- 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: double upmerge.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
12:22, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Dog breeds originating in Israel to Category:Dog breeds originating in Asia
- Nominator's rationale: This category has only one page, and I do not know of any other dog breed originating from Israel. So no more pages will be added. Corsican Warrah ( talk) 19:43, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
- Comment the Philippine & Taiwan categories only have 1, are they a problem too? What about the ones with 2? What is the line? Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:34, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
- Yes. So are the ones with 2. Merge them, please. -- Corsican Warrah ( talk) 21:48, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
- Other Categories to Merge:
other categories
|
|---|
|
-- Corsican Warrah ( talk) 17:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- Comment. I have no preference about this either way, but if the nominated categories are deleted, the contents also need to be merged into the appropriate "Animal breeds originating in FOO" category: Category:Animal breeds originating in Israel, etc. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:27, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
- Upmerge per nom. These are very small categories and I don't see much scope for expansion. Dimadick ( talk) 10:05, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
- Upmerge too small of categories to be justified. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 03:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: the additional categories have not been tagged until now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic L ondon 23:28, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Relisting comment: the additional categories have not been tagged until now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic L ondon 23:28, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Double merge, also to the other parent "Animal breeds originating in Foo". I do find it worrying that so many editors are often content to upmerge small categories to only one parent, even if the categories are intersections of two useful hierarchies. This seems careless, and removes valid information from the encyclopedia. – Fayenatic L ondon 23:36, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment.
Caucasian Shepherd Dog is in 7 (including a redlink) of these "originating in" categories (surely an article should only be in one such category) so a purge is needed.
DexDor
(talk)
07:15, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- I removed "Soviet Union" as anachronistic, and Asia & Europe as unnecessary supercategories. This leaves Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Russia. As the breed originates in the Caucasus mountains, those seem legitimate. As for the relevance to this CFD nomination, that article is only in one of the nominated categories, and I don't see overlap in the others, so I don't think a purge would have much effect. – Fayenatic L ondon 19:04, 22 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: delete. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:11, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Category only contains a redirect, which has been recently added to prevent speedy deletion. I can't see any evidence that Edmondson is planning to produce several notable albums anytime soon. Sionk ( talk) 20:53, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete WP:EPONCAT has created a (dubious) exception to small categories so we avoid placing works by a person directly in an eponymous category. I'm not going to carry that WP:SMALLCAT exception so far as to include effectively empty categories though. RevelationDirect ( talk) 19:50, 23 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: Delete Author requested deletion Tito Dutta ( talk) 22:39, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Hopelessly vague definition of category, containing monuments, capital cities, various geography, etc. etc. etc. 86.161.145.206 ( talk) 18:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. Covered by the combination of Category:Buildings and structures in England, Category:Geography of England, and Category:Visitor attractions in England. I pinged the category's creator, Zppix, as I seem to recall talking with them on IRC, and they had a plan for this category? Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Howicus i'm still talking to other editors personally on them some sort of a merge... Is it possible for it not to be deleted for maybe a few more weeks to give me some time to close things up. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ ( talk) 18:38, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- @
Zppix: With who are you talking, and with what are you going to merge it? It's very small right now, so you won't lose much work if it is deleted.
Howicus
(Did I mess up?)
18:40, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Howicus I just recieved an email from the editors they decieded that they will not merge therefore I'm going to go ahead and have this cat deleted. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ ( talk) 18:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- @ Zppix: I notice that you deleted the category yourself. Please note that you shouldn't do anything yourself but to participate in this discussion. The administrator who will close the discussion will also take care of the implementation. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- @ Titodutta: as you acted on Zppix's speedy deletion request while the full CFD template was still on the page, please would you be so kind as to close this discussion and empty the category as well? (See WP:CFDAI if this is new to you.) – Fayenatic L ondon 18:48, 30 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: Keep pending a further discussion about the category tree/main article. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 19:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Decapitalise definite article and remove superfluous 'Northern Ireland'. Gob Lofa ( talk) 18:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Currently not disambiguating anything, as none of the other Troubles have categories for works about them. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I'd have, erm, trouble supporting a category rename in isolation. This category is currently part of the
Category:The Troubles (Northern Ireland) tree so needs to be part of a broader discussion.
Sionk (
talk)
21:01, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I'd support the same for all of them. I nominated this one because it was the first I came across following a discussion at
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland#Capitalising_.27the.27.
Gob Lofa (
talk)
21:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- I interpreted your nomination as a request to remove the disambiguator, Northern Ireland, from the name.
Sionk (
talk)
13:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- It is, as well as the decapitalisation. Gob Lofa ( talk) 14:02, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- I interpreted your nomination as a request to remove the disambiguator, Northern Ireland, from the name.
Sionk (
talk)
13:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I'd support the same for all of them. I nominated this one because it was the first I came across following a discussion at
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland#Capitalising_.27the.27.
Gob Lofa (
talk)
21:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep pending a fuller discussion on the parent.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
12:54, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment - this doesn't apply to the parent as its 'The' comes at the start and would be capitalised anyways. Gob Lofa ( talk) 12:58, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep -- When I was young and visited the Republic of Ireland, I was told that the troubles were the period of the struggle for its independence and the subsequent civil war c.1919-23. Furthermore, the category should match its parent. Peterkingiron ( talk) 14:24, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The listing of the term troubles makes it clear that multiple other times are also so referred to. To only use the term for Northern Ireland is unduly presentist, and assumes a familiarity with the term which is less common among those not from Ireland or the UK, and also becoming less common now that they are a past event. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 04:18, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- @ Peterkingiron: @ Johnpacklambert: Comment, I understand your both votes to be a disagreement with the article name The Troubles not having a disambiguator. It may be worthwhile to re-discuss the article name, e.g. to propose adding years in the article name. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:21, 1 January 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; merge some contents as appropriate to Category:Rebellions by ethnic group. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:12, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Vague name, fails C2C. There are now Rebellions by country; by ethnic group; by ideology; by religious group, in Category:Rebellions for recategorization. Zoupan 13:06, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Confusing; the ones currently in the category should probably be in the ethic group or religious group categories. I suppose it's intended to compliment Category:Rebellions by animals and Category:Rebellions by robots? :) Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Gob Lofa ( talk) 19:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Potential keep - "people" here refers to an ethnic group, such as a tribe. WE could rename to Category:Rebellions by ethnic group. The point is that the rebel groups were not countries. Peterkingiron ( talk) 14:27, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support alternative to rename, purge this category from non-ethnic articles and categories and parent it to Category:History by ethnic group. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:33, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Selective merge to Category:Rebellions by ethnic group, excluding a few such as Jacobites and Naxalites which may however belong in sibling or cousin categories. (Note: the nominator created the target category shortly before making this nomination, so I suggest the closing admin should overwrite it by moving this one after purging non-ethnic members.) – Fayenatic L ondon 21:26, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- You have Rebellions by ideology and Rebellions by religious group.-- Zoupan 18:38, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete I have to say I am not convinced the Cossacks are an ethnic group either.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
04:19, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- User:Johnpacklambert: As Cossacks is categorised in ethnic groups, sub-cats such as Cossack rebellions belong in matching hierarchies, in this case Rebellions by ethnic group. If you disagree, start a discussion at the top of the Cossacks tree, but don't let that override sensible merging here. – Fayenatic L ondon 18:37, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment: For the record, the nominator removed several members from this category on 27 December. [1] @ Zoupan: I don't disagree with any of those changes, but making them before closure of this discussion goes against the CFD process; if you find it necessary to do things like that, please at least leave an explanation in the CFD discussion so that people can see what has changed. – Fayenatic L ondon 18:37, 30 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.
MER-C
13:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Christian liturgies to Category:Christian liturgy
- Nominator's rationale: The subcats are named "liturgy" rather than "liturgies". The articles are not all about individual "liturgies", so IMHO the general rule of using plurals in category names does not apply here. (In other words, this is a topic category rather than a set category.) – Fayenatic L ondon 10:41, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support: plural form is awkward.-- Zoupan 13:07, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support as creator -- JFH ( talk) 14:01, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support To match subcats. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Each individual liturgy is a liturgy. There are multiple liturgical traditions. The name should reflect this plurality. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 12:46, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support as a topic category rather than a set category, the category is a mix of liturgies and aspects of liturgy. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:30, 1 January 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. MER-C 12:33, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. This category only contains a topic article Station days and one church, San Trifone in Posterula, so is not useful for navigation. There is a list at Station_days#Station_churches_of_Lent_and_the_Easter_Octave so the category could be populated, but the list is more informative than a category would be, and I am not sure that this tradition is WP:DEFINING enough to use for categorisation. – Fayenatic L ondon 10:29, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support per nom. In the articles of the churches in the mentioned list, "station church" is sometimes mentioned but not consistently. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:47, 14 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: double upmerge.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
12:22, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Dog breeds originating in Israel to Category:Dog breeds originating in Asia
- Nominator's rationale: This category has only one page, and I do not know of any other dog breed originating from Israel. So no more pages will be added. Corsican Warrah ( talk) 19:43, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
- Comment the Philippine & Taiwan categories only have 1, are they a problem too? What about the ones with 2? What is the line? Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:34, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
- Yes. So are the ones with 2. Merge them, please. -- Corsican Warrah ( talk) 21:48, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
- Other Categories to Merge:
other categories
|
|---|
|
-- Corsican Warrah ( talk) 17:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- Comment. I have no preference about this either way, but if the nominated categories are deleted, the contents also need to be merged into the appropriate "Animal breeds originating in FOO" category: Category:Animal breeds originating in Israel, etc. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:27, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
- Upmerge per nom. These are very small categories and I don't see much scope for expansion. Dimadick ( talk) 10:05, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
- Upmerge too small of categories to be justified. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 03:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: the additional categories have not been tagged until now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic L ondon 23:28, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Relisting comment: the additional categories have not been tagged until now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic L ondon 23:28, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Double merge, also to the other parent "Animal breeds originating in Foo". I do find it worrying that so many editors are often content to upmerge small categories to only one parent, even if the categories are intersections of two useful hierarchies. This seems careless, and removes valid information from the encyclopedia. – Fayenatic L ondon 23:36, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment.
Caucasian Shepherd Dog is in 7 (including a redlink) of these "originating in" categories (surely an article should only be in one such category) so a purge is needed.
DexDor
(talk)
07:15, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- I removed "Soviet Union" as anachronistic, and Asia & Europe as unnecessary supercategories. This leaves Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Russia. As the breed originates in the Caucasus mountains, those seem legitimate. As for the relevance to this CFD nomination, that article is only in one of the nominated categories, and I don't see overlap in the others, so I don't think a purge would have much effect. – Fayenatic L ondon 19:04, 22 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: delete. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:11, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Category only contains a redirect, which has been recently added to prevent speedy deletion. I can't see any evidence that Edmondson is planning to produce several notable albums anytime soon. Sionk ( talk) 20:53, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete WP:EPONCAT has created a (dubious) exception to small categories so we avoid placing works by a person directly in an eponymous category. I'm not going to carry that WP:SMALLCAT exception so far as to include effectively empty categories though. RevelationDirect ( talk) 19:50, 23 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: Delete Author requested deletion Tito Dutta ( talk) 22:39, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Hopelessly vague definition of category, containing monuments, capital cities, various geography, etc. etc. etc. 86.161.145.206 ( talk) 18:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. Covered by the combination of Category:Buildings and structures in England, Category:Geography of England, and Category:Visitor attractions in England. I pinged the category's creator, Zppix, as I seem to recall talking with them on IRC, and they had a plan for this category? Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Howicus i'm still talking to other editors personally on them some sort of a merge... Is it possible for it not to be deleted for maybe a few more weeks to give me some time to close things up. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ ( talk) 18:38, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- @
Zppix: With who are you talking, and with what are you going to merge it? It's very small right now, so you won't lose much work if it is deleted.
Howicus
(Did I mess up?)
18:40, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Howicus I just recieved an email from the editors they decieded that they will not merge therefore I'm going to go ahead and have this cat deleted. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ ( talk) 18:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- @ Zppix: I notice that you deleted the category yourself. Please note that you shouldn't do anything yourself but to participate in this discussion. The administrator who will close the discussion will also take care of the implementation. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- @ Titodutta: as you acted on Zppix's speedy deletion request while the full CFD template was still on the page, please would you be so kind as to close this discussion and empty the category as well? (See WP:CFDAI if this is new to you.) – Fayenatic L ondon 18:48, 30 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: Keep pending a further discussion about the category tree/main article. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 19:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Decapitalise definite article and remove superfluous 'Northern Ireland'. Gob Lofa ( talk) 18:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Currently not disambiguating anything, as none of the other Troubles have categories for works about them. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I'd have, erm, trouble supporting a category rename in isolation. This category is currently part of the
Category:The Troubles (Northern Ireland) tree so needs to be part of a broader discussion.
Sionk (
talk)
21:01, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I'd support the same for all of them. I nominated this one because it was the first I came across following a discussion at
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland#Capitalising_.27the.27.
Gob Lofa (
talk)
21:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- I interpreted your nomination as a request to remove the disambiguator, Northern Ireland, from the name.
