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:revert recent changes and upmerge. –
FayenaticLondon 22:13, 4 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: upmerge per
WP:SMALLCAT, only one article. No need to merge it to the other parent
Category:Andalusia since the one article refers to Gibraltar instead of Andalusia.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 22:19, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Not so small anymore. Propose renaming to
Category:Andalusian Spanish instead. -
PanchoS (
talk) 23:50, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply After some reconsideration regarding the Andalusian dialects throughout the Americas, I think the category should remain as is, so keep. -
PanchoS (
talk) 00:08, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Upmerge : That all American dialects of Spanish resemble more or less Western Andalusian dialects doesn't mean that they are dialects of it. --
Jotamar (
talk) 17:45, 13 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Agree with Jotamar, the American article and category should be removed from this category, as well as the Canarian article.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 23:23, 13 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Well, after 3 weeks and only one editor in favor of the present categorisation (created recently by that same editor), I think it's time to recover the old categorisation. I'll do it myself if nobody opposes it. --
Jotamar (
talk) 19:15, 3 December 2015 (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:Timeline of countries
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 to new name. –
FayenaticLondon 10:36, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: These two categories are overlapping and neither of the two complies with our established scheme. Also, per consistency with parent
Category:History by countryPanchoS (
talk) 19:04, 11 November 2015 (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:Ashkenazi Jews topics
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.
Purpose of this category is to bundle both Ashkenazi, Romaniote, Sephardi jews (the people) with their respective culture into a single category, basically the same way the category tree
Category:Jews and Judaism works.
While this clearly is a valid concept, the mere addition of "topics" however isn't consistent with the other category branch, adding to the massive confusion and miscategorization in the whole
Category:Jews and Judaism tree. While basically the whole category tree is a mess, at this point I don't want to rediscuss all of the whole huge subject together, if we can improve consistency of these particular branches, paving the way for possible further improvements at a later point. For example, I'm unsure if the intermediate
Category:Jewish ethnic groups fully captures all aspects of this concept, but let this be the next aspect to discuss.
Oppose All and Keep Because: a) There is no such thing as "Ashkenazi Judaism" (there is however "
Nusach Ashkenaz" the way Ashkenazi Jews pray and their customs, but it is not referred to as a "Judaism" as such) because the term "Ashkenazi" primarily refers to an
ethnicity, a Jewish sub-ethnic group, i.e. it is translated as "Germanic" and there is no such thing really as "
Germanic Judaism" as such, meaning "Ashkenazi" refers to
Jews who come from "Ashkenaz" that means "
Germany" in Biblical Hebrew, that broadly includes and refers to Jews from Germany, France, Poland, Hungary, Russia -- whether they practice Judaism or not. b) The main article for this category is
Ashkenazi Jews and the main parent topic for this category is
Category:Ashkenazi Jews and it is thus its legitimate related or sub-category! c) Not all the topics in this category have to do with
Judaism per se, since Judaism is a
religion mainly, while the topics are inclusive of secular and non-religious topics, as well as even anti-religious Jews, who are of
Ashkenazi Jews extraction yet have nothing to do with Judaism as such. d) Likewise, with Sephardi Jews, the main article is
Sephardi Jews the main category for it is
Category:Sephardi Jews, the word Sephardi/Sefardi means "Spanish" or "from
Spain" and refers to Jews who ethnically and historically lived in and originated from Spain, Portugal, and North Africa and extending into the Middle East, and there is no such thing really as "Sephardi Judaism" really, while there is/are
Sephardic law and customs, and yes this can get very confusing. Therefore, e) Leave well-enough alone because
if it ain't broke don't fix it, and note that this, albeit well-intentioned, yet clearly misguided and mistaken nomination, is probably a good example of what is meant by the need for
WP:EXPERT &
WP:COMPETENCE &
WP:EXR. Thank you,
IZAK (
talk) 14:09, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I respect your inclination to keep the categories as is, but am not so sure about your main argument, namely, that there was no such thing as "Ashkenazi Judaism" as Judaism was mainly about religion. Firstly, according to
Judaism#Distinction between Jews as a people and Judaism,
Daniel Boyarin states uncontradictedly that "the underlying distinction between religion and ethnicity is foreign to Judaism". If there even is something like
Humanistic Judaismrejecting the religious aspects of Judaism, then it can't be true that Judaism is overwhelmingly about religion. Secondly, you're saying that there was no such thing as "Ashkenazi Judaism". However, relevant articles and books exist that even bear "Ashkenazi Judaism" in their titles, including Mysticism, Magic, and Kabbalah in Ashkenazi Judaism at
Google Books, or Illness and Death in Ashkenazi Judaism at
Google Books.
Michel Gurfinkiel refers to "19th-century French Ashkenazi Judaism" (
[1]). Eugeniusz Duda refers to it (Pillars of Judaism at
Google Books), Heinz Mosche Graupe does (The Rise of Modern Judaism at
Google Books), David Lehmann and Batia Siebzehner do (Remaking Israeli Judaism at
Google Books), and Edna Aizenberg cites an Ashkenazi journalist refering to it (Contemporary Sephardic Identity in the Americas, p. 80, at
Google Books).
Joseph Dan, professor at Jerusalem University (
[2]), and
Kateřina Průšová (
[3]) offer university courses focussing on "Ashkenazi Judaism", etc. p.p. There might be different viewpoints, but it seems clearly established that "such a thing" indeed exists. Thirdly, it is not about whether you or me are capable to grasp the (IMHO overly intricate and often inconsistent) categorization in the "Jews and Judaism" category tree. Rather it's about whether it is accessible for the average user or not. And if it's not, it further deteriorates with users miscategorizing articles. So no, we're not fixing something that ain't wrong. Rather, categorization is an ongoing work. Best regards,
PanchoS (
talk) 16:37, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose Renames The current titles more effectively describe their contents and serves more effectively for those navigating through these categories.
Alansohn (
talk) 17:04, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose all and keep - Ashkenazi/Sephardic/Romaniote are ethnicities; Judaism is a religion. Current categories are fine.
—МандичкаYO 😜 18:14, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose all and keep I concur with what IZAK has said regarding the issues with this suggestion. --
Avi (
talk) 22:41, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose suggested changes. Geographic areas of origin correspond to negligible differences in ritual practice.
Bus stop (
talk) 00:41, 13 November 2015 (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:People from Westfield Center, Ohio
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. –
FayenaticLondon 11:18, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Per
WP:SMALLCAT. Small one county community with only 1 entry.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 14:29, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Upmerge per nom. Every community does not automatically get one of these just because it exists; a place doesn't get one until the number of people who can be filed in it, right off the top, is already large enough to get beyond
WP:SMALLCAT.
Bearcat (
talk) 19:12, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Support per nom and Bearcat.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 22:43, 11 November 2015 (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:Formula Renault 3.5 Series
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.
Question: @
Jz392:@
Morio: a reverse merge might be better, as the article mentions the name with capital S on Series, but the article is now at
Formula 3.5 V8, so should the merged category be renamed to
Category:Formula 3.5 V8? –
FayenaticLondon 10:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Good catch! I agree with the renaming. In that case, it doesn't matter whether we merge or reverse-merge the two categories?
Jz392 (
talk) 11:03, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Right; reverse merge would only apply if we were not renaming. I suggest the closer first moves the lowercase-"series" page to the new name in order to keep the history of the older category page. –
FayenaticLondon 11:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Fayenatic london:I've been having a look at this, and there is a reasoning behind the two separate categories. Formula Renault 3.5 is a category of motor racing (read
Formula Renault for full detail), and
Category:Formula Renault 3.5 series (lower case) is intended to include the different championships run to FR3.5 regulations (see
Category:Formula Renault 2.0 series for comparison). The
Category:Formula Renault 3.5 Series (upper case) is specifically for the
Formula Renault 3.5 Series, now renamed Formula 3.5 V8, which was the main championship. Unfortunately as "series" is both singular and plural, the English language has caused some confusion, as we only have the case to distinguish the two different categories.
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:Linguists of Coptic
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: Small category, should be merged to older and larger category with substantially the same scope. It seems unlikely to me that there would be people who achieved a defining notability in studying the culture without knowing the language. –
FayenaticLondon 13:40, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Support -- In theory linguists is a narrower category, but I do not think that matters.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 18:44, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Merge One article is not enough to justify such a split.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 07:11, 5 December 2015 (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:Ancient Indian grammarians
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.
Keep - More Indian languages have been added to the category, so that the rationale no longer exists.
Aravind V R (
talk) 14:11, 16 November 2015 (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:Science fiction adventure films
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. –
FayenaticLondon 11:23, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Too broad for a category: it lists superhero action films like Iron Man, science fiction horror like Alien, science fiction thrillers like Sunshine, Children of Men, the Japanese animated feature Paprika, the Disney-film Wall-E, light-hearted family film E.T.. These all have already their own respective categories.
