The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 13:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Chess problemist ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The result of the debate was no consensus -- Kbdank71 13:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Television anchors by city to Category:Television news presenters by city
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 13:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Ocarina of Time characters ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 13:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Cat makes no sense to me. -- musicpvm 20:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep -- Kbdank71 13:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
This request could arguably fall under the speedy criteria renaming policy because of its non-conformance to the "by country" categorization, however, it might also generate debate, and I so posted it here instead – Regardless, please read the entire argument before adding comments.
Category heading is Anachronistic. Almost all of the Saints listed in this category were not Italians nationally or by citizenship, living in the first millennium during the time of the Roman Empire, and long before Italy formed as a nation-state. Roman citizens did not see themselves as Italians, and were not necessarily even Latins, Rome being a cosmopolitan empire. Certainly most would have identified nationally with some nation than Italy (Gaullic, Etruscian, Pisian, Germanic etc) Italy as a country did not exist until 1861 and we can't support the claim that all Roman Saints were Italian saints. Therefore its very misleading to call the category Italian saints.
I recommend that we rename the “Italian_saints” to “Roman_Saints”, however I also recommend we re-add a new category “Italian_saints” and recategorized any Saints venerated after 1861 back to this new category both preserving the national identification and better reflecting historical realities.
--
LinuxDude 18:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was rename -- Drini 16:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC) (unfinished move) reply
Categories for the subject of newspapers by sub-national entities in Canada and the United States currently use different naming conventions. I believe they should be standardized to one naming convention for both. For sub-categories of
Category:Canadian newspapers, "published in X" is the naming convention currently used (Ex:
Category:Newspapers published in Alberta). For sub-categories of
Category:American newspapers, "of X" is the naming convention currently used (Ex:
Category:Newspapers of Arizona). As there is no reason to having different naming conventions for the contents of these two categories, I believe either the "published in X" wording or the "of X" wording should be chosen and applied to all sub-categories of the above. My preference is for the "published in X" wording to be chosen as it is much more precise, clear, and accurate than the wording "of X", which by itself is ambiguous in defined, exact meaning. Based on the above, the following renamings are proposed:
-- Kurieeto 18:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename to Category:Television channels in the Netherlands -- Drini 00:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Rename, to be consistent with other entries in Category:Television stations by country. Tim! 17:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Drini 01:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete – This category is just a bad idea. It's inherently pejorative and causes conflict among editors whenever it is applied to an article. It's also difficult to see the usefulness of such a category, except as a means of expressing a (negative) POV toward the subject of an article. There are certainly clear-cut cases where (almost) everybody will agree that the label "pseudoscientist" applies, but there will be countless other cases where the applicability will be a matter of opinion and will cause pointless conflict. The German equivalent of this category was purged several months ago, for similar reasons. -- Wclark 16:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Drini 01:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename as proposed -- Drini 01:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Proposed new title is more precise and clearer. It also better follows the naming convention of Category:Military of the United States. Kurieeto 14:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus -- Kbdank71 13:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was relisting here, Musicians by record label was not tagged for deletion. -- Kbdank71 13:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The performers category should be merged into the musicians category as they both mean the same thing. All other categories use the term "musician". -- musicpvm 07:44, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Drini 16:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Drini 16:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename -- Drini 01:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Rename. Per consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Geography of Poland, to make the spelling of "voivodeship" consistent. These are two leftover categories that were missed in an earlier CFR Elonka 05:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename -- Drini 16:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Rename. I believe this should be renamed in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories), which states: “All User categories should have ‘Wikipedian’ (or ‘Wikipedians’) as part of the name.” As a side benefit, renaming this category to clarify its Wikipedian-specific nature would free up Category:Mac users for general use. —Banzai! (talk) @ 02:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep -- Drini 16:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 13:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Chess problemist ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The result of the debate was no consensus -- Kbdank71 13:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Television anchors by city to Category:Television news presenters by city
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 13:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Ocarina of Time characters ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 13:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Cat makes no sense to me. -- musicpvm 20:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep -- Kbdank71 13:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
This request could arguably fall under the speedy criteria renaming policy because of its non-conformance to the "by country" categorization, however, it might also generate debate, and I so posted it here instead – Regardless, please read the entire argument before adding comments.
Category heading is Anachronistic. Almost all of the Saints listed in this category were not Italians nationally or by citizenship, living in the first millennium during the time of the Roman Empire, and long before Italy formed as a nation-state. Roman citizens did not see themselves as Italians, and were not necessarily even Latins, Rome being a cosmopolitan empire. Certainly most would have identified nationally with some nation than Italy (Gaullic, Etruscian, Pisian, Germanic etc) Italy as a country did not exist until 1861 and we can't support the claim that all Roman Saints were Italian saints. Therefore its very misleading to call the category Italian saints.
I recommend that we rename the “Italian_saints” to “Roman_Saints”, however I also recommend we re-add a new category “Italian_saints” and recategorized any Saints venerated after 1861 back to this new category both preserving the national identification and better reflecting historical realities.
--
LinuxDude 18:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was rename -- Drini 16:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC) (unfinished move) reply
Categories for the subject of newspapers by sub-national entities in Canada and the United States currently use different naming conventions. I believe they should be standardized to one naming convention for both. For sub-categories of
Category:Canadian newspapers, "published in X" is the naming convention currently used (Ex:
Category:Newspapers published in Alberta). For sub-categories of
Category:American newspapers, "of X" is the naming convention currently used (Ex:
Category:Newspapers of Arizona). As there is no reason to having different naming conventions for the contents of these two categories, I believe either the "published in X" wording or the "of X" wording should be chosen and applied to all sub-categories of the above. My preference is for the "published in X" wording to be chosen as it is much more precise, clear, and accurate than the wording "of X", which by itself is ambiguous in defined, exact meaning. Based on the above, the following renamings are proposed:
-- Kurieeto 18:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename to Category:Television channels in the Netherlands -- Drini 00:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Rename, to be consistent with other entries in Category:Television stations by country. Tim! 17:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Drini 01:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete – This category is just a bad idea. It's inherently pejorative and causes conflict among editors whenever it is applied to an article. It's also difficult to see the usefulness of such a category, except as a means of expressing a (negative) POV toward the subject of an article. There are certainly clear-cut cases where (almost) everybody will agree that the label "pseudoscientist" applies, but there will be countless other cases where the applicability will be a matter of opinion and will cause pointless conflict. The German equivalent of this category was purged several months ago, for similar reasons. -- Wclark 16:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Drini 01:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename as proposed -- Drini 01:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Proposed new title is more precise and clearer. It also better follows the naming convention of Category:Military of the United States. Kurieeto 14:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus -- Kbdank71 13:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was relisting here, Musicians by record label was not tagged for deletion. -- Kbdank71 13:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The performers category should be merged into the musicians category as they both mean the same thing. All other categories use the term "musician". -- musicpvm 07:44, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Drini 16:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Drini 16:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename -- Drini 01:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Rename. Per consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Geography of Poland, to make the spelling of "voivodeship" consistent. These are two leftover categories that were missed in an earlier CFR Elonka 05:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename -- Drini 16:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Rename. I believe this should be renamed in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories), which states: “All User categories should have ‘Wikipedian’ (or ‘Wikipedians’) as part of the name.” As a side benefit, renaming this category to clarify its Wikipedian-specific nature would free up Category:Mac users for general use. —Banzai! (talk) @ 02:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep -- Drini 16:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply