Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 December 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 18 December 20 >

December 19[edit]

Category:Albums recorded in California[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:46, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge. I don't think there is a need to categorize by the state an album was recorded in anymore than categorizing by city (see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 March 7#Albums by city of recording location). The venue itself is what makes where an album was recorded somewhat defining, not the location of the venue. Plus it encourages editors to put any album recorded anywhere in the state of California in this category, which is not defining to the album. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 22:35, 19 December 2012 (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:Mahala[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: speedy delete. – Fayenatic London 22:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: What is the purpose of this category? The sole page that it contains is a user page with nothing on it. SuperMarioMan 22:03, 19 December 2012 (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:Customary units in India[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 to rename. delldot ∇. 08:39, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of speedy discussion
Oppose If needed new category for a region can be created but it is not appropriate to change the country speci category's name.Shyamsunder (talk) 19:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object to speedy rename. Changes scope of the category, so requires discussion -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 22:35, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:43, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If needed new category for a region can be created but it is not appropriate to change the country specific category's name.Shyamsunder (talk) 19:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The units are those that have been historically used in various parts of India. To the extent that we have categories for systems of units they are by country categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:32, 20 December 2012 (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:Fictional clones[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 to rename. I'm not going to purge this, any editor is invited to remove an article from this category that they feel doesn't belong there. delldot ∇. 08:45, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the content, the category also contains characters that were cloned and as it stands is somewhat misleading. Brandmeistertalk 09:31, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support seems more apt.146.90.110.75 (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and perge. I do not think that having been cloned is really worth merging with being a clone. I think it makes sense to limit this category to just clones.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Splitting would require an interested user and some scrutiny. Brandmeistertalk 01:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Just cleanup/purge. adding evert character who has ever been cloned is a bad idea. And futher, I would support suggesting listify/delete, because I have a feeling that most of these clones likely will not have their own article, and so will merely be included in the "clonee"s articles (if such exists). This is a common plot device in fiction. Oh and also due to the overlapping vagueness of the terms "clone", "duplicate", and "replicant" in sci-fi. Oh and also because of the Silver Age Bizarro World : ) - jc37 05:24, 20 December 2012 (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:Permanent Representatives of Colombia to the United Nations Office at Nairobi[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: speedily deleted per G7: creator emptied it and immediately replaced it with Category:Permanent Representatives of Colombia to the United Nations at Nairobi. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: mijotoba (talk) 07:08, 19 December 2012 (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:Ezhava People[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. Dana boomer (talk) 01:38, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. My understanding is that there has been a fairly long-standing consensus that we do not categorize people by Indian caste. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:43, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not delete: Please explain I've struck the !vote here because Kadinjool also !votes below. - Sitush (talk) 15:18, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly point to the discussion, rather than giving reference to "your understanding". Categorization based on ethnicity
Main page: Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality
is pretty common. What's special about Indian caste? Kadinjool (talk) 08:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's just it—I don't know where the discussions are found. I have been told this in the past by members of the India WikiProject. You could ask that WikiProject for more details. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:49, 20 December 2012 (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:Ireland mountains and hills navigational boxes[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: keep without rename. I have gone ahead and created Category:Ireland geography navigational boxes, please feel free to populate it. delldot ∇. 08:31, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No Category:Mountains and hills navigational boxes currently exists. However, Category:Geography navigational boxes and Category:United Kingdom geography navigational boxes do exist so this would bring it into line with them. In addition, this would allow for other geography-related navboxes, such as Template:Rivers of Ireland and Template:Weather events in Ireland. 86.40.98.64 (talk) 05:21, 19 December 2012 (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.

Books by publisher[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Two opposed speedies. The convention for the subcategories of Category:Books by publisher is "NAME-OF-PUBLISHER books", where "NAME-OF-PUBLISHER" is formatted in the same manner as the WP article about that publisher. Here, the NAME-OF-PUBLISHER is Abrams Books; Golden Books is not an article, but it redirects to Western Publishing. (Upon investigation, I have learned that the publisher is not "Golden Book", it is "Golden Books".)
Yes, this leaves us with an "XXXX Books books" format, but this is no different than the already existing Category:Ace Books books, Category:Baen Books books, Category:Bantam Books books, Category:Deseret Book books, Category:Penguin Books books, Category:Prometheus Books books, Category:Signature Books books, and Category:Tor Books books.
This is also similar to the formatting used for the subcategories of Category:Films by studio, which results in some "XXXX Films films" category names, but we have accepted this as implementation of a standard, and I see no reason to depart from it here in the context of a different medium.
Anyway, "Abrams books" is ambiguous; "Abrams Books books" is not. For the Golden Books one, there is no reason to use "publications" when they are all books and they are categorized in the Category:Books tree. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:57, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion
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/2012_December_19&oldid=1136463016"