From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 7

Category:People from Forest Hills, Pennsylvania

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 ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Small one county community with just 1 entry. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:20, 7 April 2018 (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.

Lakes of the Republic of Ireland‎

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 10:27, 20 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming
Nominator's rationale: per convention of Category:Lakes and (AFAICS) all of its by-country subcats, including Category:Lakes of Scotland, parent Category:Lakes of Ireland and sibling Category:Lakes of Northern Ireland ... and to avoid ambiguity with Category:Sea loughs of the Republic of Ireland
As in Northern Ireland, most inland bodies of water in the Republic of Ireland‎ are known as "Lough Foo". Same in Scotland, though the Scots use the Scots gaelic spelling "Loch".
However, while most Irish inland bodies of water are individually called "Lough Foo" in English, they are collectively referred to in English as "lakes".
See the following searches in reliable sources for Lakes/Loughs in Ireland:
"Lakes in Ireland" "Loughs in Ireland"
Gbooks 271 hits 157 hits
Gscholar 659 hits 29 hits
JSTOR 100 hits 7 hits
... and for Lakes/Loughs of' Ireland:
"Lakes of Ireland" "Loughs of Ireland"
Gbooks 260 hits 260 hits
Gscholar 144 hits 93 hits
JSTOR 49 hits 30 hits
-- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 19:33, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply
‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Lakes of the Republic of Ireland containing ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Freshwater loughs of the Republic of Ireland and ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Reservoirs of the Republic of Ireland
‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Loughs of the Republic of Ireland containing ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Freshwater loughs of the Republic of Ireland and ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Sea loughs of the Republic of Ireland
The same would hold on the county level.
I also wonder whether those sources for English language usage of the terms lake and lough reflected global usage, rather than local usage. I suspect that most hits from .ie sites would be for "loughs". If so, Loughs should be used. Grutness... wha? 02:50, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Reply @ Grutness: I think it is the inverse of what you suggest. I have never encountered Irish usage describing them collectively as "loughs"; always "lakes". I think the collective use of "loughs" is non-Irish writers making a well-intended but mistaken attempt to use what they wrongly believe to be Irish terminology. I will try if I can devise some searches to verify (or disprove) my hunch. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 04:40, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply
  • More data. Usage on Irish websites strongly prefers "lakes":
Lakes Loughs Notes
gov.ie 549 hits 230 hits results for "loughs" are overhelmingly about sea loughs, not lakes. The Loughs Agency deals specifically with sea loughs.
irishtimes.com 529 hits 211 hits If I exclude the "Loughs Agency", then there are only 122 hits for Loughs
thejournal.ie 638 hits 42 hits
I originally nominated these cats as a speedy, but that was objected to [1] by @ Johnbod, so I spent the best part of an hour compiling the first set of data. Now I have spent another half hour compiling another set of data in response to @ Grutness.
I know that both editors mean well ... but please can anyone else who wants to weigh in against this actually do their own homework, rather than running off hunches? This simple renaming has taken a wholly disproportionate amount of my time -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 06:10, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply
I tried, but for some reason google wasn't giving me page counts for .ie only sites, otherwise I would have done so. Sorry for the extra work. I must admit to being very surprised about the result however - though I must admit that I was perhaps biased by having a lot of Irish relations. Grutness... wha? 13:00, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply
The criteria for a speedy are tightly defined (yet still very often abused). I make no apologies for challenging it before this data was produced, and the messy Scottish situation (in the only other country to use "Loch/lough" much) is probably itself enough to trigger this bit of the speedy verbiage: "This criterion should be applied only when there is no ambiguity or doubt over the existence of a category naming convention. Such a convention must be well defined and must be overwhelmingly used within the tree. If this is not the case then the category in question must be brought forward to a full Cfd nomination." So here we are. It is obviously for nominators to do the "homework" and make their case. CfD has always been largely defined by people "running off hunches" in any case. Johnbod ( talk) 01:39, 9 April 2018 (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:United States private paramilitary groups

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. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 15:26, 19 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Nominator's rationale: In line with similar categories - and giving a wider scope. Use of the word "private" isnt very illuminating in this context. Rathfelder ( talk) 13:45, 7 April 2018 (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:Proto-facsists

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: speedy delete per WP:G7. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 22:04, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Nominator's rationale: ‎Dumb spelling error. Xxanthippe ( talk) 07:24, 7 April 2018 (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:Association for Research and Enlightenment

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. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:31, 19 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only two articles. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:53, 7 April 2018 (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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 7

Category:People from Forest Hills, Pennsylvania

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 ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Small one county community with just 1 entry. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:20, 7 April 2018 (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.

