Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 June 29

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 28 June 30 >

June 29[edit]

Category:Sodaplay[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. Jafeluv (talk) 11:00, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Contains only one article. I don't see any other articles that could be included in it. Mika1h (talk) 20:25, 29 June 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:Presbyterian courts[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) 23:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This was an opposed speedy renaming, and on further reflection I think for good reason. The problem is that continental Reformed and Presbyterian churches both use what is commonly understood to be the same system of polity called presbyterian polity (usually lowercase is used to avoid confusion). The continental Reformed use the word "classis" for their first level regional assembly, and the Presbyterians call it a presbytery. In my opinion, they should be in the same category.
I also created Category:Presbyterian courts, because that is what Presbyterians call sessions, presbyteries, synods, and general assemblies. However, I can't find evidence the continental Reformed do the same, so now I am suggesting that category be renamed Category:Presbyterian assemblies, because I have seen evidence that both groups use "assembly" for these bodies, and it is purely descriptive anyway (please note "presbyterian" is being used in the sense of polity rather than denomination, if you can think of a less confusing alternative, go for it). Nyttend points out that this rescoped category belongs in Category:Calvinist organizations rather than Category:Presbyterian organizations, since the latter is for the denomination not the polity. JFH (talk) 14:41, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support both. There's really nothing better than "presbyterian" for the courts/assemblies issue. Renaming from Presbyteries to Presbyteries and classes means that we're expanding the scope of the category substantially, and in my mind that's good; the differences between the continental and UK churches are small enough that their judicatories should all be put together, except of course for single-denomination subcategories. Nyttend (talk) 03:31, 30 July 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:Ottoman Imperial School of Military Engineering[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:Istanbul Technical University. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:14, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category that has no corresponding article and only 1 subcategory with no other articles in it. Tim! (talk) 09:58, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete -- There is an alumni category with 20 articles, which suggests that the article is badly needed, but when created it will be appropriate as the main article of the alumni category. I doubt we are going to get much other content for this category, thus delete, without prjudice to re-creation if necessary. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:23, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge to Category:Istanbul Technical University. this site] calling it the "Royal School of Military Engineering" indicvates that it was founded in 1795, and merged with other Ottoman institutions to form an Engineering Academy, which gaoined univeristy status in 1927. The WP conventioon on alumni categories is that alumni of the predecessors of renamed or merged institutions are treated as being alumni of the present successor. If my view is correct the alumni category needs merging with that for the technical univeristy. If that cannot be a speedy, could the closing admin, please make that nomination. I am not doing so as multiple discussions on different days causes confusion. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:33, 30 June 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:Police misconduct in Poland[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: Listify. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:17, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
List created at Police misconduct#Poland. – Fayenatic London 23:00, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Content of this category is completely off base. Jürgen Stroop was German, not Polish. Blue Police was conscripted in World War II under the pain of death. These entries have nothing to do with the Polish Police per say, or any so-called misconduct. Please read the articles if you want. Also, please do not create cats with nothing of relevance. Thanks. Poeticbent talk 05:26, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but purge. One article is about a Nazi concentration camp commander (surprisingly a Jew): he should be in another category, probably a war criminal one; he was not guilty of misconduct within the warped mind of the Nazi regime, as he was doing just what they wanted. Józef Różański and one other are about members of the Polish Communist regime police, who were convicterd of being too brutal: they belong here, though they were probably mere fall-guys, used to extirpate the guilt of the regime in the post-Stalinist era. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This category is being misused and should be scrapped.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:24, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Listify a list can properly summarize why they are consider police having caused misconduct. This isn't a category of articles on police misconduct, it contains police that performed misconduct, so is anycase, misnamed -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 01:07, 5 July 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:Industrial designs[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) 23:09, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category has completely unclear inclusion criteria. It's unlikely that any of the articles in this category are not in a category for cars, computers etc. If this category is for articles about designs that have received some particular form of recognition (e.g. an award for being particularly innovative) then a list would be better than a category. Note: This category was previously discussed at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_December_6#Category:Industrial_design_examples. DexDor (talk) 05:18, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- the inclusion criterion, "examples of industrial design" is much too vague. Any industrial design could be in it, making it far too large a category to be useful. If it is for "outstanding examples", who is the judge? It is a POV category. It might be possible to have a category for industrial design awards, covering a series of list articles dealing with the winners of awards. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:46, 30 June 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_June_29&oldid=1091456470"