Category:Grammy Award winners for Album of the 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:rename.
ℯxplicit 03:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: I have started creating subcats for
Grammy Award winners, which includes thousands of artists who have won various Grammies. The subcats are sorted by genre, with the form
Grammy Award winners for rap music,
Grammy Award winners for dance and electronic music, etc. I think that the prefix "Grammy Award winners for…" should be reserved for artists, so that this category
Grammy Award winners for Album of the Year should contain artists who have won an Album of the Year award. The category currently contains the albums, not the artists, therefore I suggest changing this category name to simply "Grammy Award for Album of the Year". This would be consistent with existing categories
Grammy Award for Record of the Year and
Grammy Award for Song of the Year. When that's done, we can place the relevant artists in a new category bearing the old name. —
JFGtalk 20:52, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Support for consistency, although I'm not sure if the name of the new category (= the current name of the current category) is distinct enough from the proposed name of the current category. But further discussion about that may take place in a fresh discussion.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:47, 16 August 2018 (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:Voting lobby groups
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 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:Peak body organisations
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: Peak body is an Australian term for what is generally called a Lobbying organization in other places. As a category title it's inconsistent and a bit confusing.
Rathfelder (
talk) 20:22, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Happy with that idea. I dont see the distinction between advocacy groups and lobbying groups as very helpful.
Rathfelder (
talk) 20:51, 11 August 2018 (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:Socialist economists
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.
ℯxplicit 03:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:delete, trivial intersection between educational background (economist) and political conviction (socialist). Note by the way that this reasoning does not apply to the subcategory because
Marxian economics concerns an economics school of thought rather than a political conviction.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:09, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose I could see a hypothetical biography where someone went to school and majored in economics and then went on to be a socialist political activist. But then I read through the articles:
Michael Albert actually majored in physics but has been a socialist cooperative economist,
John Roemer writes about distributive justice, and
Sidney Webb, 1st Baron Passfield writes about how nationalization will end poverty.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 10:23, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Inclined to keep -- Being a socialist is a strong indication of the approach that socialist economists take to their subject (likewise Marxist economists). The intersection in this case is anything but trivial. Economics is a social science, not a science, and one where a person's political point of view very much reflects how they seal with it.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Inclined to keep as well. Marxian economics may be the dominant school of thought within Western socialist economics after Marx, but Marx and Engels themselves as well as several pre-Marxian socialists, Christian socialists or social anarchists were socialist economists, yet no Marxians. --
PanchoS (
talk) 07:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)reply
keep nomination shows a false understanding of this category. Being a 'socialist economist' is certainly defining and different from the run of the mill capitalist economists
Hmains (
talk) 02:00, 20 August 2018 (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:Christianity of the Middle Ages
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.
Note: There is a closely related sub-cat
Roman Catholicism of the Middle Ages, but that has additional issues re "Catholic Church" and can be discussed separately after this one is closed. –
FayenaticLondon 10:01, 16 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment our main article on the period is at
Middle Ages not
Medieval Period, not that such a choice binds us, but may be of instruction. I don't like "Medieval Religion" formulations as it seems to have a connotation that the religion of that period differs from that religion of today - rather than just groups articles having to do with that religion during that period. Of course, some religious practices have changed, but some would argue the religion, per se, has not. Maybe I'm reading too much into the wording?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 18:47, 16 July 2018 (UTC)reply
I agree in this observation, and that is why this alternative is less than optimal.
Chicbyaccident (
talk) 21:09, 9 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Weak support for option E, for consistency with the article name. But I wouldn't really oppose any of the five options.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:35, 22 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Struck vote per discussion below.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 19:10, 9 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Weak support for options B or D, oppose C and E.
Johnbod (
talk) 15:06, 25 July 2018 (UTC)reply
WP:COMMONNAME, and they aren't really "history of" categories.
Johnbod (
talk) 07:47, 26 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Admittedly "history of" is redundant in combination with Middle Ages.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:42, 26 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ℯxplicit 00:15, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Option B -- The earlier part of the main article is about the post-Roman, which is probably a sibling for Late Antique Christianity, as late antique tends to refer to the continuing Eastern Empire.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:30, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Option E to blindly follow the lead of the main article
History of Christianity during the Middle Ages. (That being said, I would support a move of that article to "Christianity during the Middle Ages" and I'm fine with any option.)
RevelationDirect (
talk) 03:16, 10 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Option A or D or F (=RevelationDirect's variant), i.e. Christianity in/of/during the Middle Ages, per comments of Carlossuarez (avoid medieval religion) and Johnbod (avoid history of), and have this discussion followed up by an RM for the article.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:28, 11 August 2018 (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:Hong Kong Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood
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. –
FayenaticLondon 06:22, 19 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:delete per
WP:SMALLCAT, it only contains the eponymous article and a subcategory.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:17, 16 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ℯxplicit 00:15, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete -- The category has no scope for expansion. The one article will serve very well as a main article for the subcategory. I might have said upmerge, but I do not think that would add anything useful.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:24, 8 August 2018 (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:Grammy Award winners for Album of the 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:rename.
ℯxplicit 03:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: I have started creating subcats for
Grammy Award winners, which includes thousands of artists who have won various Grammies. The subcats are sorted by genre, with the form
Grammy Award winners for rap music,
Grammy Award winners for dance and electronic music, etc. I think that the prefix "Grammy Award winners for…" should be reserved for artists, so that this category
Grammy Award winners for Album of the Year should contain artists who have won an Album of the Year award. The category currently contains the albums, not the artists, therefore I suggest changing this category name to simply "Grammy Award for Album of the Year". This would be consistent with existing categories
Grammy Award for Record of the Year and
Grammy Award for Song of the Year. When that's done, we can place the relevant artists in a new category bearing the old name. —
JFGtalk 20:52, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Support for consistency, although I'm not sure if the name of the new category (= the current name of the current category) is distinct enough from the proposed name of the current category. But further discussion about that may take place in a fresh discussion.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:47, 16 August 2018 (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:Voting lobby groups
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 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:Peak body organisations
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: Peak body is an Australian term for what is generally called a Lobbying organization in other places. As a category title it's inconsistent and a bit confusing.
Rathfelder (
talk) 20:22, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Happy with that idea. I dont see the distinction between advocacy groups and lobbying groups as very helpful.
Rathfelder (
talk) 20:51, 11 August 2018 (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:Socialist economists
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.
ℯxplicit 03:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:delete, trivial intersection between educational background (economist) and political conviction (socialist). Note by the way that this reasoning does not apply to the subcategory because
Marxian economics concerns an economics school of thought rather than a political conviction.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:09, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose I could see a hypothetical biography where someone went to school and majored in economics and then went on to be a socialist political activist. But then I read through the articles:
Michael Albert actually majored in physics but has been a socialist cooperative economist,
John Roemer writes about distributive justice, and
Sidney Webb, 1st Baron Passfield writes about how nationalization will end poverty.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 10:23, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Inclined to keep -- Being a socialist is a strong indication of the approach that socialist economists take to their subject (likewise Marxist economists). The intersection in this case is anything but trivial. Economics is a social science, not a science, and one where a person's political point of view very much reflects how they seal with it.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Inclined to keep as well. Marxian economics may be the dominant school of thought within Western socialist economics after Marx, but Marx and Engels themselves as well as several pre-Marxian socialists, Christian socialists or social anarchists were socialist economists, yet no Marxians. --
PanchoS (
talk) 07:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)reply
keep nomination shows a false understanding of this category. Being a 'socialist economist' is certainly defining and different from the run of the mill capitalist economists
Hmains (
talk) 02:00, 20 August 2018 (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:Christianity of the Middle Ages
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.
Note: There is a closely related sub-cat
Roman Catholicism of the Middle Ages, but that has additional issues re "Catholic Church" and can be discussed separately after this one is closed. –
FayenaticLondon 10:01, 16 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment our main article on the period is at
Middle Ages not
Medieval Period, not that such a choice binds us, but may be of instruction. I don't like "Medieval Religion" formulations as it seems to have a connotation that the religion of that period differs from that religion of today - rather than just groups articles having to do with that religion during that period. Of course, some religious practices have changed, but some would argue the religion, per se, has not. Maybe I'm reading too much into the wording?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 18:47, 16 July 2018 (UTC)reply
I agree in this observation, and that is why this alternative is less than optimal.
Chicbyaccident (
talk) 21:09, 9 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Weak support for option E, for consistency with the article name. But I wouldn't really oppose any of the five options.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:35, 22 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Struck vote per discussion below.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 19:10, 9 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Weak support for options B or D, oppose C and E.
Johnbod (
talk) 15:06, 25 July 2018 (UTC)reply
WP:COMMONNAME, and they aren't really "history of" categories.
Johnbod (
talk) 07:47, 26 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Admittedly "history of" is redundant in combination with Middle Ages.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:42, 26 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ℯxplicit 00:15, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Option B -- The earlier part of the main article is about the post-Roman, which is probably a sibling for Late Antique Christianity, as late antique tends to refer to the continuing Eastern Empire.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:30, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Option E to blindly follow the lead of the main article
History of Christianity during the Middle Ages. (That being said, I would support a move of that article to "Christianity during the Middle Ages" and I'm fine with any option.)
RevelationDirect (
talk) 03:16, 10 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Option A or D or F (=RevelationDirect's variant), i.e. Christianity in/of/during the Middle Ages, per comments of Carlossuarez (avoid medieval religion) and Johnbod (avoid history of), and have this discussion followed up by an RM for the article.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:28, 11 August 2018 (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:Hong Kong Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood
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. –
FayenaticLondon 06:22, 19 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:delete per
WP:SMALLCAT, it only contains the eponymous article and a subcategory.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:17, 16 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ℯxplicit 00:15, 8 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete -- The category has no scope for expansion. The one article will serve very well as a main article for the subcategory. I might have said upmerge, but I do not think that would add anything useful.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:24, 8 August 2018 (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.