Lakes of the Republic of Ireland‎

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 10:27, 20 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming
Nominator's rationale: per convention of Category:Lakes and (AFAICS) all of its by-country subcats, including Category:Lakes of Scotland, parent Category:Lakes of Ireland and sibling Category:Lakes of Northern Ireland ... and to avoid ambiguity with Category:Sea loughs of the Republic of Ireland
As in Northern Ireland, most inland bodies of water in the Republic of Ireland‎ are known as "Lough Foo". Same in Scotland, though the Scots use the Scots gaelic spelling "Loch".
However, while most Irish inland bodies of water are individually called "Lough Foo" in English, they are collectively referred to in English as "lakes".
See the following searches in reliable sources for Lakes/Loughs in Ireland:
"Lakes in Ireland" "Loughs in Ireland"
Gbooks 271 hits 157 hits
Gscholar 659 hits 29 hits
JSTOR 100 hits 7 hits
... and for Lakes/Loughs of' Ireland:
"Lakes of Ireland" "Loughs of Ireland"
Gbooks 260 hits 260 hits
Gscholar 144 hits 93 hits
JSTOR 49 hits 30 hits
-- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 19:33, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply
‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Lakes of the Republic of Ireland containing ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Freshwater loughs of the Republic of Ireland and ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Reservoirs of the Republic of Ireland
‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Loughs of the Republic of Ireland containing ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Freshwater loughs of the Republic of Ireland and ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:Sea loughs of the Republic of Ireland
The same would hold on the county level.
I also wonder whether those sources for English language usage of the terms lake and lough reflected global usage, rather than local usage. I suspect that most hits from .ie sites would be for "loughs". If so, Loughs should be used. Grutness... wha? 02:50, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Reply @ Grutness: I think it is the inverse of what you suggest. I have never encountered Irish usage describing them collectively as "loughs"; always "lakes". I think the collective use of "loughs" is non-Irish writers making a well-intended but mistaken attempt to use what they wrongly believe to be Irish terminology. I will try if I can devise some searches to verify (or disprove) my hunch. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 04:40, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply
  • More data. Usage on Irish websites strongly prefers "lakes":
Lakes Loughs Notes
gov.ie 549 hits 230 hits results for "loughs" are overhelmingly about sea loughs, not lakes. The Loughs Agency deals specifically with sea loughs.
irishtimes.com 529 hits 211 hits If I exclude the "Loughs Agency", then there are only 122 hits for Loughs
thejournal.ie 638 hits 42 hits
I originally nominated these cats as a speedy, but that was objected to [1] by @ Johnbod, so I spent the best part of an hour compiling the first set of data. Now I have spent another half hour compiling another set of data in response to @ Grutness.
I know that both editors mean well ... but please can anyone else who wants to weigh in against this actually do their own homework, rather than running off hunches? This simple renaming has taken a wholly disproportionate amount of my time -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 06:10, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply
I tried, but for some reason google wasn't giving me page counts for .ie only sites, otherwise I would have done so. Sorry for the extra work. I must admit to being very surprised about the result however - though I must admit that I was perhaps biased by having a lot of Irish relations. Grutness... wha? 13:00, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply
The criteria for a speedy are tightly defined (yet still very often abused). I make no apologies for challenging it before this data was produced, and the messy Scottish situation (in the only other country to use "Loch/lough" much) is probably itself enough to trigger this bit of the speedy verbiage: "This criterion should be applied only when there is no ambiguity or doubt over the existence of a category naming convention. Such a convention must be well defined and must be overwhelmingly used within the tree. If this is not the case then the category in question must be brought forward to a full Cfd nomination." So here we are. It is obviously for nominators to do the "homework" and make their case. CfD has always been largely defined by people "running off hunches" in any case. Johnbod ( talk) 01:39, 9 April 2018 (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:United States private paramilitary groups

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. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 15:26, 19 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Nominator's rationale: In line with similar categories - and giving a wider scope. Use of the word "private" isnt very illuminating in this context. Rathfelder ( talk) 13:45, 7 April 2018 (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:Proto-facsists

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: speedy delete per WP:G7. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 22:04, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Nominator's rationale: ‎Dumb spelling error. Xxanthippe ( talk) 07:24, 7 April 2018 (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:Association for Research and Enlightenment

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. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:31, 19 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only two articles. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:53, 7 April 2018 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook