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 and merge the target back, leaving it as a cat-redirect. Sometimes it is necessary to have a disambiguator for a category, where the article has none. The classic case is Birmingham, whose categories are at Birmingham, West Midlands to keep up articles related to Birmingham, AL. In the same way, this category needs one, to exclude articles on other people called Adele. I am sure that there will be many, though none as prominent as the singer.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
19:46, 1 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. Unlike with Birmingham, "Adele" appears to be a valid mononym for only a few people, and aside from the singer, they're all mediæval people; everyone else on the
Adele (given name) page has a surname, and we don't need a disambiguated category just because someone might put something related to
Adele Megann into the singer's category. What's more, we're not going to need a subcategory for any of these mediæval ladies (it's not like we have tons of articles related to either one of them), so we really don't need to worry about disambiguation in the first place.
Nyttend (
talk)
05:46, 2 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:Wikipedia files for deletion
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.
To change "deletion" to discussion is something I am always in favor of, but why the same category for both? If that is the gist of the discussion, then that too is okay we me.
Debresser (
talk)
22:50, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Hold wait for the processes to be merged first. Renaming "deletion" to "discussion" is easy, the merger part should be done after NFCR is shut down and its content migrated to FfD; as the files are tagged via template, the template change should automatically repopulate into FfD, clearing most of the work. --
70.51.44.60 (
talk)
05:51, 30 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Rename the first one. This probably should have been moved without a CFD, since it's essentially a
C2D case. No opinion on the second; of course we'll have to merge a bunch of things, but as I'm not that familiar with the details here, I don't know whether the proposed merge is best or whether something else would be better.
Nyttend (
talk)
05:27, 2 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:Ships in Norwegian history
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.
Good point. Presumably it's because the ship appears in a legend-like song of later date, but I don't think we should keep the legendary category for that reason, I've removed it.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
22:04, 1 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:Kven history
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Religious leaders in New Zealand
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 They are not duplicates. One is a "by nationality" category while the other is a "by place served" category. Admittedly in the case of NZ, there may may be a high degree of overlap (i.e. most NZ nationals will serve as bishops in NZ itself). However, this is not necessarily the case for other countries. Ireland, for example, has a long history of 19th-century emigrants rising to the episcopacy in their new homes. So while they are Irish bishops, they are religious leaders in Australia.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
13:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)reply
REverse merge -- If there are Kiwi religious leaders serving abroad, they can go into a separate but appropriately named sibling category. However I doubt that it will be a large category.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
19:54, 1 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep per Laurel Lodged. I planned to vote for merging, but LL's argument explained quite well why there are two categories; deleting one such category out of many would be a horrid idea if there are a lot of other countries with two separate categories like this. Nominator may wish to start a discussion on whether the current setup is good, although it seems worthy of keeping, as far as I can tell at first glance.
Nyttend (
talk)
05:30, 2 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:Subdistricts of Karo Regency
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: When this was created we did refer to them as subdistricts, but 4 years ago the parent article was renamed to
Districts of Indonesia as a better translation of the actual Indonesian term. While most of the others of this type are eligible for speedy renaming, this one probably isn't because strictly speaking it doesn't have an article of the same name -- it goes Region -> Regency or City -> District, and our article structure is organised only by region. They're mentioned on
Districts of North Sumatra instead. For accuracy and consistency with our naming style, this should be renamed.
Buttons to Push Buttons (
talk |
contribs)
10:35, 28 October 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:Songs from We Will Rock You (musical)
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. We Will Rock You is what's called a "
jukebox musical", meaning that it did not comprise original songs written for the musical per se, but simply took songs that already existed and then recontextualized them in a new setting. Each song here is already categorized as
Category:Queen (band) songs, which is the appropriately
WP:DEFINING characteristic on which they should be categorized. And as a point of comparison, we do not have a similar category for songs which appeared in Mamma Mia! — we categorize them only as
Category:ABBA songs, and do not redundantly categorize them as "Songs from Mamma Mia!" alongside that fact. And neither do we categorize songs for their having been featured in Moulin Rouge! — we just list them in the film's article, and don't categorize them as such because being used in that film doesn't constitute a defining characteristic of the songs. Original musical theatre songs should certainly be categorized by the musical from whence they came — but pre-existing "jukebox musical" songs should not.
Bearcat (
talk)
18:43, 1 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:America's Got Talent
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 consensus for the purge portion of the nomination; discussion on that can continue on the category talk page if desired. No consensus to delete the main contestants category, either, but a consensus does support deleting the Pennsylvania intersection.
