September 8
Category:Clerks (film)
- 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 20:54, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Only five articles and all will be pretty easily interlinked and navigable from a footer. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 19:44, 8 September 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.
Area codes in the United States by state
- 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.
ℯ
xplicit
05:04, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Alaska
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Connecticut
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Delaware
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Hawaii
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Idaho
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Maine
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Maryland
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Montana
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Nebraska
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Nevada
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in New Hampshire
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in New Mexico
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in North Dakota
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Oregon
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Rhode Island
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in South Dakota
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Utah
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Vermont
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in West Virginia
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Wyoming
- Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, small categories unlikely to grow. Some of these states are served exclusively by one area code, e.g. Area code 701 for North Dakota. All area codes in all states (including those not in this nomination) are already in Category:Area codes in the United States. A category is included here iff there are fewer than four articles. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 18:33, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep as part of Category:Area codes in the United States by state per the exception in WP:SMALLCAT for overall accepted sub-categorization schemes. The states of the United States are just such a scheme as is the parent for each state in Category:Communications in the United States by state. Hmains ( talk) 22:04, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:SMALLCAT exception per Hmains. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 02:32, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Helpful category and per above's comments on SmallCat AmericanAir88( talk) 22:09, 25 September 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.
Category:Abbott and Costello (film series)
- 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: split into
Category:Abbott and Costello and
Category:Abbott and Costello films.
Good Ol’factory
(talk)
05:37, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Abbott and Costello (film series) to Category:Abbott and Costello
- Nominator's rationale: Does not exclusively include films. Article Abbott and Costello (film series) does not exist. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 17:36, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Alternative suggestion, create Category:Abbott and Costello as a parent category of Category:Abbott and Costello (film series). Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:40, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- I say use Category:Abbott and Costello as a parent cateory but rename the other one to Category:Abbott and Costello films. ★Trekker ( talk) 14:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, "films" is more accurate than "film series". Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:36, 22 September 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.
Category:Stella Vine
- 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 20:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary small category containing only two articles CallyMc ( talk) 15:29, 8 September 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.
Category:8th-century disestablishments in Israel
- 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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 12:03, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: delete as an outlier in Category:Disestablishments in Israel by century which starts in the 20th century (to be precise, in 1948). Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:41, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Merge to Category:8th-century disestablishments in the Abbasid Caliphate, which I think it the correct country category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 15:46, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Almost! The earthquake (hence the disestablishment) was in 749 while the Abbasids conquered Syria and Palestina in 750 (see Abbasid Revolution). The correct country category is Category:Umayyad Caliphate but this doesn't have a disestablishments subcat of its own. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:29, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:8th-century disestablishments in the Umayyad Caliphate per above. GreyShark ( dibra) 05:12, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Also
Category:8th century in Israel.
GreyShark (
dibra)
05:15, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- I cannot imagine we can create a reasonably populated disestablishment tree for the Umayyad Caliphate. The one article is already in the global
Category:749 establishmentsCategory:749 disestablishments and that should be good enough. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:40, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- I will do that. I created the Abbasid Caliphate tree. GreyShark ( dibra) 14:19, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- I cannot imagine we can create a reasonably populated disestablishment tree for the Umayyad Caliphate. The one article is already in the global
- Also
Category:8th century in Israel.
GreyShark (
dibra)
05:15, 9 September 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.
Category:Lübeck law
- 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
2018 OCT 6 CFD.
Good Ol’factory
(talk)
05:35, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Lübeck law to Category:Cities with Lübeck law
- Nominator's rationale: rename since the large amount of this category consists of cities with Lübeck law rather than articles about Lübeck law itself. When this category is renamed, the first three articles may be moved to the two parent categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Support -- The eponymous article can remain the main article. Peterkingiron ( talk) 15:50, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- do not rename, create a subcat instead and name it Category:Populated places with Lübeck law to include any place that is not a city, such as the towns I just saw here. Hmains ( talk) 22:09, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- In that case, the remaining Category:Lübeck law would only contain the eponymous article and the subcategory (because the two other topic articles should be moved up anyway). That is not very helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:27, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Delete a city having Lübeck law is probably not a defining characteristic. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 02:34, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- That is what I have been considering too. It is usually mentioned early in the wp articles as if it were very defining, but that may also have been the work of one over-enthusiastic editor. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:11, 11 September 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.
Category:Data with undue precision
- 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 ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:02, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Empty cleanup category with an unclear and possibly misleading scope. — Mr. Guye ( talk) ( contribs) 04:15, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Comment – This category is populated by {{ Undue precision}}. It is for articles with figures that are more precise than necessary. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 17:31, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Or for conversions (e.g. Imperial to metric) that are more precise than the data warrants. That's really what the issue is. If the data is only precise to within 10%, and we (or someone else) convert it into a figure with 1% precision, then we're misrepresenting the source. E.g., if a distance is given as 1km, and we convert that to 0.62mi, then we're claiming a precision of 50ft instead of 500m. Or, sometimes the source itself will have spurious precision, because the journalist reporting on the topic has little understanding of stats. There have been edit wars over keeping undue precision inherited from a supposedly reliable source, and that has required consensus among editors who do know what they're doing to change it. — kwami ( talk) 18:20, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. I have added documentation about the purpose of the category. kwami, please do likewise (if still necessary) with any other similar categories that you set up. – Fayenatic London 08:22, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, Fayenatic. — kwami ( talk) 16:11, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- keep for the good reasons stated above. Hmains ( talk) 02:11, 12 September 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.
Category:Winter Olympic venues by year
- 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
2018 OCT 7 CFD.
Good Ol’factory
(talk)
12:05, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Winter Olympic venues by year i.e. Category:2018 Winter Olympics venues to Category:2018 Winter Olympic venues, and back to 1924 i.e. Category:1924 Winter Olympics venues to Category:1924 Winter Olympic venues. Also all intermediate years (1928, 1932, 1936, 1948, 1952, 1956, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2006, 2010; & 2014: all tagged).
- Nominator's rationale: While only the 2022 category ( Category:2022 Winter Olympic venues) uses "Olympic" rather than "Olympics"; all the Summer Olympics use "Olympic". Hence it seems preferable to change (e.g. to Category:2018 Winter Olympic venues etc.) so as to have the same format as for the Summer Olympics (see e.g. Category:2016 Summer Olympic venues). Hugo999 ( talk) 10:57, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 11:14, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose For me, the word "Olympics" should stand as a plural. I think for example "2018 Winter Olympic venues" looks wrong as it contains the familiar name "2018 Winter Olympics" but with the 's' missing, so it just looks unfinished. "2018 Winter Olympics venues" seems correct as it describes venues of the "2018 Winter Olympics". Personally I'd prefer to see all the summer categories changed to "???? Summer Olympics venues". I can see that the singular version matches the idea of an "olympic venue" in which the word 'olympic' is an adjective describing the venue, but I think it's more important to retain the familiar plural word "Olympics" in this case. An alternative suggestion would be renaming to "Olympic venues of the 2018 Winter Olympics" but this might seem too wordy. Rodney Baggins ( talk) 10:22, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Further comment While the possessive "Olympics" applies to events so Category:2018 Winter Olympics events as the events are part of the Olympics; the Olympic venues do not belong to the Olympics, but are associated with a particular Olympics; hence the category Category:2016 Summer Olympic venues (with "Olympic" not "Olympics") for venues associated with that Olympics. Hugo999 ( talk) 02:05, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- In which case why not just call it "Category:2016 Olympic venues" or "Category:Venues of the 2016 Summer Olympics" Rodney Baggins ( talk) 05:43, 17 September 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.
September 8
Category:Clerks (film)
- 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 20:54, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Only five articles and all will be pretty easily interlinked and navigable from a footer. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 19:44, 8 September 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.
Area codes in the United States by state
- 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.
ℯ
xplicit
05:04, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Alaska
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Connecticut
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Delaware
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Hawaii
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Idaho
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Maine
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Maryland
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Montana
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Nebraska
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Nevada
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in New Hampshire
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in New Mexico
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in North Dakota
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Oregon
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Rhode Island
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in South Dakota
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Utah
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Vermont
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in West Virginia
- Propose deleting Category:Area codes in Wyoming
- Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, small categories unlikely to grow. Some of these states are served exclusively by one area code, e.g. Area code 701 for North Dakota. All area codes in all states (including those not in this nomination) are already in Category:Area codes in the United States. A category is included here iff there are fewer than four articles. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 18:33, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep as part of Category:Area codes in the United States by state per the exception in WP:SMALLCAT for overall accepted sub-categorization schemes. The states of the United States are just such a scheme as is the parent for each state in Category:Communications in the United States by state. Hmains ( talk) 22:04, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:SMALLCAT exception per Hmains. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 02:32, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Helpful category and per above's comments on SmallCat AmericanAir88( talk) 22:09, 25 September 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.
Category:Abbott and Costello (film series)
- 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: split into
Category:Abbott and Costello and
Category:Abbott and Costello films.
Good Ol’factory
(talk)
05:37, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Abbott and Costello (film series) to Category:Abbott and Costello
- Nominator's rationale: Does not exclusively include films. Article Abbott and Costello (film series) does not exist. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 17:36, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Alternative suggestion, create Category:Abbott and Costello as a parent category of Category:Abbott and Costello (film series). Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:40, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- I say use Category:Abbott and Costello as a parent cateory but rename the other one to Category:Abbott and Costello films. ★Trekker ( talk) 14:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, "films" is more accurate than "film series". Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:36, 22 September 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.
Category:Stella Vine
- 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 20:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary small category containing only two articles CallyMc ( talk) 15:29, 8 September 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.
Category:8th-century disestablishments in Israel
- 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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 12:03, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: delete as an outlier in Category:Disestablishments in Israel by century which starts in the 20th century (to be precise, in 1948). Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:41, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Merge to Category:8th-century disestablishments in the Abbasid Caliphate, which I think it the correct country category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 15:46, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Almost! The earthquake (hence the disestablishment) was in 749 while the Abbasids conquered Syria and Palestina in 750 (see Abbasid Revolution). The correct country category is Category:Umayyad Caliphate but this doesn't have a disestablishments subcat of its own. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:29, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:8th-century disestablishments in the Umayyad Caliphate per above. GreyShark ( dibra) 05:12, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Also
Category:8th century in Israel.
GreyShark (
dibra)
05:15, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- I cannot imagine we can create a reasonably populated disestablishment tree for the Umayyad Caliphate. The one article is already in the global
Category:749 establishmentsCategory:749 disestablishments and that should be good enough. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:40, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- I will do that. I created the Abbasid Caliphate tree. GreyShark ( dibra) 14:19, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- I cannot imagine we can create a reasonably populated disestablishment tree for the Umayyad Caliphate. The one article is already in the global
- Also
Category:8th century in Israel.
GreyShark (
dibra)
05:15, 9 September 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.
Category:Lübeck law
- 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
2018 OCT 6 CFD.
Good Ol’factory
(talk)
05:35, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Lübeck law to Category:Cities with Lübeck law
- Nominator's rationale: rename since the large amount of this category consists of cities with Lübeck law rather than articles about Lübeck law itself. When this category is renamed, the first three articles may be moved to the two parent categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Support -- The eponymous article can remain the main article. Peterkingiron ( talk) 15:50, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- do not rename, create a subcat instead and name it Category:Populated places with Lübeck law to include any place that is not a city, such as the towns I just saw here. Hmains ( talk) 22:09, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- In that case, the remaining Category:Lübeck law would only contain the eponymous article and the subcategory (because the two other topic articles should be moved up anyway). That is not very helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:27, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Delete a city having Lübeck law is probably not a defining characteristic. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 02:34, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- That is what I have been considering too. It is usually mentioned early in the wp articles as if it were very defining, but that may also have been the work of one over-enthusiastic editor. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:11, 11 September 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.
Category:Data with undue precision
- 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 ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:02, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Empty cleanup category with an unclear and possibly misleading scope. — Mr. Guye ( talk) ( contribs) 04:15, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Comment – This category is populated by {{ Undue precision}}. It is for articles with figures that are more precise than necessary. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 17:31, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Or for conversions (e.g. Imperial to metric) that are more precise than the data warrants. That's really what the issue is. If the data is only precise to within 10%, and we (or someone else) convert it into a figure with 1% precision, then we're misrepresenting the source. E.g., if a distance is given as 1km, and we convert that to 0.62mi, then we're claiming a precision of 50ft instead of 500m. Or, sometimes the source itself will have spurious precision, because the journalist reporting on the topic has little understanding of stats. There have been edit wars over keeping undue precision inherited from a supposedly reliable source, and that has required consensus among editors who do know what they're doing to change it. — kwami ( talk) 18:20, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. I have added documentation about the purpose of the category. kwami, please do likewise (if still necessary) with any other similar categories that you set up. – Fayenatic London 08:22, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, Fayenatic. — kwami ( talk) 16:11, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- keep for the good reasons stated above. Hmains ( talk) 02:11, 12 September 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.
Category:Winter Olympic venues by year
- 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
2018 OCT 7 CFD.
Good Ol’factory
(talk)
12:05, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Winter Olympic venues by year i.e. Category:2018 Winter Olympics venues to Category:2018 Winter Olympic venues, and back to 1924 i.e. Category:1924 Winter Olympics venues to Category:1924 Winter Olympic venues. Also all intermediate years (1928, 1932, 1936, 1948, 1952, 1956, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2006, 2010; & 2014: all tagged).
- Nominator's rationale: While only the 2022 category ( Category:2022 Winter Olympic venues) uses "Olympic" rather than "Olympics"; all the Summer Olympics use "Olympic". Hence it seems preferable to change (e.g. to Category:2018 Winter Olympic venues etc.) so as to have the same format as for the Summer Olympics (see e.g. Category:2016 Summer Olympic venues). Hugo999 ( talk) 10:57, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 11:14, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose For me, the word "Olympics" should stand as a plural. I think for example "2018 Winter Olympic venues" looks wrong as it contains the familiar name "2018 Winter Olympics" but with the 's' missing, so it just looks unfinished. "2018 Winter Olympics venues" seems correct as it describes venues of the "2018 Winter Olympics". Personally I'd prefer to see all the summer categories changed to "???? Summer Olympics venues". I can see that the singular version matches the idea of an "olympic venue" in which the word 'olympic' is an adjective describing the venue, but I think it's more important to retain the familiar plural word "Olympics" in this case. An alternative suggestion would be renaming to "Olympic venues of the 2018 Winter Olympics" but this might seem too wordy. Rodney Baggins ( talk) 10:22, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Further comment While the possessive "Olympics" applies to events so Category:2018 Winter Olympics events as the events are part of the Olympics; the Olympic venues do not belong to the Olympics, but are associated with a particular Olympics; hence the category Category:2016 Summer Olympic venues (with "Olympic" not "Olympics") for venues associated with that Olympics. Hugo999 ( talk) 02:05, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- In which case why not just call it "Category:2016 Olympic venues" or "Category:Venues of the 2016 Summer Olympics" Rodney Baggins ( talk) 05:43, 17 September 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.