Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 August 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< August 12 August 14 >

August 13[edit]

Category:Galatasaray S.K. (football) footballers[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. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:49, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: While it's generally a good idea to have category names matching articles and other categories, sometimes common sense exceptions should be made. The proposed title is still unambiguous; the basketball teams, for example, don't have footballers. Compare to Category:Galatasaray men's basketball players (not Category:Galatasaray S.K. (men's basketball) basketball players). BDD (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • REname -- the disambiguator is clearly redundant. If it were "players" (which I think it may have been), it would have been needed. A parent relating to the football team more generally may need to keep a disambiguator. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:14, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. --BDD (talk) 02:26, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Galatasaray S.K. (football) footballers? That doesn't sound right. Really no need for the disambiguator. – Michael (talk) 20:42, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - when I noticed the CFDS, I thought it was an unnatural name for a category - this is much better. Mentoz86 (talk) 23:59, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - over-disambiguated. GiantSnowman 09:55, 20 August 2013 (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: Classical music genres (newly proposed)[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: Suspended/closed per request of User:LazyStarryNights. Non-admin close. Cgingold (talk) 01:01, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to propose the following:

  • I have only now taken a look at the talk page for WikiProject Classical music, and I'm not at all surprised that this discussion here at CFD did not get any comments in response to LazyStarryNights' notification. To begin with, it was posted way back in the middle of the talk page, where it was very unlikely to be noticed. Equally important, it this proposal is a follow-on to a discussion that was dead in the water, and which was followed by an extremely rancorous exchange between the other participants. Under the circumstances, I can undertand why LSN might have sought another venue for the discussion.
My advice: just leave it alone for now, LSN, and perhaps come back to it a few months down the line. And as I said above, WikiProject Classical music is probably the best place for a discussion of this sort -- it's really not the sort of thing that CFD is well-suited to. Best, Cgingold (talk) 06:51, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for you advice. I'd like to clarify that the state of the wider discussion about genres on the WikiProject Classical music was not my reason to post this at CFD. The only reason was that in my (mistaken) understanding CFD was best because it was about categories.
My understanding going forward would be letting this discussion be closed again and I later repost my proposal at a new WikiProject Classical music talk with a reference to this discussion.
Since that project is relatively inactive now (holidays, infoboxes), waiting for a while makes sense. I'll also notify User:Johnbod by then, since he did reply. LazyStarryNights (talk) 20:43, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, then - I will close this out. Cgingold (talk) 01:01, 23 August 2013 (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:Women writers from Oklahoma[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. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:52, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 July 29#Category:Women writers by state - this category was missed by the user who tagged the rest. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 14:53, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. We have decided to not subdivide by gender below the national level.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:26, 14 August 2013 (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:Royal Army Medical Corps non-commissioned officers[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. No action on comments about other categories. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge. No reason for this category. Category:Royal Army Medical Corps soldiers (into which this category's sole occupant can be upmerged) already exists for all ranks below commissioned officer and no other subcat of Category:British Army soldiers in the categorisation scheme includes this further subcat. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:39, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see that there is such a category. The soldiers category needs to be purged of officers by transferring them to the officer category, which should be linked. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There may be the odd officer in there by mistake, but as far as I can see the majority are other ranks (although some may later have been commissioned in other regiments, which doesn't disqualify them from this category). The British Army categorisation scheme has been in existence for a long time and includes separate categories for officers and ORs for every regiment and corps. I periodically go through categories to check the categorisation is correct, but there aren't many problems. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:00, 19 August 2013 (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:Peoria Rivermen players[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. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:44, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Peoria Rivermen (AHL) now defunct/moved out of town. These players are all for the old team (2005-2013). Similar categories Category:Peoria Rivermen (ECHL) players and Category:Peoria Rivermen (IHL) players already exist. (Later, a new Category:Peoria Rivermen (SPHL) players will probably end up existing also.) Closeapple (talk) 10:43, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support was going to put this up for a speedy rename myself but hadn't gotten around to it. I support this so it can be turned into a category disambiguation like other similar situations. -DJSasso (talk) 12:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support no brainer. TerminalPreppie (talk) 12:39, 13 August 2013 (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:Charlemagne Prize recipients[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. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Having received this award is not a WP:DEFINING characteristic (see WP:OC#AWARD) - especially as most of the recipients are senior politicians/royalty who are in many other categories. This category also (incorrectly) categorizes articles such as Euro and The Raspberry Ice Cream War under Category:Aachen and Category:People by status. For info: There is a list at Charlemagne_Prize#Recipients_of_the_Charlemagne_Prize. Note: Deletion of this category would leave the parent category with just 2 pages so that might be upmerged. DexDor (talk) 04:34, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:OC#AWARD -- This is a fairly major prize, but the recipients were recognisably notable long before they gor the prize. This contrasts with the Nobel prize, which confers much increased notability. List exists. Upmerge parent. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:26, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Having categories like this is why Winston Churchill is in a truly too large number of categories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnpacklambert (talk • contribs) 23:30, 14 August 2013
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:Gay culture in Canada[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. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Contains a single sub-category which in turn contains a single page. Not needed. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 01:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to Category:LGBT culture in Canada. This one is too small, but the parent is well-populated and part of the established series Category:LGBT culture by country. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:26, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge per nom and above. 14:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Upmerge per nom and above. Obvious. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:27, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge per nom. In addition to the reasons already specified, it's worth noting that this was created by a banned user as part of a nonconsensual and very much unwanted campaign of comprehensively breaking down every "LGBT" category on Wikipedia into four separate L, G, B and T subcategories — much, but not yet all, of which has already been undone in the wake of the userban. Bearcat (talk) 20:44, 19 August 2013 (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:Gay culture in Ireland[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. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:11, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Unnecessary single-item category. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 01:37, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to Category:LGBT culture in Ireland. This one is too small, but the parent is well-populated and part of the established series Category:LGBT culture by country. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge per nom and above. 14:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Upmerge per nom and above. Obvious. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge per nom. In addition to the reasons already specified, it's worth noting that this was created by a banned user as part of a nonconsensual and very much unwanted campaign of comprehensively breaking down every "LGBT" category on Wikipedia into four separate L, G, B and T subcategories — much, but not yet all, of which has already been undone in the wake of the userban. Bearcat (talk) 20:44, 19 August 2013 (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/2013_August_13&oldid=1074810334"