Sionk (
talk)
13:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- It is, as well as the decapitalisation. Gob Lofa ( talk) 14:02, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- I interpreted your nomination as a request to remove the disambiguator, Northern Ireland, from the name.
Sionk (
talk)
13:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I'd support the same for all of them. I nominated this one because it was the first I came across following a discussion at
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland#Capitalising_.27the.27.
Gob Lofa (
talk)
21:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep pending a fuller discussion on the parent.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
12:54, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment - this doesn't apply to the parent as its 'The' comes at the start and would be capitalised anyways. Gob Lofa ( talk) 12:58, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep -- When I was young and visited the Republic of Ireland, I was told that the troubles were the period of the struggle for its independence and the subsequent civil war c.1919-23. Furthermore, the category should match its parent. Peterkingiron ( talk) 14:24, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The listing of the term troubles makes it clear that multiple other times are also so referred to. To only use the term for Northern Ireland is unduly presentist, and assumes a familiarity with the term which is less common among those not from Ireland or the UK, and also becoming less common now that they are a past event. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 04:18, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- @ Peterkingiron: @ Johnpacklambert: Comment, I understand your both votes to be a disagreement with the article name The Troubles not having a disambiguator. It may be worthwhile to re-discuss the article name, e.g. to propose adding years in the article name. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:21, 1 January 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; merge some contents as appropriate to Category:Rebellions by ethnic group. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:12, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Vague name, fails C2C. There are now Rebellions by country; by ethnic group; by ideology; by religious group, in Category:Rebellions for recategorization. Zoupan 13:06, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Confusing; the ones currently in the category should probably be in the ethic group or religious group categories. I suppose it's intended to compliment Category:Rebellions by animals and Category:Rebellions by robots? :) Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Gob Lofa ( talk) 19:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Potential keep - "people" here refers to an ethnic group, such as a tribe. WE could rename to Category:Rebellions by ethnic group. The point is that the rebel groups were not countries. Peterkingiron ( talk) 14:27, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support alternative to rename, purge this category from non-ethnic articles and categories and parent it to Category:History by ethnic group. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:33, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Selective merge to Category:Rebellions by ethnic group, excluding a few such as Jacobites and Naxalites which may however belong in sibling or cousin categories. (Note: the nominator created the target category shortly before making this nomination, so I suggest the closing admin should overwrite it by moving this one after purging non-ethnic members.) – Fayenatic L ondon 21:26, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- You have Rebellions by ideology and Rebellions by religious group.-- Zoupan 18:38, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete I have to say I am not convinced the Cossacks are an ethnic group either.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
04:19, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- User:Johnpacklambert: As Cossacks is categorised in ethnic groups, sub-cats such as Cossack rebellions belong in matching hierarchies, in this case Rebellions by ethnic group. If you disagree, start a discussion at the top of the Cossacks tree, but don't let that override sensible merging here. – Fayenatic L ondon 18:37, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment: For the record, the nominator removed several members from this category on 27 December. [1] @ Zoupan: I don't disagree with any of those changes, but making them before closure of this discussion goes against the CFD process; if you find it necessary to do things like that, please at least leave an explanation in the CFD discussion so that people can see what has changed. – Fayenatic L ondon 18:37, 30 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.
MER-C
13:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Christian liturgies to Category:Christian liturgy
- Nominator's rationale: The subcats are named "liturgy" rather than "liturgies". The articles are not all about individual "liturgies", so IMHO the general rule of using plurals in category names does not apply here. (In other words, this is a topic category rather than a set category.) – Fayenatic L ondon 10:41, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support: plural form is awkward.-- Zoupan 13:07, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support as creator -- JFH ( talk) 14:01, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support To match subcats. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Each individual liturgy is a liturgy. There are multiple liturgical traditions. The name should reflect this plurality. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 12:46, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support as a topic category rather than a set category, the category is a mix of liturgies and aspects of liturgy. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:30, 1 January 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. MER-C 12:33, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. This category only contains a topic article Station days and one church, San Trifone in Posterula, so is not useful for navigation. There is a list at Station_days#Station_churches_of_Lent_and_the_Easter_Octave so the category could be populated, but the list is more informative than a category would be, and I am not sure that this tradition is WP:DEFINING enough to use for categorisation. – Fayenatic L ondon 10:29, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support per nom. In the articles of the churches in the mentioned list, "station church" is sometimes mentioned but not consistently. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:47, 14 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.