Bearcat (
talk)
20:01, 4 December 2015 (UTC)reply
According to
the article, the show consists of "a group of acts ranging from only a Top 20..., to as many as 60" contestants on each live episodes and some of those contestants also appeared on earlier audition episode. This is not like Big Brother where the cast is on screen for a full season. Including the showbiz hosts in the parent category is also non-defining because they were hired because they were famous rather than famous because they hosted the show. I do think the 12 winners are defined by the show so I created
Category:America's Got Talent winners, and the 2nd and 3rd place for each season are in the
template but this is overkill.
RevelationDirect (
talk)
01:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose, on the basis I don't see the finer distinction between similar categories such as
Category:Big Brother (TV series). If an umbrella category exists, I don't see how you can allow one type of related article to be added, but prevent another (e.g. presenters).
Sionk (
talk)
15:31, 31 October 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:Electors of Baden
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: delete as a pointless category since Baden existed as an
electorate for only three years, from 1803 to 1806. Before 1803 Baden was a
margraviate, while after ending the Holy Roman Empire in 1806, Baden became a
grand duchy. Likewise for Württemberg which became an
electorate in 1803 and a kingdom in 1806.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
13:52, 20 September 2015 (UTC)reply
I still say delete -- This was a briefly held title. I suspect that the holder was also a margrave or duke at the same time. At worst retain as a cat-redirect; it is a credible search term and this should also prevent officious re-creation.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)reply
(In relisting, I'm not expecting users to reconsider their previously stated opinions and to try to work out a consensus among themselves. Ideally what we're looking for is the participation of more editors to supplement the views we already have.)
Good Ol’factory(talk)06:52, 5 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete the Elector of Baden (or at least the category thereof) and throw the sole holder of the title into
Category:Electors of the Holy Roman Empire, and ditto for the Elector of WÞrttemburg. Simply trash the Electresses category, since its only article is
List of consorts of Baden (odd title; it sounds like it's people who were married to Baden, not married to its sovereigns), and that article's "Electress of Baden" section says that there weren't any. When there's not a single article that rightfully belongs in a category, the category shouldn't exist.
Nyttend (
talk)
05:35, 2 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Oops, Württemburg, not WÞrttemburg. Hit the wrong
alt code, 0222 instead of 0252. There's a hazard to knowing the codes instead of picking them from a list, especially when you're touchtyping on the keypad :-)
Nyttend (
talk)
05:37, 2 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Support the last proposal. The target ought to be a container only category (or container and lists). An explanation of the appearance of these two electors probably needs to be included in the headnote.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:02, 8 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.
Keep and merge the target back, leaving it as a cat-redirect. Sometimes it is necessary to have a disambiguator for a category, where the article has none. The classic case is Birmingham, whose categories are at Birmingham, West Midlands to keep up articles related to Birmingham, AL. In the same way, this category needs one, to exclude articles on other people called Adele. I am sure that there will be many, though none as prominent as the singer.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
19:46, 1 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. Unlike with Birmingham, "Adele" appears to be a valid mononym for only a few people, and aside from the singer, they're all mediæval people; everyone else on the
Adele (given name) page has a surname, and we don't need a disambiguated category just because someone might put something related to
Adele Megann into the singer's category. What's more, we're not going to need a subcategory for any of these mediæval ladies (it's not like we have tons of articles related to either one of them), so we really don't need to worry about disambiguation in the first place.
Nyttend (
talk)
05:46, 2 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:Wikipedia files for deletion
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.
To change "deletion" to discussion is something I am always in favor of, but why the same category for both? If that is the gist of the discussion, then that too is okay we me.
Debresser (
talk)
22:50, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Hold wait for the processes to be merged first. Renaming "deletion" to "discussion" is easy, the merger part should be done after NFCR is shut down and its content migrated to FfD; as the files are tagged via template, the template change should automatically repopulate into FfD, clearing most of the work. --
70.51.44.60 (
talk)
05:51, 30 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Rename the first one. This probably should have been moved without a CFD, since it's essentially a
C2D case. No opinion on the second; of course we'll have to merge a bunch of things, but as I'm not that familiar with the details here, I don't know whether the proposed merge is best or whether something else would be better.
Nyttend (
talk)
05:27, 2 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:Ships in Norwegian history
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.
Good point. Presumably it's because the ship appears in a legend-like song of later date, but I don't think we should keep the legendary category for that reason, I've removed it.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
22:04, 1 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:Kven history
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Religious leaders in New Zealand
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 They are not duplicates. One is a "by nationality" category while the other is a "by place served" category. Admittedly in the case of NZ, there may may be a high degree of overlap (i.e. most NZ nationals will serve as bishops in NZ itself). However, this is not necessarily the case for other countries. Ireland, for example, has a long history of 19th-century emigrants rising to the episcopacy in their new homes. So while they are Irish bishops, they are religious leaders in Australia.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
13:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)reply
REverse merge -- If there are Kiwi religious leaders serving abroad, they can go into a separate but appropriately named sibling category. However I doubt that it will be a large category.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
19:54, 1 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep per Laurel Lodged. I planned to vote for merging, but LL's argument explained quite well why there are two categories; deleting one such category out of many would be a horrid idea if there are a lot of other countries with two separate categories like this. Nominator may wish to start a discussion on whether the current setup is good, although it seems worthy of keeping, as far as I can tell at first glance.
Nyttend (
talk)
05:30, 2 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:Subdistricts of Karo Regency
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: When this was created we did refer to them as subdistricts, but 4 years ago the parent article was renamed to
Districts of Indonesia as a better translation of the actual Indonesian term. While most of the others of this type are eligible for speedy renaming, this one probably isn't because strictly speaking it doesn't have an article of the same name -- it goes Region -> Regency or City -> District, and our article structure is organised only by region. They're mentioned on
Districts of North Sumatra instead. For accuracy and consistency with our naming style, this should be renamed.
Buttons to Push Buttons (
talk |
contribs)
10:35, 28 October 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:Songs from We Will Rock You (musical)
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. We Will Rock You is what's called a "
jukebox musical", meaning that it did not comprise original songs written for the musical per se, but simply took songs that already existed and then recontextualized them in a new setting. Each song here is already categorized as
Category:Queen (band) songs, which is the appropriately
WP:DEFINING characteristic on which they should be categorized. And as a point of comparison, we do not have a similar category for songs which appeared in Mamma Mia! — we categorize them only as
Category:ABBA songs, and do not redundantly categorize them as "Songs from Mamma Mia!" alongside that fact. And neither do we categorize songs for their having been featured in Moulin Rouge! — we just list them in the film's article, and don't categorize them as such because being used in that film doesn't constitute a defining characteristic of the songs. Original musical theatre songs should certainly be categorized by the musical from whence they came — but pre-existing "jukebox musical" songs should not.
Bearcat (
talk)
18:43, 1 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:America's Got Talent
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 consensus for the purge portion of the nomination; discussion on that can continue on the category talk page if desired. No consensus to delete the main contestants category, either, but a consensus does support deleting the Pennsylvania intersection.
Bearcat (
talk)
20:01, 4 December 2015 (UTC)reply
According to
the article, the show consists of "a group of acts ranging from only a Top 20..., to as many as 60" contestants on each live episodes and some of those contestants also appeared on earlier audition episode. This is not like Big Brother where the cast is on screen for a full season. Including the showbiz hosts in the parent category is also non-defining because they were hired because they were famous rather than famous because they hosted the show. I do think the 12 winners are defined by the show so I created
Category:America's Got Talent winners, and the 2nd and 3rd place for each season are in the
template but this is overkill.
RevelationDirect (
talk)
01:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose, on the basis I don't see the finer distinction between similar categories such as
Category:Big Brother (TV series). If an umbrella category exists, I don't see how you can allow one type of related article to be added, but prevent another (e.g. presenters).
Sionk (
talk)
15:31, 31 October 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:Electors of Baden
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: delete as a pointless category since Baden existed as an
electorate for only three years, from 1803 to 1806. Before 1803 Baden was a
margraviate, while after ending the Holy Roman Empire in 1806, Baden became a
grand duchy. Likewise for Württemberg which became an
electorate in 1803 and a kingdom in 1806.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
13:52, 20 September 2015 (UTC)reply
I still say delete -- This was a briefly held title. I suspect that the holder was also a margrave or duke at the same time. At worst retain as a cat-redirect; it is a credible search term and this should also prevent officious re-creation.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)reply
(In relisting, I'm not expecting users to reconsider their previously stated opinions and to try to work out a consensus among themselves. Ideally what we're looking for is the participation of more editors to supplement the views we already have.)
Good Ol’factory(talk)06:52, 5 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete the Elector of Baden (or at least the category thereof) and throw the sole holder of the title into
Category:Electors of the Holy Roman Empire, and ditto for the Elector of WÞrttemburg. Simply trash the Electresses category, since its only article is
List of consorts of Baden (odd title; it sounds like it's people who were married to Baden, not married to its sovereigns), and that article's "Electress of Baden" section says that there weren't any. When there's not a single article that rightfully belongs in a category, the category shouldn't exist.
Nyttend (
talk)
05:35, 2 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Oops, Württemburg, not WÞrttemburg. Hit the wrong
alt code, 0222 instead of 0252. There's a hazard to knowing the codes instead of picking them from a list, especially when you're touchtyping on the keypad :-)
Nyttend (
talk)
05:37, 2 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Support the last proposal. The target ought to be a container only category (or container and lists). An explanation of the appearance of these two electors probably needs to be included in the headnote.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:02, 8 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.