikely to expand there. This category will only have one article in it for the foreseeable future. Regards, James( talk/ contribs) 23:52, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Neutral. I really don't know about this.Support but I have a concern as well. If we merge these two categories, all pages in all subcategories of Category:Metrolink stations should also be copied to Category:Metrolink stations, and Category:Metrolink stations should be made a non-diffusing category rather than the diffusing category that it currently is. epicgenius ( talk) 03:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)- Support nomination - but strongly oppose suggestion to copy all articles from the subcategories. Only articles that don't fit in the subcategories should be placed in the main category.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
08:33, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle: Technically, the
Category:Metrolink stations in San Diego County, California fits into
Category:Metrolink stations, but Category:Metrolink stations in San Diego County, California is extremely small.
epicgenius (
talk)
01:22, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, that's why I support the nomination. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:36, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle: Technically, the
Category:Metrolink stations in San Diego County, California fits into
Category:Metrolink stations, but Category:Metrolink stations in San Diego County, California is extremely small.
epicgenius (
talk)
01:22, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- 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: no real consensus on which way to go here, so I'm reinstating the status quo ante by merging Category:Healthcare companies of the United Kingdom to Category:Health care companies of the United Kingdom. If users want to nominate Category:Health care companies of the United Kingdom to remove the space, then that could be done. The way this nomination was carried out by the nominator was inappropriate, as pointed out by Bearcat. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:45, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: empty
Rathfelder (
talk)
21:30, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- This category is empty only because the nominator emptied it out of process, by moving everything in it to a new Category:Healthcare companies of the United Kingdom. But the established naming convention within Category:Health care companies by country is for "health care" to be two words rather than one, so this was not an appropriate action to take without a wider discussion first. I'm not opposed to the idea that they could be renamed to "healthcare" instead of "health care", but that would require a consensus of Wikipedians, not one user's arbitrary decision: moving it without discussion, and then listing the existing category for deletion as "empty" without acknowleding why it's empty, is not the way to go about it. Reverse merge everything from Category:Healthcare companies of the United Kingdom back here, and list for discussion if you actually want to pursue a rename — even if the new category is the end result, this should remain in place as a {{ categoryredirect}} to it anyway. Bearcat ( talk) 21:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Merge to Category:Healthcare companies of the United Kingdom because we should standardize with "healthcare" as a word less likely to be misconstrued in various grammatical constructs, and also used in Britain, and slightly shorter. -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 07:02, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- Reverse emptying and keep everything in health care categories at least until, possibly, article Health care is going to be renamed to Healthcare. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:38, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete -- Yes it may have been emptied out of process, which is wrong, but the UK term is "healthcare" not "health care" so that Category:Healthcare companies of the United Kingdom should be kept. Usage elsewhere may be different, so that I am not advocating renaming the parent or main article. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:21, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- If there is consensus that this is an WP:ENGVAR issue, I will withdraw my earlier vote and comment. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:34, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Even if there is a consensus that "healthcare" rather than "health care" is the appropriate wording for a UK category, the version with the space in it would need to be retained as a category redirect, in order to catch instances of somebody mistakenly filing an article in it (which has a high prospect of happening if most of the other sibling categories remain at "health care".) So outright deletion wouldn't really be appropriate here; it would have to be maintained as a redirect. Bearcat ( talk) 19:36, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- 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: rename to
Category:Festivals of Bangladeshi culture. No support for merge proposed here but among the votes to rename the category, the consensus is to rename the category as such. This rename seems to solve the concerns expressed by everyone.
Ricky81682 (
talk)
20:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Bangladeshi festivals to Category:Festivals in Bangladesh
- Nominator's rationale: If there's a distinction here between these two categories, I'm not seeing it. Merge, unless I'm missing something. Bearcat ( talk) 20:35, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment the current category should be for ethnocultural festivals of Bengladeshi ethnocultural groups regardless of location in the world, while the target should be for festivals in the country of Bangladesh, regardless of ethnocultural background. But the current content seems to be used only for that in Bangladesh. -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 07:04, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- In theory, I'd fully understand that sort of distinction — though I'd suggest that a category for that purpose should be named differently than this, to minimize potential confusion about its intent. But as you correctly pointed out in your final sentence, that isn't the way this category is being used right now; in its current form, it's just an alternate wording for the merge target rather than a separate kind of thing.
Bearcat (
talk)
18:58, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- The two categories are confusing, and may not be used correctly. Boishakhi Mela, a festival strongly associated with the British-Bangladeshi community in London, is an example of a festival in Category:Bangladeshi festivals that does not belong in Category:Festivals in Bangladesh. -- Worldbruce ( talk) 01:21, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- In theory, I'd fully understand that sort of distinction — though I'd suggest that a category for that purpose should be named differently than this, to minimize potential confusion about its intent. But as you correctly pointed out in your final sentence, that isn't the way this category is being used right now; in its current form, it's just an alternate wording for the merge target rather than a separate kind of thing.
Bearcat (
talk)
18:58, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- Reverse merge and include expatriate festivals in the merged category. Marcocapelle ( talk) 11:53, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- All of its sibling categories in Category:Festivals by country are named in the "Festivals in Country" format rather than the "Nationality festivals" one. Is there a substantive reason why Bangladesh should be an isolated outlier to an established naming convention? Bearcat ( talk) 01:11, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
- It should be by nationality across the globe, because it is part of parent Category:Culture by nationality and culture also includes expatriate culture, as the nomination shows. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:42, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
- But "festivals by country in which they are located" is a thing that warrants categorization too. For example, a festival of Bangladeshi culture in the United States rightly should be categorized on the "in the United States" part of its mandate every bit as much as the "Bangladeshi diaspora" part — but if we swapped the existing category structure in the manner you suggest, it would lose that category. Bearcat ( talk) 18:15, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
- I wouldn't agree with a loss like that, because the festival has also become part of American culture. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:08, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment. It sounds to me like both could be kept. Category:Festivals in Bangladesh can hold any festival in Bangladesh. Category:Bangladeshi festivals could hold Category:Festivals in Bangladesh (or just link them through a "see also") plus any Bangladeshi festival not in Bangladesh, such as Boishakhi Mela. Articles that are in both should be removed from Category:Bangladeshi festivals. This is how I would close this. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- Tending to oppose a merge per nom. Clearly oppose a reverse merge per Marcocapelle, as this one is fully in line with the Category:Festivals in Asia by country tree. Least bad solution seems making Category:Festivals in Bangladesh a subcategory of Category:Bangladeshi festivals per Good Olfactory. -- PanchoS ( talk) 09:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- I see what you mean. While I wasn't aware of this when offering the alternative, in retrospect I was actually against the whole Category:Festivals by country scheme and would rather turn it into a by nationality / by ethnicity tree, as this is really a cultural thing. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:26, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- Merge Festivals should be classed by where they are. If we are going to group things not directly connected with the country we should use a more clear name. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 23:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- Keep or merge to Category:Festivals of Bangladeshi culture. Obviously Category:Festivals in Bangladesh needs to be kept, but a festival category for festivals of Bangladeshi culture (irregardless of location) has obvious use. See Category:Festivals by culture for other similar examples. The descriptions just need to be made clear, so there's no confusion among readers that one category is for cultural festivals and the other one is for festivals by location. (Note this discussion also applies to a current one at Category:Indian festivals) Earflaps ( talk) 07:37, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support alt rename to Category:Festivals of Bangladeshi culture per reasons outlined before. This overturns my previous vote. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:22, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support alt rename per Earflaps. -- PanchoS ( talk) 14:36, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- 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: delete. (non-admin closure) sst✈ (discuss) 16:14, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection by location. The only entry here is a single subcategory, making it a WP:SMALLCAT — and that subcategory already gets parented by Category:American designers anyway through the Category:American architects subtree, so this isn't adding anything to its parentage except a duplicate path to the same place. And no other state of the United States has a "Designers from State" category, so this isn't part of any "overall accepted subcategorization scheme" that would grant it an exemption from having to be either defining or diffusing. Delete. Bearcat ( talk) 19:38, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete -- This is an unnecessary category level. The one sub-cat is correctly in American architects by state, which is below American designers. This appears to be the only case where this level of designers exists. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- 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 just this category. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:27, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. The Metrolink system does not serve San Diego County and is unlikely to expand there. This category will only have one article in it for the foreseeable future. Regards, James( talk/ contribs) 23:52, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Neutral. I really don't know about this.Support but I have a concern as well. If we merge these two categories, all pages in all subcategories of Category:Metrolink stations should also be copied to Category:Metrolink stations, and Category:Metrolink stations should be made a non-diffusing category rather than the diffusing category that it currently is. epicgenius ( talk) 03:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)- Support nomination - but strongly oppose suggestion to copy all articles from the subcategories. Only articles that don't fit in the subcategories should be placed in the main category.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
08:33, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle: Technically, the
Category:Metrolink stations in San Diego County, California fits into
Category:Metrolink stations, but Category:Metrolink stations in San Diego County, California is extremely small.
epicgenius (
talk)
01:22, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, that's why I support the nomination. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:36, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle: Technically, the
Category:Metrolink stations in San Diego County, California fits into
Category:Metrolink stations, but Category:Metrolink stations in San Diego County, California is extremely small.
epicgenius (
talk)
01:22, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- 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: no real consensus on which way to go here, so I'm reinstating the status quo ante by merging Category:Healthcare companies of the United Kingdom to Category:Health care companies of the United Kingdom. If users want to nominate Category:Health care companies of the United Kingdom to remove the space, then that could be done. The way this nomination was carried out by the nominator was inappropriate, as pointed out by Bearcat. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:45, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: empty
Rathfelder (
talk)
21:30, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- This category is empty only because the nominator emptied it out of process, by moving everything in it to a new Category:Healthcare companies of the United Kingdom. But the established naming convention within Category:Health care companies by country is for "health care" to be two words rather than one, so this was not an appropriate action to take without a wider discussion first. I'm not opposed to the idea that they could be renamed to "healthcare" instead of "health care", but that would require a consensus of Wikipedians, not one user's arbitrary decision: moving it without discussion, and then listing the existing category for deletion as "empty" without acknowleding why it's empty, is not the way to go about it. Reverse merge everything from Category:Healthcare companies of the United Kingdom back here, and list for discussion if you actually want to pursue a rename — even if the new category is the end result, this should remain in place as a {{ categoryredirect}} to it anyway. Bearcat ( talk) 21:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Merge to Category:Healthcare companies of the United Kingdom because we should standardize with "healthcare" as a word less likely to be misconstrued in various grammatical constructs, and also used in Britain, and slightly shorter. -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 07:02, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- Reverse emptying and keep everything in health care categories at least until, possibly, article Health care is going to be renamed to Healthcare. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:38, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete -- Yes it may have been emptied out of process, which is wrong, but the UK term is "healthcare" not "health care" so that Category:Healthcare companies of the United Kingdom should be kept. Usage elsewhere may be different, so that I am not advocating renaming the parent or main article. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:21, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- If there is consensus that this is an WP:ENGVAR issue, I will withdraw my earlier vote and comment. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:34, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Even if there is a consensus that "healthcare" rather than "health care" is the appropriate wording for a UK category, the version with the space in it would need to be retained as a category redirect, in order to catch instances of somebody mistakenly filing an article in it (which has a high prospect of happening if most of the other sibling categories remain at "health care".) So outright deletion wouldn't really be appropriate here; it would have to be maintained as a redirect. Bearcat ( talk) 19:36, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- 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: rename to
Category:Festivals of Bangladeshi culture. No support for merge proposed here but among the votes to rename the category, the consensus is to rename the category as such. This rename seems to solve the concerns expressed by everyone.
Ricky81682 (
talk)
20:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Bangladeshi festivals to Category:Festivals in Bangladesh
- Nominator's rationale: If there's a distinction here between these two categories, I'm not seeing it. Merge, unless I'm missing something. Bearcat ( talk) 20:35, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment the current category should be for ethnocultural festivals of Bengladeshi ethnocultural groups regardless of location in the world, while the target should be for festivals in the country of Bangladesh, regardless of ethnocultural background. But the current content seems to be used only for that in Bangladesh. -- 70.51.44.60 ( talk) 07:04, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- In theory, I'd fully understand that sort of distinction — though I'd suggest that a category for that purpose should be named differently than this, to minimize potential confusion about its intent. But as you correctly pointed out in your final sentence, that isn't the way this category is being used right now; in its current form, it's just an alternate wording for the merge target rather than a separate kind of thing.
Bearcat (
talk)
18:58, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- The two categories are confusing, and may not be used correctly. Boishakhi Mela, a festival strongly associated with the British-Bangladeshi community in London, is an example of a festival in Category:Bangladeshi festivals that does not belong in Category:Festivals in Bangladesh. -- Worldbruce ( talk) 01:21, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- In theory, I'd fully understand that sort of distinction — though I'd suggest that a category for that purpose should be named differently than this, to minimize potential confusion about its intent. But as you correctly pointed out in your final sentence, that isn't the way this category is being used right now; in its current form, it's just an alternate wording for the merge target rather than a separate kind of thing.
Bearcat (
talk)
18:58, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
- Reverse merge and include expatriate festivals in the merged category. Marcocapelle ( talk) 11:53, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- All of its sibling categories in Category:Festivals by country are named in the "Festivals in Country" format rather than the "Nationality festivals" one. Is there a substantive reason why Bangladesh should be an isolated outlier to an established naming convention? Bearcat ( talk) 01:11, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
- It should be by nationality across the globe, because it is part of parent Category:Culture by nationality and culture also includes expatriate culture, as the nomination shows. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:42, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
- But "festivals by country in which they are located" is a thing that warrants categorization too. For example, a festival of Bangladeshi culture in the United States rightly should be categorized on the "in the United States" part of its mandate every bit as much as the "Bangladeshi diaspora" part — but if we swapped the existing category structure in the manner you suggest, it would lose that category. Bearcat ( talk) 18:15, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
- I wouldn't agree with a loss like that, because the festival has also become part of American culture. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:08, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment. It sounds to me like both could be kept. Category:Festivals in Bangladesh can hold any festival in Bangladesh. Category:Bangladeshi festivals could hold Category:Festivals in Bangladesh (or just link them through a "see also") plus any Bangladeshi festival not in Bangladesh, such as Boishakhi Mela. Articles that are in both should be removed from Category:Bangladeshi festivals. This is how I would close this. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- Tending to oppose a merge per nom. Clearly oppose a reverse merge per Marcocapelle, as this one is fully in line with the Category:Festivals in Asia by country tree. Least bad solution seems making Category:Festivals in Bangladesh a subcategory of Category:Bangladeshi festivals per Good Olfactory. -- PanchoS ( talk) 09:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- I see what you mean. While I wasn't aware of this when offering the alternative, in retrospect I was actually against the whole Category:Festivals by country scheme and would rather turn it into a by nationality / by ethnicity tree, as this is really a cultural thing. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:26, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- Merge Festivals should be classed by where they are. If we are going to group things not directly connected with the country we should use a more clear name. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 23:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
- Keep or merge to Category:Festivals of Bangladeshi culture. Obviously Category:Festivals in Bangladesh needs to be kept, but a festival category for festivals of Bangladeshi culture (irregardless of location) has obvious use. See Category:Festivals by culture for other similar examples. The descriptions just need to be made clear, so there's no confusion among readers that one category is for cultural festivals and the other one is for festivals by location. (Note this discussion also applies to a current one at Category:Indian festivals) Earflaps ( talk) 07:37, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support alt rename to Category:Festivals of Bangladeshi culture per reasons outlined before. This overturns my previous vote. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:22, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support alt rename per Earflaps. -- PanchoS ( talk) 14:36, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- 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: delete. (non-admin closure) sst✈ (discuss) 16:14, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection by location. The only entry here is a single subcategory, making it a WP:SMALLCAT — and that subcategory already gets parented by Category:American designers anyway through the Category:American architects subtree, so this isn't adding anything to its parentage except a duplicate path to the same place. And no other state of the United States has a "Designers from State" category, so this isn't part of any "overall accepted subcategorization scheme" that would grant it an exemption from having to be either defining or diffusing. Delete. Bearcat ( talk) 19:38, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete -- This is an unnecessary category level. The one sub-cat is correctly in American architects by state, which is below American designers. This appears to be the only case where this level of designers exists. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- 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.