Category:Trade associations based in the Philippines
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: This is the only country with categories for both trade associations and industry trade groups. Industry trade groups is more common.
Rathfelder (
talk) 22:07, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Merge or reverse merge, the terms trade association and industry trade group are clearly synonymous.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:23, 19 July 2019 (UTC)reply
It would be good to standardise on one or the other. I dont know if there are local usage issues, but there isnt anything obvious. A Trade group sounds a bit less well organised and less permanent than a trade association.
Rathfelder (
talk) 15:19, 19 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Fair enough. That will require a batch nomination.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:31, 21 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Preferably reverse merge; certainly merge somehow. The Phillipines currently has three articles between the two categories. The parent Industry trade groups by country contains national subcats with both names, so that a wider name change should not automatically follow.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 14:03, 25 July 2019 (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 result of the discussion was:empty and disambiguate. All current members of the category are in one of the two targets already. –
FayenaticLondon 21:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:merge per
WP:NONDEF. In contrast to
prince-bishops who were the actual rulers of their own territory,
prince-primate was merely a secondary title of the archbishops of Esztergom. They did not rule their own territory.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 10:05, 5 July 2019 (UTC)reply
While the leaders of the Confederation of the Rhine now have their own subcategory, the issue with the Hungarian prince-primates has remained unchanged.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 16:58, 17 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DannyS712 (
talk) 18:39, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment -- With the possible exception of the Rhenish rulers, there should be no articles in this category, merely an Esztergom subcat. Alternatively, this should be a cat-redirect to Esztergom with an otheruses template for the Rhenish rulers. No decided view.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 13:59, 25 July 2019 (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:The Wack Pack
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.
MER-C 08:57, 27 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
MER-C 08:53, 7 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose, most of these people seem to be uniquely tied to one particular show.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:00, 9 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DannyS712 (
talk) 18:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. These people are (strongly) associated with Wack Pack and as such are linked in both directions in a way that is much better (e.g. with an explanation and references) than category links. Categorization is for grouping similar articles (e.g. in
Category:American female bodybuilders), but is not necessary to link together associated articles. DexDor(talk) 18:29, 19 July 2019 (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.
Yearly college football standings templates
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.
MER-C 09:31, 26 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DannyS712 (
talk) 18:37, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. Many major football programs listed in these templates were not NCAA members in the early days. "College football" is more accurate.
Ostealthy (
talk) 17:40, 22 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Support per above
Corky 13:31, 23 July 2019 (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:Mayors of Lodi
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.
MER-C 12:58, 31 July 2019 (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:Freedmen
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:do not merge. There is definitely scope for clarification of these categories per the comments below, but this nomination is not it, and a new proposal should be bought accordingly.
MER-C 10:19, 2 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Merge either way and leave a redirect.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:38, 19 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose Freedmen is the historical terms for slaves who were subjects of
manumission. Merge "former slaves" to that one.
Dimadick (
talk) 10:43, 20 July 2019 (UTC)reply
For what it is worth, the article
Freedman suggests that freedmen are merely a subset of former slaves:
In the United States, the terms "freedmen" and "freedwomen" refer chiefly to former slaves emancipated during and after the American Civil War by the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment. Slaves freed before the war (usually by individual manumissions, often in wills) were generally referred to as "Free Negroes" or free blacks. In addition, there was a population of black Americans born free.
Comment -- The term is also used in relation to Ancient Rome, where governmental officers of the Emperor Claudius (for example were Freedmen. There will also be equivalent categories to free negroes in the British West Indies. Whatever the outcome (and I have no view what it should be), it needs to take account of all these.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 13:51, 25 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose. A "former" slave may also have escaped, not necessarily have been legally freed, which is technically what a freedman is. Although most people in
Category:Former slaves probably need to be moved to
Category:Freedmen.
Category:Freed slaves would be a better name for the latter in any case. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 12:53, 29 July 2019 (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:Grawemeyer Award winners
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.
MER-C 12:57, 31 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:delete per
WP:OCAWARD and
WP:NONDEF, the award is not comparable to e.g. the Nobel prize, for most recipients it is just one of many prizes they got.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:22, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete -- yet another NN OCAWARD case. No need to listify as the main article has one. Four to five such awards are given by Uninversity of Louisiana annually.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 13:54, 25 July 2019 (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:Trade associations based in the Philippines
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: This is the only country with categories for both trade associations and industry trade groups. Industry trade groups is more common.
Rathfelder (
talk) 22:07, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Merge or reverse merge, the terms trade association and industry trade group are clearly synonymous.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:23, 19 July 2019 (UTC)reply
It would be good to standardise on one or the other. I dont know if there are local usage issues, but there isnt anything obvious. A Trade group sounds a bit less well organised and less permanent than a trade association.
Rathfelder (
talk) 15:19, 19 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Fair enough. That will require a batch nomination.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:31, 21 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Preferably reverse merge; certainly merge somehow. The Phillipines currently has three articles between the two categories. The parent Industry trade groups by country contains national subcats with both names, so that a wider name change should not automatically follow.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 14:03, 25 July 2019 (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 result of the discussion was:empty and disambiguate. All current members of the category are in one of the two targets already. –
FayenaticLondon 21:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:merge per
WP:NONDEF. In contrast to
prince-bishops who were the actual rulers of their own territory,
prince-primate was merely a secondary title of the archbishops of Esztergom. They did not rule their own territory.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 10:05, 5 July 2019 (UTC)reply
While the leaders of the Confederation of the Rhine now have their own subcategory, the issue with the Hungarian prince-primates has remained unchanged.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 16:58, 17 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DannyS712 (
talk) 18:39, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment -- With the possible exception of the Rhenish rulers, there should be no articles in this category, merely an Esztergom subcat. Alternatively, this should be a cat-redirect to Esztergom with an otheruses template for the Rhenish rulers. No decided view.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 13:59, 25 July 2019 (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:The Wack Pack
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.
MER-C 08:57, 27 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
MER-C 08:53, 7 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose, most of these people seem to be uniquely tied to one particular show.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:00, 9 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DannyS712 (
talk) 18:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. These people are (strongly) associated with Wack Pack and as such are linked in both directions in a way that is much better (e.g. with an explanation and references) than category links. Categorization is for grouping similar articles (e.g. in
Category:American female bodybuilders), but is not necessary to link together associated articles. DexDor(talk) 18:29, 19 July 2019 (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.
Yearly college football standings templates
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.
MER-C 09:31, 26 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DannyS712 (
talk) 18:37, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. Many major football programs listed in these templates were not NCAA members in the early days. "College football" is more accurate.
Ostealthy (
talk) 17:40, 22 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Support per above
Corky 13:31, 23 July 2019 (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:Mayors of Lodi
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.
MER-C 12:58, 31 July 2019 (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:Freedmen
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:do not merge. There is definitely scope for clarification of these categories per the comments below, but this nomination is not it, and a new proposal should be bought accordingly.
MER-C 10:19, 2 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Merge either way and leave a redirect.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:38, 19 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose Freedmen is the historical terms for slaves who were subjects of
manumission. Merge "former slaves" to that one.
Dimadick (
talk) 10:43, 20 July 2019 (UTC)reply
For what it is worth, the article
Freedman suggests that freedmen are merely a subset of former slaves:
In the United States, the terms "freedmen" and "freedwomen" refer chiefly to former slaves emancipated during and after the American Civil War by the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment. Slaves freed before the war (usually by individual manumissions, often in wills) were generally referred to as "Free Negroes" or free blacks. In addition, there was a population of black Americans born free.
Comment -- The term is also used in relation to Ancient Rome, where governmental officers of the Emperor Claudius (for example were Freedmen. There will also be equivalent categories to free negroes in the British West Indies. Whatever the outcome (and I have no view what it should be), it needs to take account of all these.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 13:51, 25 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose. A "former" slave may also have escaped, not necessarily have been legally freed, which is technically what a freedman is. Although most people in
Category:Former slaves probably need to be moved to
Category:Freedmen.
Category:Freed slaves would be a better name for the latter in any case. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 12:53, 29 July 2019 (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:Grawemeyer Award winners
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.
MER-C 12:57, 31 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:delete per
WP:OCAWARD and
WP:NONDEF, the award is not comparable to e.g. the Nobel prize, for most recipients it is just one of many prizes they got.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:22, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete -- yet another NN OCAWARD case. No need to listify as the main article has one. Four to five such awards are given by Uninversity of Louisiana annually.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 13:54, 25 July 2019 (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.