Soetermans.
T /
C 11:21, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
keep Valid recognized category. Scifi adventure is no broader than, say,
category:War adventure films. If something is miscategorized, fix the article.
A Reference Guide to American Science Fiction Films
A. W. Strickland, Forrest J. Ackerman - 1981 - Snippet view - More editions
Science Fiction-Adventure Films within this sub-classification emphasize the adventure or drama surrounding the principle players and is equal to, or greater than, the science fiction aspect of the story. Nevertheless, the SF emphasis, even ...
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:Qing dynasty people executed by decapitation
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.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:27, 6 December 2015 (UTC)reply
There are 7 articles about Chinese people executed by decapitation during the Qing dynasty and all of them were executed by the Qing Dynasty so they all also appear in
Category:People executed by the Qing dynasty by decapitation. (3 foreigners and 2 Ming Chinese people also suffered the same fate and are only in the "executed by" category.) There may be some cases where a lot of citizens are executed by other governments or a government executes a lot of non-citizens in a sort of
venn diagram but, in this case, the triple intersection mostly creates double categorization.
If you're thinking to yourself, two execution by decapitation categories doesn't seem so bad,
Lucy Yi Zhenmei is in 2 more decapitation categories and 4 more non-decapitation execution/martyr categories.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 01:06, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Questions: @
RevelationDirect:Good Ol’factory: if we do that double upmerge, won't that worsen the category clutter by adding two execution-related categories in place of one? Also, the parent
Category:Chinese people executed by decapitation is currently almost a container category, but upmerging would more than double its direct member articles; do you envisage upmerging more of its subcats? –
FayenaticLondon 22:45, 4 December 2015 (UTC)reply
I agree. The nationality ones should ultimately just be placed in appropriate "Chinese" categories for Chinese people of all ages, so more work will definitely be necessary.
Good Ol’factory(talk) 01:06, 5 December 2015 (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:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Cactusjackbangbang
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Delete – per ANI discussion.
Oculi (
talk) 09:56, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete – this was a witch hunt.
Legacypac (
talk) 10:02, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - no evidence of sockpuppetry; SPI showed accounts unrelated.
—МандичкаYO 😜 18:12, 12 November 2015 (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:revert recent changes and upmerge. –
FayenaticLondon 22:13, 4 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: upmerge per
WP:SMALLCAT, only one article. No need to merge it to the other parent
Category:Andalusia since the one article refers to Gibraltar instead of Andalusia.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 22:19, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Not so small anymore. Propose renaming to
Category:Andalusian Spanish instead. -
PanchoS (
talk) 23:50, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply After some reconsideration regarding the Andalusian dialects throughout the Americas, I think the category should remain as is, so keep. -
PanchoS (
talk) 00:08, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Upmerge : That all American dialects of Spanish resemble more or less Western Andalusian dialects doesn't mean that they are dialects of it. --
Jotamar (
talk) 17:45, 13 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Agree with Jotamar, the American article and category should be removed from this category, as well as the Canarian article.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 23:23, 13 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Well, after 3 weeks and only one editor in favor of the present categorisation (created recently by that same editor), I think it's time to recover the old categorisation. I'll do it myself if nobody opposes it. --
Jotamar (
talk) 19:15, 3 December 2015 (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:Timeline of countries
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 to new name. –
FayenaticLondon 10:36, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: These two categories are overlapping and neither of the two complies with our established scheme. Also, per consistency with parent
Category:History by countryPanchoS (
talk) 19:04, 11 November 2015 (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:Ashkenazi Jews topics
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.
Purpose of this category is to bundle both Ashkenazi, Romaniote, Sephardi jews (the people) with their respective culture into a single category, basically the same way the category tree
Category:Jews and Judaism works.
While this clearly is a valid concept, the mere addition of "topics" however isn't consistent with the other category branch, adding to the massive confusion and miscategorization in the whole
Category:Jews and Judaism tree. While basically the whole category tree is a mess, at this point I don't want to rediscuss all of the whole huge subject together, if we can improve consistency of these particular branches, paving the way for possible further improvements at a later point. For example, I'm unsure if the intermediate
Category:Jewish ethnic groups fully captures all aspects of this concept, but let this be the next aspect to discuss.
Oppose All and Keep Because: a) There is no such thing as "Ashkenazi Judaism" (there is however "
Nusach Ashkenaz" the way Ashkenazi Jews pray and their customs, but it is not referred to as a "Judaism" as such) because the term "Ashkenazi" primarily refers to an
ethnicity, a Jewish sub-ethnic group, i.e. it is translated as "Germanic" and there is no such thing really as "
Germanic Judaism" as such, meaning "Ashkenazi" refers to
Jews who come from "Ashkenaz" that means "
Germany" in Biblical Hebrew, that broadly includes and refers to Jews from Germany, France, Poland, Hungary, Russia -- whether they practice Judaism or not. b) The main article for this category is
Ashkenazi Jews and the main parent topic for this category is
Category:Ashkenazi Jews and it is thus its legitimate related or sub-category! c) Not all the topics in this category have to do with
Judaism per se, since Judaism is a
religion mainly, while the topics are inclusive of secular and non-religious topics, as well as even anti-religious Jews, who are of
Ashkenazi Jews extraction yet have nothing to do with Judaism as such. d) Likewise, with Sephardi Jews, the main article is
Sephardi Jews the main category for it is
Category:Sephardi Jews, the word Sephardi/Sefardi means "Spanish" or "from
Spain" and refers to Jews who ethnically and historically lived in and originated from Spain, Portugal, and North Africa and extending into the Middle East, and there is no such thing really as "Sephardi Judaism" really, while there is/are
Sephardic law and customs, and yes this can get very confusing. Therefore, e) Leave well-enough alone because
if it ain't broke don't fix it, and note that this, albeit well-intentioned, yet clearly misguided and mistaken nomination, is probably a good example of what is meant by the need for
WP:EXPERT &
WP:COMPETENCE &
WP:EXR. Thank you,
IZAK (
talk) 14:09, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I respect your inclination to keep the categories as is, but am not so sure about your main argument, namely, that there was no such thing as "Ashkenazi Judaism" as Judaism was mainly about religion. Firstly, according to
Judaism#Distinction between Jews as a people and Judaism,
Daniel Boyarin states uncontradictedly that "the underlying distinction between religion and ethnicity is foreign to Judaism". If there even is something like
Humanistic Judaismrejecting the religious aspects of Judaism, then it can't be true that Judaism is overwhelmingly about religion. Secondly, you're saying that there was no such thing as "Ashkenazi Judaism". However, relevant articles and books exist that even bear "Ashkenazi Judaism" in their titles, including Mysticism, Magic, and Kabbalah in Ashkenazi Judaism at
Google Books, or Illness and Death in Ashkenazi Judaism at
Google Books.
Michel Gurfinkiel refers to "19th-century French Ashkenazi Judaism" (
[1]). Eugeniusz Duda refers to it (Pillars of Judaism at
Google Books), Heinz Mosche Graupe does (The Rise of Modern Judaism at
Google Books), David Lehmann and Batia Siebzehner do (Remaking Israeli Judaism at
Google Books), and Edna Aizenberg cites an Ashkenazi journalist refering to it (Contemporary Sephardic Identity in the Americas, p. 80, at
Google Books).
Joseph Dan, professor at Jerusalem University (
[2]), and
Kateřina Průšová (
[3]) offer university courses focussing on "Ashkenazi Judaism", etc. p.p. There might be different viewpoints, but it seems clearly established that "such a thing" indeed exists. Thirdly, it is not about whether you or me are capable to grasp the (IMHO overly intricate and often inconsistent) categorization in the "Jews and Judaism" category tree. Rather it's about whether it is accessible for the average user or not. And if it's not, it further deteriorates with users miscategorizing articles. So no, we're not fixing something that ain't wrong. Rather, categorization is an ongoing work. Best regards,
PanchoS (
talk) 16:37, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose Renames The current titles more effectively describe their contents and serves more effectively for those navigating through these categories.
Alansohn (
talk) 17:04, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose all and keep - Ashkenazi/Sephardic/Romaniote are ethnicities; Judaism is a religion. Current categories are fine.
—МандичкаYO 😜 18:14, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose all and keep I concur with what IZAK has said regarding the issues with this suggestion. --
Avi (
talk) 22:41, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose suggested changes. Geographic areas of origin correspond to negligible differences in ritual practice.
Bus stop (
talk) 00:41, 13 November 2015 (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:People from Westfield Center, Ohio
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. –
FayenaticLondon 11:18, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Per
WP:SMALLCAT. Small one county community with only 1 entry.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 14:29, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Upmerge per nom. Every community does not automatically get one of these just because it exists; a place doesn't get one until the number of people who can be filed in it, right off the top, is already large enough to get beyond
WP:SMALLCAT.
Bearcat (
talk) 19:12, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Support per nom and Bearcat.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 22:43, 11 November 2015 (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:Formula Renault 3.5 Series
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.
Question: @
Jz392:@
Morio: a reverse merge might be better, as the article mentions the name with capital S on Series, but the article is now at
Formula 3.5 V8, so should the merged category be renamed to
Category:Formula 3.5 V8? –
FayenaticLondon 10:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Good catch! I agree with the renaming. In that case, it doesn't matter whether we merge or reverse-merge the two categories?
Jz392 (
talk) 11:03, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Right; reverse merge would only apply if we were not renaming. I suggest the closer first moves the lowercase-"series" page to the new name in order to keep the history of the older category page. –
FayenaticLondon 11:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Fayenatic london:I've been having a look at this, and there is a reasoning behind the two separate categories. Formula Renault 3.5 is a category of motor racing (read
Formula Renault for full detail), and
Category:Formula Renault 3.5 series (lower case) is intended to include the different championships run to FR3.5 regulations (see
Category:Formula Renault 2.0 series for comparison). The
Category:Formula Renault 3.5 Series (upper case) is specifically for the
Formula Renault 3.5 Series, now renamed Formula 3.5 V8, which was the main championship. Unfortunately as "series" is both singular and plural, the English language has caused some confusion, as we only have the case to distinguish the two different categories.
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:Linguists of Coptic
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: Small category, should be merged to older and larger category with substantially the same scope. It seems unlikely to me that there would be people who achieved a defining notability in studying the culture without knowing the language. –
FayenaticLondon 13:40, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Support -- In theory linguists is a narrower category, but I do not think that matters.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 18:44, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Merge One article is not enough to justify such a split.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 07:11, 5 December 2015 (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:Ancient Indian grammarians
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.
Keep - More Indian languages have been added to the category, so that the rationale no longer exists.
Aravind V R (
talk) 14:11, 16 November 2015 (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:Science fiction adventure films
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. –
FayenaticLondon 11:23, 20 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Too broad for a category: it lists superhero action films like Iron Man, science fiction horror like Alien, science fiction thrillers like Sunshine, Children of Men, the Japanese animated feature Paprika, the Disney-film Wall-E, light-hearted family film E.T.. These all have already their own respective categories.
Soetermans.
T /
C 11:21, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
keep Valid recognized category. Scifi adventure is no broader than, say,
category:War adventure films. If something is miscategorized, fix the article.
A Reference Guide to American Science Fiction Films
A. W. Strickland, Forrest J. Ackerman - 1981 - Snippet view - More editions
Science Fiction-Adventure Films within this sub-classification emphasize the adventure or drama surrounding the principle players and is equal to, or greater than, the science fiction aspect of the story. Nevertheless, the SF emphasis, even ...
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:Qing dynasty people executed by decapitation
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.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:27, 6 December 2015 (UTC)reply
There are 7 articles about Chinese people executed by decapitation during the Qing dynasty and all of them were executed by the Qing Dynasty so they all also appear in
Category:People executed by the Qing dynasty by decapitation. (3 foreigners and 2 Ming Chinese people also suffered the same fate and are only in the "executed by" category.) There may be some cases where a lot of citizens are executed by other governments or a government executes a lot of non-citizens in a sort of
venn diagram but, in this case, the triple intersection mostly creates double categorization.
If you're thinking to yourself, two execution by decapitation categories doesn't seem so bad,
Lucy Yi Zhenmei is in 2 more decapitation categories and 4 more non-decapitation execution/martyr categories.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 01:06, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Questions: @
RevelationDirect:Good Ol’factory: if we do that double upmerge, won't that worsen the category clutter by adding two execution-related categories in place of one? Also, the parent
Category:Chinese people executed by decapitation is currently almost a container category, but upmerging would more than double its direct member articles; do you envisage upmerging more of its subcats? –
FayenaticLondon 22:45, 4 December 2015 (UTC)reply
I agree. The nationality ones should ultimately just be placed in appropriate "Chinese" categories for Chinese people of all ages, so more work will definitely be necessary.
Good Ol’factory(talk) 01:06, 5 December 2015 (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:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Cactusjackbangbang
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Delete – per ANI discussion.
Oculi (
talk) 09:56, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete – this was a witch hunt.
Legacypac (
talk) 10:02, 11 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - no evidence of sockpuppetry; SPI showed accounts unrelated.
—МандичкаYO 😜 18:12, 12 November 2015 (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.