- 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: keep since the RM did not result in a rename of the main article either. (
non-admin closure)
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:53, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Personal transporter manufacturers to Category:Rideable manufacturers
- Nominator's rationale:
Personal transporter is the main article for
Category:Personal transporters. Category should be renamed if
Talk:Personal transporter#Requested move 7 June 2018 is closed as move. If article name is kept then keep category name.
Dennis Bratland (
talk)
18:58, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Given that the term Rideable can be both an adjective (to describe anything that can be ridden), or a noun (to describe a specific type of electric device that can be ridden) then might it be more appropriate to use the term 'Rideables manufacturers' or possibly 'Electric rideable manufacturers' or 'Electric rideables manufacturers'. Personally I would prefer us to focus our efforts on the discussion about moving the Personal Transporter article itself and only open this discussion if we have a result there. Consideration of this issue might however encourage us towards the more specific term 'Electric rideable' for the main WP article rather than Rideable. PeterEastern ( talk) 09:37, 10 June 2018 (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- The result of the discussion was: withdrawn (
non-admin closure).
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:55, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Personal transporters to Category:Rideables
- Nominator's rationale: Personal transporter is the main article for Category:Personal transporters. Category should be renamed if Talk:Personal transporter#Requested move 7 June 2018 is closed as move. If article name is kept then keep category name. Dennis Bratland ( talk) 18:57, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Withdrawn Move discussion was closed as not moved. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 22:28, 21 June 2018 (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. Timrollpickering 11:18, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Most of the entries have been added because of the title. For instance, is 'Highway 61 Revisited' about a road or a street in the physical sense? Big Man on Mulberry Street is, at a guess, about a 'Big Man' There is nothing to really join these songs except for a word in the title. This is NOT what categorisation is for. Richhoncho ( talk) 16:25, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. Seems a pointless category that would attract all manner of titles with the vaguest of connections. For example, Dancing in the Street is a song about dancing, not about a specific street or road. Izzat Kutebar ( talk) 14:43, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Comment. Dancing in the Street is also in Songs about Chicago, Songs about Detroit, Songs about New Orleans. I mean, is it really? More category clutter. No use to anybody. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 00:21, 9 June 2018 (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/Keep at Scheduled Monuments per suggestion below.
Timrollpickering
23:51, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Scheduled Ancient Monuments to Category:Scheduled monuments in the United Kingdom
- Propose renaming Category:Scheduled Monuments in England to Category:Scheduled monuments in England
- Propose renaming Category:Scheduled Ancient Monuments in Scotland to Category:Scheduled monuments in Scotland
- Propose renaming Category:Scheduled Monuments in Northern Ireland to Category:Scheduled monuments in Northern Ireland
- Propose renaming Category:Scheduled Ancient Monuments in Wales to Category:Scheduled monuments in Wales
- Nominator's rationale: The term 'scheduled monument' is preferred over 'scheduled ancient monument', also the capitalisation is unnecessary. The main article for this topic is scheduled monument. There are numerous sub-categories, some of which have 'scheduled monuments in...', e.g. Category: Scheduled monuments in Anglesey, but others are 'Scheduled Ancient Monuments in...' e.g. Category:Scheduled Ancient Monuments in Hampshire. I think they should all be consistent and use the same form as the main article. There are about 80 subcategories in the latter form, is there some way of automatically tagging and adding all of them? What Are The Civilian Applications? ( talk) 11:36, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Should be
Category:Scheduled monuments in the UK I think, for extra clarity. This is only a holding cat for sub-cats, plus a handful of general articles.
Johnbod (
talk)
12:42, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed, I have updated the nomination. Thanks, What Are The Civilian Applications? ( talk) 11:44, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Thanks! Johnbod ( talk) 13:42, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Perhaps Category:Scheduled monuments (United Kingdom) is even better, since it concerns a specific British term. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:12, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep England and Northern Ireland and rename the rest to match, as
Category:Scheduled Monuments in Scotland. This is a UK-wide designation, though now implemented by separate authorities in the 4 home nations. "in UK" is probably not necessary because this only applies to UK. Hence also rename to
Category:Scheduled Monuments. This categorisation is correct because it is a statutory designation and thus a proper name. That fact that it applies to UK only can adequately be dealt with in a headnote. For the uninitiated in UK, archaeological sites as protected by Scheduling. Buildings are protected by being made Listed Buildings. Originally they were all ancient, but I suspect there will be some archaeological sites that are industrial and thus not very ancient.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:04, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Peter, I've no idea if its a proper noun, but was following what appears to be common usage by the regulatory authorities e.g. Historic England, Historic Environment Scotland, gov.uk Listed building articles and categories also use lower case. Thanks, What Are The Civilian Applications? ( talk) 13:43, 12 June 2018 (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) 05:03, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT; the only page in this category is also a member of all the parent categories of this category. Useddenim ( talk) 11:23, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. It is certainly over-categorising and there is no need at all to have an article in both parent and child categories. Izzat Kutebar ( talk) 13:59, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 04:08, 9 June 2018 (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: keep since the RM did not result in a rename of the main article either. (
non-admin closure)
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:53, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Personal transporter manufacturers to Category:Rideable manufacturers
- Nominator's rationale:
Personal transporter is the main article for
Category:Personal transporters. Category should be renamed if
Talk:Personal transporter#Requested move 7 June 2018 is closed as move. If article name is kept then keep category name.
Dennis Bratland (
talk)
18:58, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Given that the term Rideable can be both an adjective (to describe anything that can be ridden), or a noun (to describe a specific type of electric device that can be ridden) then might it be more appropriate to use the term 'Rideables manufacturers' or possibly 'Electric rideable manufacturers' or 'Electric rideables manufacturers'. Personally I would prefer us to focus our efforts on the discussion about moving the Personal Transporter article itself and only open this discussion if we have a result there. Consideration of this issue might however encourage us towards the more specific term 'Electric rideable' for the main WP article rather than Rideable. PeterEastern ( talk) 09:37, 10 June 2018 (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: withdrawn (
non-admin closure).
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:55, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Personal transporters to Category:Rideables
- Nominator's rationale: Personal transporter is the main article for Category:Personal transporters. Category should be renamed if Talk:Personal transporter#Requested move 7 June 2018 is closed as move. If article name is kept then keep category name. Dennis Bratland ( talk) 18:57, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Withdrawn Move discussion was closed as not moved. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 22:28, 21 June 2018 (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. Timrollpickering 11:18, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Most of the entries have been added because of the title. For instance, is 'Highway 61 Revisited' about a road or a street in the physical sense? Big Man on Mulberry Street is, at a guess, about a 'Big Man' There is nothing to really join these songs except for a word in the title. This is NOT what categorisation is for. Richhoncho ( talk) 16:25, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. Seems a pointless category that would attract all manner of titles with the vaguest of connections. For example, Dancing in the Street is a song about dancing, not about a specific street or road. Izzat Kutebar ( talk) 14:43, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Comment. Dancing in the Street is also in Songs about Chicago, Songs about Detroit, Songs about New Orleans. I mean, is it really? More category clutter. No use to anybody. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 00:21, 9 June 2018 (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/Keep at Scheduled Monuments per suggestion below.
Timrollpickering
23:51, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Scheduled Ancient Monuments to Category:Scheduled monuments in the United Kingdom
- Propose renaming Category:Scheduled Monuments in England to Category:Scheduled monuments in England
- Propose renaming Category:Scheduled Ancient Monuments in Scotland to Category:Scheduled monuments in Scotland
- Propose renaming Category:Scheduled Monuments in Northern Ireland to Category:Scheduled monuments in Northern Ireland
- Propose renaming Category:Scheduled Ancient Monuments in Wales to Category:Scheduled monuments in Wales
- Nominator's rationale: The term 'scheduled monument' is preferred over 'scheduled ancient monument', also the capitalisation is unnecessary. The main article for this topic is scheduled monument. There are numerous sub-categories, some of which have 'scheduled monuments in...', e.g. Category: Scheduled monuments in Anglesey, but others are 'Scheduled Ancient Monuments in...' e.g. Category:Scheduled Ancient Monuments in Hampshire. I think they should all be consistent and use the same form as the main article. There are about 80 subcategories in the latter form, is there some way of automatically tagging and adding all of them? What Are The Civilian Applications? ( talk) 11:36, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Should be
Category:Scheduled monuments in the UK I think, for extra clarity. This is only a holding cat for sub-cats, plus a handful of general articles.
Johnbod (
talk)
12:42, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed, I have updated the nomination. Thanks, What Are The Civilian Applications? ( talk) 11:44, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Thanks! Johnbod ( talk) 13:42, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Perhaps Category:Scheduled monuments (United Kingdom) is even better, since it concerns a specific British term. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:12, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep England and Northern Ireland and rename the rest to match, as
Category:Scheduled Monuments in Scotland. This is a UK-wide designation, though now implemented by separate authorities in the 4 home nations. "in UK" is probably not necessary because this only applies to UK. Hence also rename to
Category:Scheduled Monuments. This categorisation is correct because it is a statutory designation and thus a proper name. That fact that it applies to UK only can adequately be dealt with in a headnote. For the uninitiated in UK, archaeological sites as protected by Scheduling. Buildings are protected by being made Listed Buildings. Originally they were all ancient, but I suspect there will be some archaeological sites that are industrial and thus not very ancient.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:04, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Peter, I've no idea if its a proper noun, but was following what appears to be common usage by the regulatory authorities e.g. Historic England, Historic Environment Scotland, gov.uk Listed building articles and categories also use lower case. Thanks, What Are The Civilian Applications? ( talk) 13:43, 12 June 2018 (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) 05:03, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT; the only page in this category is also a member of all the parent categories of this category. Useddenim ( talk) 11:23, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. It is certainly over-categorising and there is no need at all to have an article in both parent and child categories. Izzat Kutebar ( talk) 13:59, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 04:08, 9 June 2018 (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.