Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 October 3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 2 October 4 >

October 3[edit]

Association football clubs in the Republic of Ireland by county[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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 20:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming:
added 4 October
Nominator's rationale: Rename all, per convention of Category:Association football in Ireland and its sub-categories. These appear to be the only ones using soccer, and my initial to proposal to speedily rename the Galway category to Category:Football (soccer) clubs in County Galway was opposed. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:53, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of speedy nomination
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:Sabah–Malaysia relations[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 to a newly-created Category:Federalism in Malaysia, which will not be parented in international relations categories. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:41, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See also: - Discussion Sabah–Malaya relations 5 October 2012

Nominator's rationale: A totally misleading category. Sabah is a state of Malaysia, it doesn't have relations with its own country. CMD (talk) 16:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tagged Category:Sarawak–Malaysia_relations so it can be considered together.- choster (talk) 19:39, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Category:Sabah–Malaysia relations,Malaysia is a federated have been legally incorporated into their governing State under an agreement between United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Federation of Malaya, North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore. The State are subject to external sovereignty or hegemony where ultimate sovereignty lies in another state. Malaysia is not an unitary state. Omdo (talk) 21:22, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • rename/merge to Category:Federalism in Malaysia I don't think deletion is the answer, but I think a single category for all the various federation articles (also incorporating Category:Sarawak–Malaysia relations) which makes clear that this is not about international relations is what is needed here. Mangoe (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming the idea of categorising the wards by their state eligibility is an interesting one, rename Category:Sabah–Malaysia relations to Category:Sabah–Malaya relations Omdo (talk) 05:41, 4 October 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.

Australian rules footballers by city[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: upmerge.--Mike Selinker (talk) 20:59, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose deletion
Nominator's rationale: Delete The 4000-5000 or so Australian rules footballer articles are all categorised into Category:Australian rules footballers by state of origin, not by city. I see no reason to break that down further into cities, especailly for the few players from Brisbane and Sydney. The current system has a couple of advantages. It links to the historical (albeit no longer in use) State of Origin concept whereby representative teams were selected by state of origin. It is, therefore a defining characteristic, unlike city. Also, people are much more likely to move around cities than states, so the chance of mis-categorisation is lessened. If you want to add people to a Brisbane or Sydney related category, then the Category:Sportspeople from Sydney and Category:Sportspeople from Brisbane are available and not too big or small. (I will notify the editor that populated these new categories and contested the CSD#C1 request, WP:AWNB and WT:AFL of this discussion) The-Pope (talk) 14:40, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I felt Category:Sportspeople from Sydney was overpopulated and that Category:Sportspeople from Sydney by gender and Category:Sportspeople from Sydney by sport were the way to go about de-populating it. If it's decided we move it back to 'by state', that's fine, but I still think Categories like 'Sortspeople from New South Wales by gender' and 'by sport' are the way to go there as well.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 20:48, 3 October 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.

Sport in Irish towns 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: Merge. Jafeluv (talk) 13:49, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging:
Nominator's rationale: Merge to both parents per WP:SMALLCAT. Birr, Cashel and Clonakilty are all small towns, and there is no reason to expect that there will be many more articles in those sparsely-populated town categories any time soon. Separating out the sports articles impedes navigation rather than helping it. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:11, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I noticed them springing up like mushrooms but was too lazy to put in a CDF. Complete smallcat case. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:40, 4 October 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:Lists of Sharlverse[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 per the discussion, and now, since the AFD has emptied the category, per CSD C1. - jc37 04:18, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. The term "Sharlverse" apparently refers to a fictional universe created by the sci-fi writer Jonathan Shipley (writer).
There are currently only two other pages on topics relating to Shipley, so there is no need for a category for any of them. The head article shows a topic of dubious notability, so there is no reason to expect this category to grow. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:43, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – one of its articles is not a list and the other one, Sharlverse list, is unlikely to survive if challenged (no refs, no links, no merit). Oculi (talk) 11:13, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete — All members of this category were deleted at AfD as non-notable at 03:58, 16 October 2012. There is no reason to keep. The previously minuscule category has virtually zero prospect of growing, and in 4 days it would be amenable to a C1 speedy. JFHJr (㊟) 14:33, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete since all the component articles have been delted.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:47, 18 October 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:University of Great Falls[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 - jc37 04:23, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No need for single-article spinoff cats without any faculty or alumni subcategories. The Bushranger One ping only 04:44, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Faculty and Alumni subcats should be added, as they have been done for Carroll already - this would be the natural expansion. Benkenobi18 (talk) 19:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both per Benkenobi, and create the relevant subcats. It took only a few minutes with Special:WhatLinksHere to make the following quick list of ppl associated with these two institutions:
I have not created the subcats while the discussion is underway, but will be happy to do so once it is closed. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:50, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep University of Great Falls, I have brought it up to another article directly in the category plus 6 alumni cats. Probably as people expand and create articles on state legislators in Montana and surrounding states we will find more alumni to put in there.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:55, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Category:Rocky Mountain College there I have managed to add three more articles to the cat, and place 2 sub-cats. The alumni sub-cat currently has 12 entries. The Miss Montana page suggests that there are more potentially notable alumni who could have articles created on them.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:04, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment It is now up to 9 direct articles (including one on one of its parent institutions, but since there are 3 different insitutions merged over time to form RMC, there could possible be more articles on parent institutions), plus 4 in the faculty cat and 18 in the alumni cat.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - not having subcats is not a rationale we recognize; otherwise, there are plenty of articles in the tree to support the cats for both. Aboutmovies (talk) 03:35, 18 October 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:History of California by city[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 to Category:Histories of cities in California. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:05, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We have Category:Histories of counties in California, which is more than adequate. if this was populated properly, it would be unmanageable. the lone category here is properly categorized already. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:32, 3 October 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_October_3&oldid=1074809944"