- 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.
ℯ
xplicit
02:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Universal identifiers to Category:Unique identifiers
- Nominator's rationale: This is in the spirit of CFDS #C2D, but it doesn't precisely fit that situation. Universal identifier is a redlink, and Universal identifiers is a redirect to International identifier, a kind of identifier that's used to identify multinational corporations. The basic concept is covered by an article with a different name, Unique identifier (this is the standard term in the field, not merely a Wikipedia-created descriptive title), which covers all sorts of identifiers from international identifiers to national identity numbers, from Bates numbering to Smithsonian trinomials. The article and category for this basic concept ought to share a title, and when the article has the standard term as its current title, the discrepancy ought to be resolved by renaming the category. Nyttend ( talk) 02:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle ( talk) 18:48, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle ( talk) 18:48, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Added a banner of WikiProject Computer Science on the talk page, perhaps this will generate more discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:55, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
- Support. A set of unique identifiers were called Universal unique identifiers (UUID) and this may have led to the category name. The creator also apparently wanted to exclude company-specific data such as codes for stock-keeping units (SKU). However, IMHO "Unique identifier" is the best name. – Fayenatic London 23:27, 8 May 2017 (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:
Relisted at
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 June 13#Category:Lists of ambassadors by recepting subject of international law.
ℯ
xplicit
02:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: This would at least match its parent Category:Ambassadors by mission country Tim! ( talk) 17:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support -- The present name is obscure, though accurate.
Category:Lists of ambassadors by sending countrymight be even better. Peterkingiron ( talk) 10:21, 1 May 2017 (UTC)- @ Peterkingiron: that would not be better, because it would be the wrong way round! – Fayenatic London
- Support, this is the counterpart to recently closed renamings of Fooian Ambassadors to "Lists of ambassadors from Foo". – Fayenatic London 23:33, 8 May 2017 (UTC).
- Comment - this category has now been moved by the original author to
Category:Lists of ambassadors by receiving country, which seems to me like a reasonable solution, although it would have been better for them to have come here and proposed it instead of just doing it. --
R'n'B (
call me Russ)
10:16, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- Noted, but that's only one of the three nominated categories. @
Regesta: once a discussion has been started, please participate in it, rather than implementing your own choice. Why did you move that category to a name that is not consistent with the parent
Category:Ambassadors by mission country? –
Fayenatic
London
18:54, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
- Mission (lat. mittere ‚to send‘) I have to admit that Category:Lists of ambassadors by mission country is more comprehensive than Category:Lists of ambassadors by receiving country. With the second you could exclude the ambassadors that got no Diplomatic accreditation (I had not intended) Regesta ( talk) 14:12, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
- Noted, but that's only one of the three nominated categories. @
Regesta: once a discussion has been started, please participate in it, rather than implementing your own choice. Why did you move that category to a name that is not consistent with the parent
Category:Ambassadors by mission country? –
Fayenatic
London
18:54, 23 May 2017 (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. – Fayenatic London 18:59, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Propose renaming:
Rationale: Per the naming paterns in most of the Category:Organizations by subject and country subcats; additionally, these aren't organizatios related to Fooian disabilities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Od Mishehu ( talk • contribs) 14:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support, per kind of WP:C2C, and it avoids the suggestion that only national organizations should be included, and it avoids discussions that we sometimes have about the right format or spelling of FOOIAN. Marcocapelle ( talk) 01:03, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: @
Od Mishehu: I have no objection, but please note that the categories will probably all need a sort key to be inserted after renaming. –
Fayenatic
London
23:38, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
- Noted - I've started to deal with this; many of them actually did have a sortkey before I started.
עוד מישהו
Od Mishehu
03:11, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Done all but the US and UK (these should wait until after the move); Once the move is done, it will be simple to see if I missed any.
עוד מישהו
Od Mishehu
09:40, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- Noted - I've started to deal with this; many of them actually did have a sortkey before I started.
עוד מישהו
Od Mishehu
03:11, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
- Support This matches the pattern established by members of Category:Organizations by country. -- Mirokado ( talk) 06:59, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: merge. –
Fayenatic
London
18:55, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Buddhists by period to Category:Buddhists
- Propose merging Category:Muslims by period to Category:Muslims
- Nominator's rationale: upmerge as a redundant category layer, container categories like these are only helpful to navigation if they have a pretty large number of child categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support -- This eliminates an unnecessary level. Category:Buddhists by century will become a direct child of Buddhists. I do not believe we ever need millennium categories; certainly not here; and decades are too short for a lifetime. Peterkingiron ( talk) 10:25, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: delete ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:15, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Typo in the name, existing cat without the two Ps already exists. Aboutmovies ( talk) 04:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Speedy delete as typo. Peterkingiron ( talk) 10:22, 1 May 2017 (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.
ℯ
xplicit
02:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Universal identifiers to Category:Unique identifiers
- Nominator's rationale: This is in the spirit of CFDS #C2D, but it doesn't precisely fit that situation. Universal identifier is a redlink, and Universal identifiers is a redirect to International identifier, a kind of identifier that's used to identify multinational corporations. The basic concept is covered by an article with a different name, Unique identifier (this is the standard term in the field, not merely a Wikipedia-created descriptive title), which covers all sorts of identifiers from international identifiers to national identity numbers, from Bates numbering to Smithsonian trinomials. The article and category for this basic concept ought to share a title, and when the article has the standard term as its current title, the discrepancy ought to be resolved by renaming the category. Nyttend ( talk) 02:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle ( talk) 18:48, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle ( talk) 18:48, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Added a banner of WikiProject Computer Science on the talk page, perhaps this will generate more discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:55, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
- Support. A set of unique identifiers were called Universal unique identifiers (UUID) and this may have led to the category name. The creator also apparently wanted to exclude company-specific data such as codes for stock-keeping units (SKU). However, IMHO "Unique identifier" is the best name. – Fayenatic London 23:27, 8 May 2017 (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: Relisted at
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 June 13#Category:Lists of ambassadors by recepting subject of international law.
ℯ
xplicit
02:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: This would at least match its parent Category:Ambassadors by mission country Tim! ( talk) 17:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support -- The present name is obscure, though accurate.
Category:Lists of ambassadors by sending countrymight be even better. Peterkingiron ( talk) 10:21, 1 May 2017 (UTC)- @ Peterkingiron: that would not be better, because it would be the wrong way round! – Fayenatic London
- Support, this is the counterpart to recently closed renamings of Fooian Ambassadors to "Lists of ambassadors from Foo". – Fayenatic London 23:33, 8 May 2017 (UTC).
- Comment - this category has now been moved by the original author to
Category:Lists of ambassadors by receiving country, which seems to me like a reasonable solution, although it would have been better for them to have come here and proposed it instead of just doing it. --
R'n'B (
call me Russ)
10:16, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- Noted, but that's only one of the three nominated categories. @
Regesta: once a discussion has been started, please participate in it, rather than implementing your own choice. Why did you move that category to a name that is not consistent with the parent
Category:Ambassadors by mission country? –
Fayenatic
London
18:54, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
- Mission (lat. mittere ‚to send‘) I have to admit that Category:Lists of ambassadors by mission country is more comprehensive than Category:Lists of ambassadors by receiving country. With the second you could exclude the ambassadors that got no Diplomatic accreditation (I had not intended) Regesta ( talk) 14:12, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
- Noted, but that's only one of the three nominated categories. @
Regesta: once a discussion has been started, please participate in it, rather than implementing your own choice. Why did you move that category to a name that is not consistent with the parent
Category:Ambassadors by mission country? –
Fayenatic
London
18:54, 23 May 2017 (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. – Fayenatic London 18:59, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Propose renaming:
Rationale: Per the naming paterns in most of the Category:Organizations by subject and country subcats; additionally, these aren't organizatios related to Fooian disabilities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Od Mishehu ( talk • contribs) 14:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support, per kind of WP:C2C, and it avoids the suggestion that only national organizations should be included, and it avoids discussions that we sometimes have about the right format or spelling of FOOIAN. Marcocapelle ( talk) 01:03, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: @
Od Mishehu: I have no objection, but please note that the categories will probably all need a sort key to be inserted after renaming. –
Fayenatic
London
23:38, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
- Noted - I've started to deal with this; many of them actually did have a sortkey before I started.
עוד מישהו
Od Mishehu
03:11, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
- Done all but the US and UK (these should wait until after the move); Once the move is done, it will be simple to see if I missed any.
עוד מישהו
Od Mishehu
09:40, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- Noted - I've started to deal with this; many of them actually did have a sortkey before I started.
עוד מישהו
Od Mishehu
03:11, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
- Support This matches the pattern established by members of Category:Organizations by country. -- Mirokado ( talk) 06:59, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: merge. –
Fayenatic
London
18:55, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Buddhists by period to Category:Buddhists
- Propose merging Category:Muslims by period to Category:Muslims
- Nominator's rationale: upmerge as a redundant category layer, container categories like these are only helpful to navigation if they have a pretty large number of child categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support -- This eliminates an unnecessary level. Category:Buddhists by century will become a direct child of Buddhists. I do not believe we ever need millennium categories; certainly not here; and decades are too short for a lifetime. Peterkingiron ( talk) 10:25, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: delete ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:15, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Typo in the name, existing cat without the two Ps already exists. Aboutmovies ( talk) 04:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Speedy delete as typo. Peterkingiron ( talk) 10:22, 1 May 2017 (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.