August 11
Single Portal Categories
- 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.
- Category:Arts portal
- Category:Biography portal
- Category:Geography portal
- Category:History portal
- Category:Mathematics portal
- Category:Science portal
- Category:Society portal
- Category:Technology portal
- Category:Current events portal
Per WP:SMALLCAT. These categories are applied to a single portal without the possibility of another use. By WP:SUB the subpages are, by defition, hierarchically linked to the page above without the need for categorization that creates extra complexity in maintaining the portals. Guilherme Burn ( talk) 18:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Query - how is
Category:Science portal small with 194 pages?
Oculi (
talk) 21:38, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Biography portal has over 200, Technology has 180, Maths has two subcats, and Current events has several hundred.
- @ Oculi: Only one page, all others are subpages. Guilherme Burn ( talk) 14:19, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. Many of those portal categories are quite substantial, and all are in active use. They're as sensible as WikiProject categories. Grutness... wha? 02:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Much easier to use the cats to navigate the subpages. Ease/difficulty of maintenance has never been a reason for deletion. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 23:23, 16 August 2020 (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:Religious apologists
- 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: retain.
bibliomaniac
1
5 19:13, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Religious apologists to Category:Religious apologetics
- Propose merging Category:Buddhist apologists to Category:Buddhist apologetics
- Propose merging Category:Christian apologists to Category:Christian apologetics
- Propose merging Category:Jewish apologists to Category:Jewish apologetics
- Propose merging Category:Muslim apologists to Category:Muslim apologetics
- Propose merging Category:Mormon apologists to Category:Mormon apologetics (added 20 August)
- Propose renaming Apologists to Apologetics - The term apologist has two formal meanings - a person who defends a belief or idea, or in the ecclesiastical world, someone who defends a religious faith in order to convert new followers. However, the term isn't very broadly understood, and can be informally misunderstood as referring to someone apologizing for something out of sorrow and/or embarrassment. Or at least it did for me, and I'm not very religious. When I saw the category Category:Muslim apologists, I immediately thought it was a list of people who are apologizing for any Muslim wrongdoing, and that to me was somewhat insulting. In order to prevent others from making the same mistake, I'm proposing that we rename all the Religious apologists categories as Religious apologetics, per this source: [ [1]]. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:19, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. I'm not sure that unfamiliarity/misunderstanding of terminology is a good reason to change a category name when the name that exists is one that is consistently used in sources to describe these people. "Apologetics" is the field of work; "apologists" are individuals who work within the field, and since these categories are for people, I don't see utility in changing the name. I think that the nominator's confusion is fairly commonplace, but the term continues to be used widely nonetheless. Note that Category:Buddhist apologetics, Category:Christian apologetics, Category:Jewish apologetics, Category:Mormon apologetics, and Category:Muslim apologetics already exist, and I don't think it would be wise to merge all of the bio articles about apologists into these categories. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:52, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per Timtempleton. Pahlevun ( talk) 13:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note that Tintempleton did not propose deletion, the proposal was to rename (which in this case turned out to be equivalent to merge). Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:29, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Good Olfactory. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:29, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Good Olfactory:
"Apologetics" is the field of work; "apologists" are individuals who work within the field
. These these categories are for people, so they are correctly named. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC) - Procedural note. @
Timtempleton: only 2 of the 5 categories have been tagged. --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs) 00:32, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
Done. Admin note: this CFD should not be closed before 27 August. @
Timtempleton: When you start a nomination and somebody points out that you have not done all the work required to set it up, please ask for help if you need it, rather than leaving it incomplete. –
Fayenatic
London 09:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Support. The term "Apologist" is sometimes used in academic to question the objectivity of a scholar. In such cases, it carries with it stigma, which makes it especially problematic on WP:BLP. Right now there are two controversial candidates for these categories ( Talk:Edward_Said#Should_Said_be_categorized_as_"Muslim_apologist"? and Talk:John_Esposito#Incorrect_removal_of_Category:Muslim_apologists). In both cases, users have felt that adding the category is an attempt to tarnish the individual. Indeed the sources that call these individuals "apologists" are fairly biased. Changing the name to "apologetics" would slightly reduce the negative connotation of that category. VR talk 03:42, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- This may be a reason for purging rather than for merging. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:13, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Perfectly reasonable naming for those who work in the field of apologetics. Dimadick ( talk) 15:58, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose -- This refers to the practitioners of apologetics, which needs a category. The difficulty is that apology has a broader less technical meaning of those who "say sorry". The solution is to incorporate a robust definition into headnotes, to exclude those engaged in apologies, as opposed to apologetics. Peterkingiron ( talk) 12:46, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- @ Peterkingiron: Good suggestion - I added a more detailed description on the Category:Muslim apologists page, which was the one that I think it the most likely to be misunderstood, as I did. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:46, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- Procedural note 2 I do not see a proposal (from/to).
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 13:25, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- @ Laurel Lodged: The proposal is to rename the above Apologists categories as Apologetics. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 14:06, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Perhaps you could amend the nomination heading to reflect that clarification. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 14:15, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose an apologetic is a work by an apologist. Since all 154 entries in the Christian category contains people, not works, then the name should reflect that fact. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 14:15, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. There are lots of correct category names that I do not understand when I first see them, just as there are sometimes words in news articles that I do not know yet, so I learn something when I look them up. – Fayenatic London 09:03, 20 August 2020 (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.
dobble ceg
- 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.
Category:Universal Televison drafts Nominator's rationale: allready exist under Category:Universal Television drafts Fanoflionking 18:03, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy delete, spelling error. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:52, 11 August 2020 (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:University of Washington continuing education
- 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 to Category:University of Washington. bibliomaniac 1 5 19:23, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT - Category only contains one page, which would fit into the parent category just fine; category doesn't appear to have much potential for growth. Jmertel23 ( talk) 12:32, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Merge to Category:University of Washington. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:47, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Merge per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
- Obviously Merge. Peterkingiron ( talk) 12:46, 16 August 2020 (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:Vukovar-Srijem County
- 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.
Good Ol’factory
(talk) 22:36, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Vukovar-Srijem County to Category:Vukovar-Syrmia County. Approximately one month after my original proposal on WP:Croatia and the Article (and corresponding article move) there was some strong criticism for my omission to use the formal procedure here (quoting assumed consensus from 2014, which I honestly don't see there despite some useful insight). One user therefore removed everything from the Category:Vukovar-Syrmia County which led to nomination for speedy deletion of the empty category. Since there was disagreement I didn't want to engage in anything which can be perceived as edit war etc, but I challenged speedy deletion on the basis that even if my proposal if refused it will be used as redirect (it seems it was not considered). My main argument is in this admittedly long comment which very unfortunately just annoyed other users who perceived it as too long to read rant. I believe that right category title here is Vukovar-Syrmia County therefore I would like to make this new proposal. Admittedly, you may need 15-20 minutes to go over the previous exchanges and I apologize for this. Thank you for your time.-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 07:56, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Rename - the article is Vukovar-Syrmia County. Oculi ( talk) 11:02, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: If I'm reading the talk page discussion right, the proper place to have this conversation is to figure out what the article name is first by
requesting a move before initiating this discussion.
MirkoS18, can you provide a link to confirm that you actually did file a request at
WP:RM?
bibliomaniac
1
5 19:22, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Reply to Comment: Bibliomaniac15 unfortunately I can't because my omission caused initial complaint on procedural grounds. I proposed it only on WP: Croatia and article's talk page where I expected to find interested editors (as you can see from the history). The new (old) title is actually not that new anymore and there is quite low activity there as you can see. Of course, I really hate that I didn't know about procedure. I thought about challenging my own editing, but it seemed a bit absurd ( I even tried this (unsuccessfully)). In this case, I actually just proposed category change after some quiet time on the main article itself and of course any good advice or feedback is welcome.-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 20:48, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Rename, there has been a discussion on the article talk page about the new title, with quotation of English-language sources. It is unfortunate that it was not an RM discussion, but for now the title is stable. In case someone would start an RM after all and if the article title would be changed back, the category name can also speedily be reverted per WP:C2D. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:21, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose until the sourcing concerns at Talk:Vukovar-Syrmia County#RfC on Proposal to rename article are properly addressed. I just had a look, and the argument is still rather flimsy because the quotation of English-language sources there is rather crude and not actually comprehensive. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 06:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- @ Joy: then please start an RM. The category name should follow the article name so it would not make sense to oppose here and leave the article title untouched. Marcocapelle ( talk) 13:32, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- I agree it doesn't make sense to have this inconsistent - and that is why I previously said that the WP:RM-less move of the article should simply be reverted instead. I hoped everyone would recognize how WP:BRD should apply, but ever since 26 June when the initial bold move was done we've been stuck in the discussion state without an actual revert... -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 18:42, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- Also, there was no really uninterrupted discussion during the entire period. As for the article the original proposal to rename it was made on 16 June on WP Croatia. The move was done on 26 June after there was no disagreement and there was at least some support. The first complain on the talk page was published on 21 July and that exchange lasted until 26 July. There was no activity on the talk page until the 10 October and the most recent comments here. As there was no activity I proposed this move after some time in August. Hope this helps.-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 22:36, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- Rename A formal RM would have been better but the main article title had discussion on the talk page. We should match that name to ease navigation. RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:24, 2 November 2020 (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:Television series by 20th Century Fox Television
- 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. bibliomaniac 1 5 19:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: The name 20th Century Fox Television is no longer used anymore, because yesterday Disney announced a major shakeup up of it's TV studios, and this studio is now known as just 20th Television. And plus the Fox name was dropped to avoid confusion with Fox Corp. ExtraEditing ( talk) 09:58, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose That was the name used at the time and articles should continue to reference them. Redirects can handle name changes for regular links. Better to be a subcategory to the new name for categories and retain the names that can be verified per WP:CATVER. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 17:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Geraldo Perez. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whatever was produced under that name is history. New productions should be placed under the new name. -- Gonnym ( talk) 14:50, 13 August 2020 (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:Television series by ABC Studios
- 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. bibliomaniac 1 5 19:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Again due to the recent change at Disney TV, this studio has merged with it's cable/streaming division Signature and took on that name. ExtraEditing ( talk) 09:58, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose That was the name used at the time and articles should continue to reference them. Redirects can handle name changes for regular links. Better to be a subcategory to the new name for categories and retain the names that can be verified per WP:CATVER. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 17:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Geraldo Perez. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:44, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whatever was produced under that name is history. New productions should be placed under the new name. -- Gonnym ( talk) 14:50, 13 August 2020 (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:Television series by ABC Signature Studios
- 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. bibliomaniac 1 5 19:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Once again due to the rename since ABC Studios and ABC Signature have merged, However they no longer carry the word Studios. ExtraEditing ( talk) 09:58, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose That was the name used at the time and articles should continue to reference them. Redirects can handle name changes for regular links. Better to be a subcategory to the new name for categories and retain the names that can be verified per WP:CATVER. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 17:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Geraldo Perez. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whatever was produced under that name is history. New productions should be placed under the new name. -- Gonnym ( talk) 14:51, 13 August 2020 (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.
August 11
Single Portal Categories
- 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.
- Category:Arts portal
- Category:Biography portal
- Category:Geography portal
- Category:History portal
- Category:Mathematics portal
- Category:Science portal
- Category:Society portal
- Category:Technology portal
- Category:Current events portal
Per WP:SMALLCAT. These categories are applied to a single portal without the possibility of another use. By WP:SUB the subpages are, by defition, hierarchically linked to the page above without the need for categorization that creates extra complexity in maintaining the portals. Guilherme Burn ( talk) 18:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Query - how is
Category:Science portal small with 194 pages?
Oculi (
talk) 21:38, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Biography portal has over 200, Technology has 180, Maths has two subcats, and Current events has several hundred.
- @ Oculi: Only one page, all others are subpages. Guilherme Burn ( talk) 14:19, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. Many of those portal categories are quite substantial, and all are in active use. They're as sensible as WikiProject categories. Grutness... wha? 02:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Much easier to use the cats to navigate the subpages. Ease/difficulty of maintenance has never been a reason for deletion. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 23:23, 16 August 2020 (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:Religious apologists
- 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: retain.
bibliomaniac
1
5 19:13, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Religious apologists to Category:Religious apologetics
- Propose merging Category:Buddhist apologists to Category:Buddhist apologetics
- Propose merging Category:Christian apologists to Category:Christian apologetics
- Propose merging Category:Jewish apologists to Category:Jewish apologetics
- Propose merging Category:Muslim apologists to Category:Muslim apologetics
- Propose merging Category:Mormon apologists to Category:Mormon apologetics (added 20 August)
- Propose renaming Apologists to Apologetics - The term apologist has two formal meanings - a person who defends a belief or idea, or in the ecclesiastical world, someone who defends a religious faith in order to convert new followers. However, the term isn't very broadly understood, and can be informally misunderstood as referring to someone apologizing for something out of sorrow and/or embarrassment. Or at least it did for me, and I'm not very religious. When I saw the category Category:Muslim apologists, I immediately thought it was a list of people who are apologizing for any Muslim wrongdoing, and that to me was somewhat insulting. In order to prevent others from making the same mistake, I'm proposing that we rename all the Religious apologists categories as Religious apologetics, per this source: [ [1]]. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:19, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. I'm not sure that unfamiliarity/misunderstanding of terminology is a good reason to change a category name when the name that exists is one that is consistently used in sources to describe these people. "Apologetics" is the field of work; "apologists" are individuals who work within the field, and since these categories are for people, I don't see utility in changing the name. I think that the nominator's confusion is fairly commonplace, but the term continues to be used widely nonetheless. Note that Category:Buddhist apologetics, Category:Christian apologetics, Category:Jewish apologetics, Category:Mormon apologetics, and Category:Muslim apologetics already exist, and I don't think it would be wise to merge all of the bio articles about apologists into these categories. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:52, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per Timtempleton. Pahlevun ( talk) 13:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note that Tintempleton did not propose deletion, the proposal was to rename (which in this case turned out to be equivalent to merge). Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:29, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Good Olfactory. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:29, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Good Olfactory:
"Apologetics" is the field of work; "apologists" are individuals who work within the field
. These these categories are for people, so they are correctly named. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC) - Procedural note. @
Timtempleton: only 2 of the 5 categories have been tagged. --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs) 00:32, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- Done. Admin note: this CFD should not be closed before 27 August. @
Timtempleton: When you start a nomination and somebody points out that you have not done all the work required to set it up, please ask for help if you need it, rather than leaving it incomplete. –
Fayenatic
London 09:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Support. The term "Apologist" is sometimes used in academic to question the objectivity of a scholar. In such cases, it carries with it stigma, which makes it especially problematic on WP:BLP. Right now there are two controversial candidates for these categories ( Talk:Edward_Said#Should_Said_be_categorized_as_"Muslim_apologist"? and Talk:John_Esposito#Incorrect_removal_of_Category:Muslim_apologists). In both cases, users have felt that adding the category is an attempt to tarnish the individual. Indeed the sources that call these individuals "apologists" are fairly biased. Changing the name to "apologetics" would slightly reduce the negative connotation of that category. VR talk 03:42, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- This may be a reason for purging rather than for merging. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:13, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Perfectly reasonable naming for those who work in the field of apologetics. Dimadick ( talk) 15:58, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose -- This refers to the practitioners of apologetics, which needs a category. The difficulty is that apology has a broader less technical meaning of those who "say sorry". The solution is to incorporate a robust definition into headnotes, to exclude those engaged in apologies, as opposed to apologetics. Peterkingiron ( talk) 12:46, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- @ Peterkingiron: Good suggestion - I added a more detailed description on the Category:Muslim apologists page, which was the one that I think it the most likely to be misunderstood, as I did. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:46, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- Procedural note 2 I do not see a proposal (from/to).
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 13:25, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- @ Laurel Lodged: The proposal is to rename the above Apologists categories as Apologetics. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 14:06, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Perhaps you could amend the nomination heading to reflect that clarification. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 14:15, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose an apologetic is a work by an apologist. Since all 154 entries in the Christian category contains people, not works, then the name should reflect that fact. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 14:15, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. There are lots of correct category names that I do not understand when I first see them, just as there are sometimes words in news articles that I do not know yet, so I learn something when I look them up. – Fayenatic London 09:03, 20 August 2020 (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.
dobble ceg
- 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.
Category:Universal Televison drafts Nominator's rationale: allready exist under Category:Universal Television drafts Fanoflionking 18:03, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy delete, spelling error. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:52, 11 August 2020 (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:University of Washington continuing education
- 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 to Category:University of Washington. bibliomaniac 1 5 19:23, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT - Category only contains one page, which would fit into the parent category just fine; category doesn't appear to have much potential for growth. Jmertel23 ( talk) 12:32, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Merge to Category:University of Washington. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:47, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Merge per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
- Obviously Merge. Peterkingiron ( talk) 12:46, 16 August 2020 (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:Vukovar-Srijem County
- 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.
Good Ol’factory
(talk) 22:36, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Vukovar-Srijem County to Category:Vukovar-Syrmia County. Approximately one month after my original proposal on WP:Croatia and the Article (and corresponding article move) there was some strong criticism for my omission to use the formal procedure here (quoting assumed consensus from 2014, which I honestly don't see there despite some useful insight). One user therefore removed everything from the Category:Vukovar-Syrmia County which led to nomination for speedy deletion of the empty category. Since there was disagreement I didn't want to engage in anything which can be perceived as edit war etc, but I challenged speedy deletion on the basis that even if my proposal if refused it will be used as redirect (it seems it was not considered). My main argument is in this admittedly long comment which very unfortunately just annoyed other users who perceived it as too long to read rant. I believe that right category title here is Vukovar-Syrmia County therefore I would like to make this new proposal. Admittedly, you may need 15-20 minutes to go over the previous exchanges and I apologize for this. Thank you for your time.-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 07:56, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Rename - the article is Vukovar-Syrmia County. Oculi ( talk) 11:02, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: If I'm reading the talk page discussion right, the proper place to have this conversation is to figure out what the article name is first by
requesting a move before initiating this discussion.
MirkoS18, can you provide a link to confirm that you actually did file a request at
WP:RM?
bibliomaniac
1
5 19:22, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Reply to Comment: Bibliomaniac15 unfortunately I can't because my omission caused initial complaint on procedural grounds. I proposed it only on WP: Croatia and article's talk page where I expected to find interested editors (as you can see from the history). The new (old) title is actually not that new anymore and there is quite low activity there as you can see. Of course, I really hate that I didn't know about procedure. I thought about challenging my own editing, but it seemed a bit absurd ( I even tried this (unsuccessfully)). In this case, I actually just proposed category change after some quiet time on the main article itself and of course any good advice or feedback is welcome.-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 20:48, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Rename, there has been a discussion on the article talk page about the new title, with quotation of English-language sources. It is unfortunate that it was not an RM discussion, but for now the title is stable. In case someone would start an RM after all and if the article title would be changed back, the category name can also speedily be reverted per WP:C2D. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:21, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose until the sourcing concerns at Talk:Vukovar-Syrmia County#RfC on Proposal to rename article are properly addressed. I just had a look, and the argument is still rather flimsy because the quotation of English-language sources there is rather crude and not actually comprehensive. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 06:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- @ Joy: then please start an RM. The category name should follow the article name so it would not make sense to oppose here and leave the article title untouched. Marcocapelle ( talk) 13:32, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- I agree it doesn't make sense to have this inconsistent - and that is why I previously said that the WP:RM-less move of the article should simply be reverted instead. I hoped everyone would recognize how WP:BRD should apply, but ever since 26 June when the initial bold move was done we've been stuck in the discussion state without an actual revert... -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 18:42, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- Also, there was no really uninterrupted discussion during the entire period. As for the article the original proposal to rename it was made on 16 June on WP Croatia. The move was done on 26 June after there was no disagreement and there was at least some support. The first complain on the talk page was published on 21 July and that exchange lasted until 26 July. There was no activity on the talk page until the 10 October and the most recent comments here. As there was no activity I proposed this move after some time in August. Hope this helps.-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 22:36, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- Rename A formal RM would have been better but the main article title had discussion on the talk page. We should match that name to ease navigation. RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:24, 2 November 2020 (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:Television series by 20th Century Fox Television
- 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. bibliomaniac 1 5 19:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: The name 20th Century Fox Television is no longer used anymore, because yesterday Disney announced a major shakeup up of it's TV studios, and this studio is now known as just 20th Television. And plus the Fox name was dropped to avoid confusion with Fox Corp. ExtraEditing ( talk) 09:58, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose That was the name used at the time and articles should continue to reference them. Redirects can handle name changes for regular links. Better to be a subcategory to the new name for categories and retain the names that can be verified per WP:CATVER. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 17:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Geraldo Perez. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whatever was produced under that name is history. New productions should be placed under the new name. -- Gonnym ( talk) 14:50, 13 August 2020 (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:Television series by ABC Studios
- 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. bibliomaniac 1 5 19:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Again due to the recent change at Disney TV, this studio has merged with it's cable/streaming division Signature and took on that name. ExtraEditing ( talk) 09:58, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose That was the name used at the time and articles should continue to reference them. Redirects can handle name changes for regular links. Better to be a subcategory to the new name for categories and retain the names that can be verified per WP:CATVER. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 17:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Geraldo Perez. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:44, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whatever was produced under that name is history. New productions should be placed under the new name. -- Gonnym ( talk) 14:50, 13 August 2020 (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:Television series by ABC Signature Studios
- 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. bibliomaniac 1 5 19:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Once again due to the rename since ABC Studios and ABC Signature have merged, However they no longer carry the word Studios. ExtraEditing ( talk) 09:58, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose That was the name used at the time and articles should continue to reference them. Redirects can handle name changes for regular links. Better to be a subcategory to the new name for categories and retain the names that can be verified per WP:CATVER. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 17:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Geraldo Perez. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whatever was produced under that name is history. New productions should be placed under the new name. -- Gonnym ( talk) 14:51, 13 August 2020 (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.