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:German Resistance
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.
Option B: rename to
Category:German resistance which is more in line with sibling categories than option A.
In either case the proposal is to decapitalize the R since (at least in Germany) this is not the proper name of an organisation. Note that sibling categories vary in use of capital R, presumably it may differ by country. For now, both in case of option A and B the proposal is to rename
Category:German Resistance members to
Category:German resistance members, just decapitalizing it, but I might well support if someone has a better idea for it that aligns better with option A.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
16:37, 31 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:Reactors (React media franchise)
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. As far as I can see from the
React (media franchise) article, they have a small number of channels and the contents of this category are lots of other people and channels, at least some of which have no proven link to React at all. I see no proof that people who have appeared on a React channel are widely called "Reactors" (although maybe they are on the channels themselves) and the very fact that the category name has to clarify what it even means makes me think that it is dubious. Maybe some of them did appear in some of React's videos. Who cares? We don't need a category that is half way to being Category:Anybody who ever did a cameo anywhere. If this was a category for people who were notably involved with React, such as regular show presenters or the like, then it might be defensible but there is no indication that this is the case. --
DanielRigal (
talk)
21:04, 15 September 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:Nepalese people
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. Given the weak support for this rename and the opposition in the nomination directly below, I simply cannot see a valid consensus in renaming either. If a separate nomination is sought, I suggest making a batch nomination for better participation.
ℯxplicit04:13, 1 October 2018 (UTC)reply
Weak support, the article
Nepalis exists since 2016 and the name of the article has not yet been subject of discussion. But this is an internal Wiki argument and may well be overturned by a discussion about usage in reliable sources.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:09, 9 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment Arguably we could do with a distinction between people from
Nepal (who are extremely varied in ethnicity for such a small country) and people of Nepalese ethnic groups settled elsewhere - eg India, and Bhutan where they form a significant part of the population. I don't know if sources justify this, or which would be which. Both are commonly used in the region.
Johnbod (
talk)
12:34, 1 September 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:Nepalese Wikipedians
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.
Thanks, that's helpful but not quite definitive—the MFA website uses both "Nepali" and "Nepalese" in different places as does the
U.S. Department of State. Again, I am fairly certain both "Nepali" and "Nepalese" are correct, so what would convince me is a source stating "Nepalese" is incorrect. Alternatively, if there is consensus to rename
Category:Nepalese people to
Category:Nepali people, I would have no objection. --
Black Falcon(
talk)22:16, 7 August 2018 (UTC)reply
It is not a matter of what is incorrect, but rather what is preferred. "Kyrgyzstani", "Kyrgyz", "Kirgiz", and "Kirghiz" are all correct, but "Kyrgyzstani" is preferred.
Buaidh talkcontribs22:38, 7 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:Singaporean Wikipedians
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.
Oppose. If "The national adjective for Singapore is "Singapore". "Singaporean" is the national demonym.", but categories for people are supposed to be using the demonym, then this is exactly bass ackward.
Bearcat (
talk)
00:39, 5 September 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.
Taiwan user categories
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: While both "Taiwan" and "Taiwanese" are used as national adjectives for Taiwan, the term "Taiwanese" is often used to denote the inhabitants of the island prior to the arrival of the government of the
Republic of China in 1945. Therefore, "Taiwan" is the preferred national adjective.
Buaidh talkcontribs20:43, 7 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose - While "Taiwan" is used as an adjective, it is not reasonable to think that a reader will be able to differentiate pre-/post-1945 based on such a small change. Nor is it appropriate to assume, as the proposed change does, that all Wikipedians who self-identified as being of Taiwanese descent were necessarily referring to post-1945 descent. The fact is that "Taiwanese" is the most common adjective used to denote people or things from Taiwan (pre-1945 and post-1945), and we should adhere to that practice. --
Black Falcon(
talk)22:00, 7 August 2018 (UTC)reply
True, but the CIA is not necessarily the definitive source for national adjectives and demonyms. In this instance, I think the weight of issues favors "Taiwanese"—e.g. the fact that the article category is
Category:Taiwanese people, that Taiwan Wikipedians could easily be confused with
Category:Wikipedians in Taiwan, that "Taiwanese" is a more natural English adjective, etc. --
Black Falcon(
talk)18:30, 8 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:Social economists
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. Social economics is not the same as socioeconomics. It is a field in its own right. See for example
here. Sooner or later there should be an article on social economics.--
Ipigott (
talk)
08:54, 11 August 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Ipigott: If you want to take a shot at creating a main article and find 5 biography articles that fit into that description, I'm more than happy to change my vote now or be open to recreating the category later. My only concern is with the category going before that main article that will establish that inclusion criteria within Wikpedia.
RevelationDirect (
talk)
09:57, 11 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.
Cleanup of Singapore football categories
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: I performed a cleanup of the category listing for templates related to football in Singapore. Many of these templates tend to be overcategorized, and there is no tangible benefit to distinguish between 'template' and 'navigational boxes' because there are so few of them and most of them are already navigation boxes, which just adds another redundant layer of sub-categorization. The categories with sub-categories listed here eventually lead to a sub-category with no entries and should also be deleted, while the redirects are the result of a rename I proceeded with in order to simplify the categorization name so they may be deleted too. --
AquaDTRS (
talk)
01:20, 31 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete all Some can go to G6.
AquaDTRS, you can also nominate rename category request and merge category request in CfD/CfDS and no need to do this cleanup one by one manually
Hhkohh (
talk)
06:05, 31 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Thanks, I'll keep that in mind when cleaning up next time. Also, just for the record, I'm not allowed to G6 in the middle of a CfD for these categories right? --
AquaDTRS (
talk)
06:25, 31 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.
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:German Resistance
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.
Option B: rename to
Category:German resistance which is more in line with sibling categories than option A.
In either case the proposal is to decapitalize the R since (at least in Germany) this is not the proper name of an organisation. Note that sibling categories vary in use of capital R, presumably it may differ by country. For now, both in case of option A and B the proposal is to rename
Category:German Resistance members to
Category:German resistance members, just decapitalizing it, but I might well support if someone has a better idea for it that aligns better with option A.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
16:37, 31 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:Reactors (React media franchise)
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. As far as I can see from the
React (media franchise) article, they have a small number of channels and the contents of this category are lots of other people and channels, at least some of which have no proven link to React at all. I see no proof that people who have appeared on a React channel are widely called "Reactors" (although maybe they are on the channels themselves) and the very fact that the category name has to clarify what it even means makes me think that it is dubious. Maybe some of them did appear in some of React's videos. Who cares? We don't need a category that is half way to being Category:Anybody who ever did a cameo anywhere. If this was a category for people who were notably involved with React, such as regular show presenters or the like, then it might be defensible but there is no indication that this is the case. --
DanielRigal (
talk)
21:04, 15 September 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:Nepalese people
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. Given the weak support for this rename and the opposition in the nomination directly below, I simply cannot see a valid consensus in renaming either. If a separate nomination is sought, I suggest making a batch nomination for better participation.
ℯxplicit04:13, 1 October 2018 (UTC)reply
Weak support, the article
Nepalis exists since 2016 and the name of the article has not yet been subject of discussion. But this is an internal Wiki argument and may well be overturned by a discussion about usage in reliable sources.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:09, 9 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment Arguably we could do with a distinction between people from
Nepal (who are extremely varied in ethnicity for such a small country) and people of Nepalese ethnic groups settled elsewhere - eg India, and Bhutan where they form a significant part of the population. I don't know if sources justify this, or which would be which. Both are commonly used in the region.
Johnbod (
talk)
12:34, 1 September 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:Nepalese Wikipedians
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.
Thanks, that's helpful but not quite definitive—the MFA website uses both "Nepali" and "Nepalese" in different places as does the
U.S. Department of State. Again, I am fairly certain both "Nepali" and "Nepalese" are correct, so what would convince me is a source stating "Nepalese" is incorrect. Alternatively, if there is consensus to rename
Category:Nepalese people to
Category:Nepali people, I would have no objection. --
Black Falcon(
talk)22:16, 7 August 2018 (UTC)reply
It is not a matter of what is incorrect, but rather what is preferred. "Kyrgyzstani", "Kyrgyz", "Kirgiz", and "Kirghiz" are all correct, but "Kyrgyzstani" is preferred.
Buaidh talkcontribs22:38, 7 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:Singaporean Wikipedians
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.
Oppose. If "The national adjective for Singapore is "Singapore". "Singaporean" is the national demonym.", but categories for people are supposed to be using the demonym, then this is exactly bass ackward.
Bearcat (
talk)
00:39, 5 September 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.
Taiwan user categories
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: While both "Taiwan" and "Taiwanese" are used as national adjectives for Taiwan, the term "Taiwanese" is often used to denote the inhabitants of the island prior to the arrival of the government of the
Republic of China in 1945. Therefore, "Taiwan" is the preferred national adjective.
Buaidh talkcontribs20:43, 7 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose - While "Taiwan" is used as an adjective, it is not reasonable to think that a reader will be able to differentiate pre-/post-1945 based on such a small change. Nor is it appropriate to assume, as the proposed change does, that all Wikipedians who self-identified as being of Taiwanese descent were necessarily referring to post-1945 descent. The fact is that "Taiwanese" is the most common adjective used to denote people or things from Taiwan (pre-1945 and post-1945), and we should adhere to that practice. --
Black Falcon(
talk)22:00, 7 August 2018 (UTC)reply
True, but the CIA is not necessarily the definitive source for national adjectives and demonyms. In this instance, I think the weight of issues favors "Taiwanese"—e.g. the fact that the article category is
Category:Taiwanese people, that Taiwan Wikipedians could easily be confused with
Category:Wikipedians in Taiwan, that "Taiwanese" is a more natural English adjective, etc. --
Black Falcon(
talk)18:30, 8 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:Social economists
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. Social economics is not the same as socioeconomics. It is a field in its own right. See for example
here. Sooner or later there should be an article on social economics.--
Ipigott (
talk)
08:54, 11 August 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Ipigott: If you want to take a shot at creating a main article and find 5 biography articles that fit into that description, I'm more than happy to change my vote now or be open to recreating the category later. My only concern is with the category going before that main article that will establish that inclusion criteria within Wikpedia.
RevelationDirect (
talk)
09:57, 11 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.
Cleanup of Singapore football categories
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: I performed a cleanup of the category listing for templates related to football in Singapore. Many of these templates tend to be overcategorized, and there is no tangible benefit to distinguish between 'template' and 'navigational boxes' because there are so few of them and most of them are already navigation boxes, which just adds another redundant layer of sub-categorization. The categories with sub-categories listed here eventually lead to a sub-category with no entries and should also be deleted, while the redirects are the result of a rename I proceeded with in order to simplify the categorization name so they may be deleted too. --
AquaDTRS (
talk)
01:20, 31 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete all Some can go to G6.
AquaDTRS, you can also nominate rename category request and merge category request in CfD/CfDS and no need to do this cleanup one by one manually
Hhkohh (
talk)
06:05, 31 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Thanks, I'll keep that in mind when cleaning up next time. Also, just for the record, I'm not allowed to G6 in the middle of a CfD for these categories right? --
AquaDTRS (
talk)
06:25, 31 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.