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: The category currently is inaccurate. Fashion publications and writers mainly feature bloggers or columnists. Calling many of the people in this category "journalists" is misleading because they mostly publish opinion pieces (such as style trends, fashion show analysis, etc.) which is inherently biased. None of these people exclusively write factual information as a typical journalist would.
Category:Fashion journalists is very different from
Category:Business and financial journalists or
Category:Crime journalists. I propose renaming to
Category:Fashion criticism, like the categories for writers on similar topics like music, theatre, and art.
Woebegone (
talk)
21:42, 11 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose -- These are (or should be) about people writing for newspapers and magazines about fashion. As such they are entitled to be called journalists.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:25, 13 August 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Peterkingiron: Music critics and film critics also write for newspapers and magazines, but they are called critics because they analyze music and film. Most of the people in those categories do not report on music, film, theatre, artworks, and other types of art, which is why those categories are not called journalists. Can you explain why fashion critics/journalists are different?
Woebegone (
talk)
02:20, 14 August 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:Farhangian University
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.
I agree -- This appears to be an umbrella body for all the teacher training colleges in Iran. In principle, each of the 100 branches is probably entitled to an article, so that there is ample scope for this category, but the Iran universities tree is a rather undeveloped one.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:29, 13 August 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:Teachers colleges
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.
Merge both to
Category:Colleges of Education. This needs a headnote explaining that it is about
Category:Teacher training colleges, another potential name: all schools provide education (or should do). These are about teaching the teachers, which is slightly different. In UK, most of the teacher training colleges were amalgamated into Polytechnics, which have since been rebranded as universities. In parallel with this, most universities had a School of Education where graduates could do a fourth year to achieve a post-graduate certificate of education. The American usage of calling tertiary colleges "schools" is misleading in British English.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:38, 13 August 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:Wikipedians who consider themselves participants in all wikiprojects
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.
Don't rename to ".... participate in all wikiprojects" (as that changes the meaning). Delete unless someone provides a reasonable explanation of how the category could be useful. DexDor(talk)18:01, 11 August 2018 (UTC)reply
It is a rather recent wiki-philosophical/wiki-political, userbox-related category, like many others we have (in particular, it's a pro-
WP:CONLEVEL, anti-
WP:OWNership one, and serves the specific purpose of deflating "your view doesn't count since you're not a member of this project" bullshit). So, Keep. No actual deletion rationale has been provided; the above is a combination of
WP:IDONTKNOWIT /
WP:IDONTLIKEIT stuff (don't understand what it is, not interested in it, ergo it must be bad). There is also no particular reason that such an internal category must have a short name; it has nothing to do with readers and article categorization, and it's name was chosen very carefully (including use of the word "participants" vs. "members" in paticular, persuant to a CfD years ago that moved a bunch of then-extant "WikiProject Foo members" categories to use the word "participants", shortly after the community nuked
WP:Esperanza on the basis that everything on WP is open to everyone and there are no no membership organizations, no special clubs, no walled-garden cliques. Neither of the suggested renames get the entire point across: "who participate in" isn't true, unless you literally go project by project and participate in every single one of them. "who reject WikiProject membership" is confusingly misleading (implying refusal to participate in them, to most people who read it), and missing half of the point: it's not just rejection of membership per se, but of the notion that prior involvement is a requirement or confers privilege. There's an important difference between considering oneself a de facto participant in every project, vs. actively working in all of them, or refusing to work in any of them. Finally,
WP:CONCISE applies to articles and by extension to article titles; it isn't really an argument for excessive shortening of project categories, particularly when doing so results in ambiguity or loss of context. "Concise" doesn't just means "short", but short while conveying the same message. —
SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 12:37, 12 August 2018 (UTC)reply
While I might put the userbox on my user page (agreeing with the philosophy), I can't imagine how it can be useful to know who else has this userbox on their user page.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
14:17, 12 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Thanks for providing that clarification, and I agree with most everything you stated. On the matter of the category's name, a shorter name is not a must but, all else being equal, is generally preferred. However, based on your explanation above (and assuming the category is kept), I am content with
Category:Wikipedians who consider themselves participants in all WikiProjects (fixing capitalization) or perhaps the slightly shorter
Category:Wikipedians who claim participation in all WikiProjects. On the matter of the deletion rationale, it is essentially that the category appears to serve
no useful function, i.e. I understand the userbox but do not see the value added by a category that groups users who use the userbox. As DexDor stated above, what's unclear is "how the category [itself] could be useful", distinguishing the function of a category (to group related pages) from a userbox (to express a view/sentiment). --
Black Falcon(
talk)17:32, 14 August 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:Songs written by Greeeen
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: We do not do songwriters by band name - which is the marketing term used to sell records. Members of a band can change, but the songwriting credits do not.
Richhoncho (
talk)
15:50, 11 August 2018 (UTC)reply
@
TenPoundHammer:. I always thought they were a songwriting duo, and as such, although I am not in favour of conjoined songwriters in any event, decided others might disagree with me. Happy to leave the Warren Bros to your more specialist knowledge.I do think Peach Pickers (and others) should be demerged for the very reasons you state. (Why should a songwriter have 2 entries in the same cat?). --
Richhoncho (
talk)
09:21, 14 August 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.
Palestine
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.
Support -- a logical follow up, but do not create any new parents. Pre-2013 Palestinian Territories categories and articles can be parented to State of Palestine categories, since it is the same place with the same boundaries; just a new name.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:41, 13 August 2018 (UTC)reply
on the contrary, where a polity changes name without a change of borders, precedent is that the parent "years in" category uses the current name of the polity, even though this is anachronistic. I think this applies the Democratic Republic of Congo/Zaire/Belgian Congo and Burkino Faso/Upper Volta.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:07, 18 August 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.
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.
Strong support -- Most seem to have a list of rulers in YYYY and a category for states established in YYYY. My sampling did not produce any disestablishments, but I do not doubt they are there. This "in politics" level is a wholly unnecessary one. It may be this nom can be carried rather further towards the present.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:47, 13 August 2018 (UTC)reply
The question is where to start the tree. The 16th century is a much better start than the 11th century, for example because in the 16th century the English parliament begins to play an increasingly important role.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
09:11, 19 August 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:Jewish mathematicians who died in the Holocaust
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.
Comment is this an overlap that's necessary (indeed, the query applies to all the occupations). As I understand the Holocaust, the Jewish victims were not generally selected/targeted by occupation.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk)
18:12, 13 August 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.
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: The category currently is inaccurate. Fashion publications and writers mainly feature bloggers or columnists. Calling many of the people in this category "journalists" is misleading because they mostly publish opinion pieces (such as style trends, fashion show analysis, etc.) which is inherently biased. None of these people exclusively write factual information as a typical journalist would.
Category:Fashion journalists is very different from
Category:Business and financial journalists or
Category:Crime journalists. I propose renaming to
Category:Fashion criticism, like the categories for writers on similar topics like music, theatre, and art.
Woebegone (
talk)
21:42, 11 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose -- These are (or should be) about people writing for newspapers and magazines about fashion. As such they are entitled to be called journalists.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:25, 13 August 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Peterkingiron: Music critics and film critics also write for newspapers and magazines, but they are called critics because they analyze music and film. Most of the people in those categories do not report on music, film, theatre, artworks, and other types of art, which is why those categories are not called journalists. Can you explain why fashion critics/journalists are different?
Woebegone (
talk)
02:20, 14 August 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:Farhangian University
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.
I agree -- This appears to be an umbrella body for all the teacher training colleges in Iran. In principle, each of the 100 branches is probably entitled to an article, so that there is ample scope for this category, but the Iran universities tree is a rather undeveloped one.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:29, 13 August 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:Teachers colleges
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.
Merge both to
Category:Colleges of Education. This needs a headnote explaining that it is about
Category:Teacher training colleges, another potential name: all schools provide education (or should do). These are about teaching the teachers, which is slightly different. In UK, most of the teacher training colleges were amalgamated into Polytechnics, which have since been rebranded as universities. In parallel with this, most universities had a School of Education where graduates could do a fourth year to achieve a post-graduate certificate of education. The American usage of calling tertiary colleges "schools" is misleading in British English.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:38, 13 August 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:Wikipedians who consider themselves participants in all wikiprojects
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.
