- 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- The result of the discussion was: withdrawn ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:56, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: This is the correct, common name for this defunct institution. See here Elshad ( talk) 20:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now The trust for it is
The Medical College of Saint Bartholomew’s Hospital Trust (and that's on the successor institution's website), the term is also used by
the NHS records and historically
by the Lancet. Can we have some better sources than one random modern day site that the proposed name is accurate?
Timrollpickering (
talk)
22:58, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Upon reflection I now agree. "Medical College of St Bartholomew's Hospital" seems to be the correct name, as noted in
legislation. I withdraw the move request and also will update other parts of Wiki to reflect and unify under the correct name.
Elshad (
talk)
10:48, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comment -- The target is a redirect to the current subject, so that there is nothing to reverse merge. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:44, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Upon reflection I now agree. "Medical College of St Bartholomew's Hospital" seems to be the correct name, as noted in
legislation. I withdraw the move request and also will update other parts of Wiki to reflect and unify under the correct name.
Elshad (
talk)
10:48, 14 July 2022 (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: soft delete ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:09, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Club at Berkeley is marked as {{ historical}}. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:24, 13 July 2022 (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) Qwerfjkl talk 20:57, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: delete, "pilgrimage" is not a defining characteristic of these articles. The articles are in Category:Holocaust commemoration and that is the correct place for them. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Support but also parent the articles to
Category:Pilgrimages.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
09:42, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- @
Laurel Lodged: you appear to disagree with the rationale of the nominator. Are you suggesting a merge purely as
WP:SMALLCAT? –
Fayenatic
London
08:17, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- I suppose that manually parenting and merging amount to the same thing.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
12:15, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but what's your rationale? The nominator says they are not pilgrimages, but you support merging to Category:Pilgrimages – does that mean you reject the nominator's analysis of defining characteristics, but would merge this because it's a small category? – Fayenatic London 21:01, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
- I suppose that manually parenting and merging amount to the same thing.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
12:15, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- @
Laurel Lodged: you appear to disagree with the rationale of the nominator. Are you suggesting a merge purely as
WP:SMALLCAT? –
Fayenatic
London
08:17, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- On reflection, I think that the nom is correct. They do not share the characteristics of religious pilgrimages. They are only pilgrimages by metaphor. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 22:00, 26 July 2022 (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.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 August 7#Category:Taoist pilgrimages
- 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: merge both to
Category:Two-lane expressways.
(non-admin closure)
Qwerfjkl
talk
21:00, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Two-lane motorways to Category:Two-lane freeways
- Nominator's rationale: Aren't motorways the same thing as freeways? If so, I don't see the need to have to separate categories for two different terms that mean the same thing. SHB2000 ( talk) 01:57, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comments: both should be merged to Category:Two-lane expressways per article title Two-lane expressway. Or, the nominated category might be repurposed to Category:Two-lane freeways in Australia. I wonder why there aren't any articles about European two-lane expressways. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:17, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comments: both should indeed be merged to Category:Two-lane expressways per article title Two-lane expressway, per Marcocapelle. Two-lane freeway and Two-lane motorway both redirect to Two-lane expressway. Oculi ( talk) 08:40, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- I have CfD-tagged Category:Two-lane freeways as well, in order to include in this merge discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 13:53, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Merge both to Category:Two-lane expressways. M45 motorway is erroneously in first category: my recollection from last time I used it it that it has two lanes in each direction, whereas the definition is one lane in each direction. Freeway is an undesirable term in this context, because it would exclude toll motorways. There is an ENGVAR issue involved, so that splitting by country (if there are 5+ articles) might be viable and would enable the local term to be used, so that the American ones could remain "freeways" and the British ones "motorways". Note that in UK the term expressway is in use for the next class of roads below motorways. These seems to be dual carriageways, usually two lanes each way with limited accesses, and often split-level junctions. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:02, 14 July 2022 (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) 05:13, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous category for a single article. WP:OCEPON. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 00:25, 13 July 2022 (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) 17:56, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: This is the correct, common name for this defunct institution. See here Elshad ( talk) 20:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now The trust for it is
The Medical College of Saint Bartholomew’s Hospital Trust (and that's on the successor institution's website), the term is also used by
the NHS records and historically
by the Lancet. Can we have some better sources than one random modern day site that the proposed name is accurate?
Timrollpickering (
talk)
22:58, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Upon reflection I now agree. "Medical College of St Bartholomew's Hospital" seems to be the correct name, as noted in
legislation. I withdraw the move request and also will update other parts of Wiki to reflect and unify under the correct name.
Elshad (
talk)
10:48, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comment -- The target is a redirect to the current subject, so that there is nothing to reverse merge. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:44, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Upon reflection I now agree. "Medical College of St Bartholomew's Hospital" seems to be the correct name, as noted in
legislation. I withdraw the move request and also will update other parts of Wiki to reflect and unify under the correct name.
Elshad (
talk)
10:48, 14 July 2022 (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: soft delete ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:09, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Club at Berkeley is marked as {{ historical}}. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:24, 13 July 2022 (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) Qwerfjkl talk 20:57, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: delete, "pilgrimage" is not a defining characteristic of these articles. The articles are in Category:Holocaust commemoration and that is the correct place for them. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Support but also parent the articles to
Category:Pilgrimages.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
09:42, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- @
Laurel Lodged: you appear to disagree with the rationale of the nominator. Are you suggesting a merge purely as
WP:SMALLCAT? –
Fayenatic
London
08:17, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- I suppose that manually parenting and merging amount to the same thing.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
12:15, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but what's your rationale? The nominator says they are not pilgrimages, but you support merging to Category:Pilgrimages – does that mean you reject the nominator's analysis of defining characteristics, but would merge this because it's a small category? – Fayenatic London 21:01, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
- I suppose that manually parenting and merging amount to the same thing.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
12:15, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- @
Laurel Lodged: you appear to disagree with the rationale of the nominator. Are you suggesting a merge purely as
WP:SMALLCAT? –
Fayenatic
London
08:17, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- On reflection, I think that the nom is correct. They do not share the characteristics of religious pilgrimages. They are only pilgrimages by metaphor. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 22:00, 26 July 2022 (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.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 August 7#Category:Taoist pilgrimages
- 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: merge both to
Category:Two-lane expressways.
(non-admin closure)
Qwerfjkl
talk
21:00, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Two-lane motorways to Category:Two-lane freeways
- Nominator's rationale: Aren't motorways the same thing as freeways? If so, I don't see the need to have to separate categories for two different terms that mean the same thing. SHB2000 ( talk) 01:57, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comments: both should be merged to Category:Two-lane expressways per article title Two-lane expressway. Or, the nominated category might be repurposed to Category:Two-lane freeways in Australia. I wonder why there aren't any articles about European two-lane expressways. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:17, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Comments: both should indeed be merged to Category:Two-lane expressways per article title Two-lane expressway, per Marcocapelle. Two-lane freeway and Two-lane motorway both redirect to Two-lane expressway. Oculi ( talk) 08:40, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- I have CfD-tagged Category:Two-lane freeways as well, in order to include in this merge discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 13:53, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Merge both to Category:Two-lane expressways. M45 motorway is erroneously in first category: my recollection from last time I used it it that it has two lanes in each direction, whereas the definition is one lane in each direction. Freeway is an undesirable term in this context, because it would exclude toll motorways. There is an ENGVAR issue involved, so that splitting by country (if there are 5+ articles) might be viable and would enable the local term to be used, so that the American ones could remain "freeways" and the British ones "motorways". Note that in UK the term expressway is in use for the next class of roads below motorways. These seems to be dual carriageways, usually two lanes each way with limited accesses, and often split-level junctions. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:02, 14 July 2022 (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) 05:13, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous category for a single article. WP:OCEPON. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 00:25, 13 July 2022 (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.