Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 March 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 23 March 25 >

March 24[edit]

Category:Stories set in future now past[edit]

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: no consensus. the wub "?!" 11:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Stories set in future now past (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete: Apparently, this category is for stories set in what was (at the time of their publication) "the future", but now (in 2008 and counting) is "the past". Here are some examples:
  • Batman: The Dark Knight Returns. Published in 1986. Set in 2006. 2006 is now gone, therefore it is "future now past".
  • Strange Days. Released in 1995. Set in 1999. 1999 is now gone, therefore it is "future now past".
  • Nineteen Eighty-Four. Published in 1949. Set in 1984. 1984 is now gone, therefore it is "future now past".
At is rate, the category will include every work of fiction ever made. Nohansen (talk) 21:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Not all fiction has a definite date stated or even implied in that text. —ScouterSig 23:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...and only a small fraction of fiction is set in the future. And much of that that is is set in the far distant future. This is hardly going to contain every work of fiction ever made. Having said that, I suspect that listifying this would be better than keeping it as a category, since date of publication and date of setting could then easily be listed alongside the titles. Grutness...wha? 00:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or at least listify, though some inclusions seem questionable - Terminator 2: Judgment Day has scenes set in 2029, I think (date from article) but the bulk is in a tweaked 1992 present. I don't think "just like now but with an evil President/plague/monster coroporation" scenarios count. Johnbod (talk) 04:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Pure trivia.--Mike Selinker (talk) 16:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article-ize - if it can be done without original research, a great article could be written comparing the world of the fiction to the world as it existed at the actual time. Other examples include Wild Palms (aired in 1993, set in the far-flung future year 2007), Things to Come (a 1936 film that predicted a world war starting in 1940) and Just Imagine (a 1930 film examining life amongst the flying cars of 1980). Otto4711 (talk) 16:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've also just added the 1970s-made, 1980s-set UFO (TV series) to the category. There are a lot more which could be added, I'm sure. Grutness...wha? 22:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep No different than having categories for fiction set in World War II, Ancient Rome, alternate histories, post-apocalyptic scenarios, etc. Kuralyov (talk) 18:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • List / article-ize per Otto, but as a category it's too trivial, in my opinion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Listify - Mildly interesting, but hardly worthy of a category. Cgingold (talk) 12:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and listify per Johnbod and Cgingold. The content is interesting, and could be useful information, but is not, as Cgingold says, "worthy of a category." ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 22:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- I very much think that this is a legit category. Studying past visions of the future is a legitimate line of inquiry, and this category could be a useful means towards that end. KConWiki (talk)
  • Keep per Kuralyov, or possibly rename to Category:Stories set in a future now past. Lugnuts (talk) 14:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment that sounds like a good name. —ScouterSig 20:29, 30 March 2008 (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.

Phoenix, Arizona categories[edit]

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 all. As with other like discussions, adding the state simply means "the phoenix in arizona". It does not mean, "and also restrict to phoenix city limits". If these categories included articles "in and around phoenix", that will not change. It will just limit it to "in and around phoenix, arizona". I understand the concerns of Vegaswikian, but I think he is trying to deal with a problem that may not exist. Kbdank71 13:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Propose renaming Category:Transportation in Phoenix‎ to Category:Transportation in Phoenix‎, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Sports in Phoenix‎ to Category:Sports in Phoenix‎, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Television stations in Phoenix‎ to Category:Television stations in Phoenix‎, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:History of Phoenix‎ to Category:History of Phoenix‎, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Neighborhoods in Phoenix‎ to Category:Neighborhoods in Phoenix‎, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Geography of Phoenix‎ to Category:Geography of Phoenix‎, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Companies based in Phoenix‎ to Category:Companies based in Phoenix‎, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Sports venues in Phoenix‎ to Category:Sports venues in Phoenix‎, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Skyscrapers in Phoenix‎ to Category:Skyscrapers in Phoenix‎, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Museums in Phoenix‎ to Category:Museums in Phoenix‎, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Buildings and structures in Phoenix‎ to Category:Buildings and structures in Phoenix‎, Arizona
Nominator's rationale: Standardizing category names city by city. For this one, the main article is at Phoenix, Arizona, the parent category is at Category:Phoenix, Arizona, and many of the sub-cats are allready at the "Foo in Phoenix, Arizona" pattern, so I do hope that this will not be as contentious as my previous ones. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2008 (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:Band logos[edit]

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: renamed. the wub "?!" 11:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Band logos to Category:Musical artist logos
Nominator's rationale: Musical artist" is a more inclusive term, as not all musical acts with logos are bands. This reflects the more inclusive terminology for musical artists used in other areas of Wikipedia such as WikiProject Musicians and the musical artist infobox. IllaZilla (talk) 17:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Nom makes sense in terms of inclusion, and would be relatively easy to implement. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 12:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since there were no objections, the category has been renamed and all pages properly categorized under the new nomenclature. Category:Band logos is now empty and may be speedily deleted. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:43, 31 March 2008 (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:Former cities in Georgia[edit]

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. — CharlotteWebb 20:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Former cities in Georgia to Category:Former cities in Georgia (country)
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To distinguish from the U.S. state of Georgia using the usual disambiguation. Notified creator with {{subst:cfd-notify}} Good Ol’factory (talk) 09:59, 24 March 2008 (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:Event (computing)[edit]

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. the wub "?!" 11:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest merging Category:Event (computing) to Category:Events (computing)
Nominator's rationale: Merge, The same thing, plural seems the better title. Leo Laursen – ☏ ⌘ 08:51, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: The Event category has 19 articles vs 4 for the events category (3 of the 4 having the singular in their own title). The general term is Event so it seems preferable and less potentially ambiguous than Events, so the merge should be in the opposite direction? AllyD (talk) 22:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: Since most articles are event-related rather than about singular events, I guess it can be considered a topical category, in which case singular is the standard. I don't oppose a reverse merge. – Leo Laursen – ☏ ⌘ 12:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Categories normally use the plural and aticles are usually singular. Also, the number of articles in either category is not a determing factor for which category is the correct choice. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge as the categories do not pertain to a specific event, per se. — CharlotteWebb 20:20, 30 March 2008 (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:Lee Brice songs[edit]

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. the wub "?!" 11:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Lee Brice songs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Misleading category, as it's a subcat of Category:Songs by artist. Although Lee Brice did indeed co-write "More Than a Memory", there's no proof that he ever recorded it himself. Renaming it Category:Songs written by Lee Brice would probably be too narrow, as he currently holds no other writing credits (save for his own two singles, neither of which appear notable enough for their own pages). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 05:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I don't know why "More Than a Memory" ended up in Category:Lee Brice songs, but since the article for "Happy Endings" was deleted, so too should the category that was created to contain it. Eric444 (talk) 03:44, 25 March 2008 (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:Presbyterianism by nationality[edit]

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. the wub "?!" 11:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Presbyterianism by nationality to Category:Presbyterianism by country
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Subcategories are named "Presbyerianism in Foo", not "Fooian Presbyterianism". There is an article called Korean Presbyterianism, but it seems to be the exception and not the rule. The parents are also called Category:Protestantism by country and Category:Christianity by country, which are subcategories of Category:Religion by country. Notified creator with {{subst:cfd-notify}} Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:16, 24 March 2008 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_March_24&oldid=1138390932"