Don't rename to ".... participate in all wikiprojects" (as that changes the meaning). Delete unless someone provides a reasonable explanation of how the category could be useful. DexDor(talk)18:01, 11 August 2018 (UTC)reply
It is a rather recent wiki-philosophical/wiki-political, userbox-related category, like many others we have (in particular, it's a pro-
WP:CONLEVEL, anti-
WP:OWNership one, and serves the specific purpose of deflating "your view doesn't count since you're not a member of this project" bullshit). So, Keep. No actual deletion rationale has been provided; the above is a combination of
WP:IDONTKNOWIT /
WP:IDONTLIKEIT stuff (don't understand what it is, not interested in it, ergo it must be bad). There is also no particular reason that such an internal category must have a short name; it has nothing to do with readers and article categorization, and it's name was chosen very carefully (including use of the word "participants" vs. "members" in paticular, persuant to a CfD years ago that moved a bunch of then-extant "WikiProject Foo members" categories to use the word "participants", shortly after the community nuked
WP:Esperanza on the basis that everything on WP is open to everyone and there are no no membership organizations, no special clubs, no walled-garden cliques. Neither of the suggested renames get the entire point across: "who participate in" isn't true, unless you literally go project by project and participate in every single one of them. "who reject WikiProject membership" is confusingly misleading (implying refusal to participate in them, to most people who read it), and missing half of the point: it's not just rejection of membership per se, but of the notion that prior involvement is a requirement or confers privilege. There's an important difference between considering oneself a de facto participant in every project, vs. actively working in all of them, or refusing to work in any of them. Finally,
WP:CONCISE applies to articles and by extension to article titles; it isn't really an argument for excessive shortening of project categories, particularly when doing so results in ambiguity or loss of context. "Concise" doesn't just means "short", but short while conveying the same message. —
SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 12:37, 12 August 2018 (UTC)reply
While I might put the userbox on my user page (agreeing with the philosophy), I can't imagine how it can be useful to know who else has this userbox on their user page.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
14:17, 12 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Thanks for providing that clarification, and I agree with most everything you stated. On the matter of the category's name, a shorter name is not a must but, all else being equal, is generally preferred. However, based on your explanation above (and assuming the category is kept), I am content with
Category:Wikipedians who consider themselves participants in all WikiProjects (fixing capitalization) or perhaps the slightly shorter
Category:Wikipedians who claim participation in all WikiProjects. On the matter of the deletion rationale, it is essentially that the category appears to serve
no useful function, i.e. I understand the userbox but do not see the value added by a category that groups users who use the userbox. As DexDor stated above, what's unclear is "how the category [itself] could be useful", distinguishing the function of a category (to group related pages) from a userbox (to express a view/sentiment). --
Black Falcon(
talk)17:32, 14 August 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:Songs written by Greeeen
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: We do not do songwriters by band name - which is the marketing term used to sell records. Members of a band can change, but the songwriting credits do not.
Richhoncho (
talk)
15:50, 11 August 2018 (UTC)reply
@
TenPoundHammer:. I always thought they were a songwriting duo, and as such, although I am not in favour of conjoined songwriters in any event, decided others might disagree with me. Happy to leave the Warren Bros to your more specialist knowledge.I do think Peach Pickers (and others) should be demerged for the very reasons you state. (Why should a songwriter have 2 entries in the same cat?). --
Richhoncho (
talk)
09:21, 14 August 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.
Palestine
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.
Support -- a logical follow up, but do not create any new parents. Pre-2013 Palestinian Territories categories and articles can be parented to State of Palestine categories, since it is the same place with the same boundaries; just a new name.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:41, 13 August 2018 (UTC)reply
on the contrary, where a polity changes name without a change of borders, precedent is that the parent "years in" category uses the current name of the polity, even though this is anachronistic. I think this applies the Democratic Republic of Congo/Zaire/Belgian Congo and Burkino Faso/Upper Volta.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:07, 18 August 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.
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.
Strong support -- Most seem to have a list of rulers in YYYY and a category for states established in YYYY. My sampling did not produce any disestablishments, but I do not doubt they are there. This "in politics" level is a wholly unnecessary one. It may be this nom can be carried rather further towards the present.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:47, 13 August 2018 (UTC)reply
The question is where to start the tree. The 16th century is a much better start than the 11th century, for example because in the 16th century the English parliament begins to play an increasingly important role.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
09:11, 19 August 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:Jewish mathematicians who died in the Holocaust
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.
Comment is this an overlap that's necessary (indeed, the query applies to all the occupations). As I understand the Holocaust, the Jewish victims were not generally selected/targeted by occupation.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk)
18:12, 13 August 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.