Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 May 23

< May 22	May 24 >

May 23[edit]

Visual arts project 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: speedily deleted already. – Fayenatic London 20:32, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Visual arts project categories

Category:Top-importance visual arts articles
Category:High-importance visual arts articles
Category:Mid-importance visual arts articles
Category:Low-importance visual arts articles
Category:Unknown-importance visual arts articles
Category:NA-importance visual arts articles
Category:Visual arts articles by importance

I'm listing all 7 categories for deletion because I created them in error. I didn't realize that the Visual Arts Wikiproject had already discussed not to sort categories by importance because there are too many. I made the categories without consulting the project and they're not in use. I made the mistake of creating them and wish for them to be deleted. Thanks. Turn685 (talk) 23:44, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think you can tag them as {{db-author}} for speedy deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 04:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, got it under control now. :) --Turn685 (talk) 21:17, 24 May 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:World Communion of Reformed Churches[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. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:00, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:World Communion of Reformed Churches (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: No need for WP:EPONCAT, Category:Members of the World Communion of Reformed Churches should remain. JFH (talk) 19:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I created this category after stumbling upon the category Category:Members of the World Communion of Reformed Churches, which was a subcategory only of the Category:Members of the World Communion of Reformed Churches (yes, it was a subcategory of itself and it had no parent category). I couldn't identify any other container category appropriate as a parent for the "Members" category, so I created a category for the organization. None of the three parent categories in which Category:World Communion of Reformed Churches is currently slotted (i.e., Category:International bodies of Reformed denominations, Category:Reformed denominations, and Category:Religious organizations established in 2010) is a logically appropriate parent for the "Members" category. (However, I see that there are other "Members of" categories in Category:International bodies of Reformed denominations, which suggests that members of these denominations disagree with my theories on categorization.) If anything, the "Members" category should be upmerged to Category:World Communion of Reformed Churches, not the other way around. User:Cryx88 created that "Members" category as a manual category-move from another category; that user never responded to my comment on their talk page, but maybe they will comment here. --Orlady (talk) 20:12, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Reformed denominations is an appropriate parent if all of the members are Reformed. If not, Category:Christian denominations. --JFH (talk) 20:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, when I created the category, I placed it in Category:International bodies of Protestant denominations. Another user recently created Category:International bodies of Reformed denominations and recategorized it there. --Orlady (talk) 21:06, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge -- This is an unnecessary level of categorisationThe mnain article should be in the parent and should be the main article for the members cateogry. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:44, 26 May 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:Domestic heating[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 to Category:Residential heating appliances and cleanup. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:02, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Domestic heating to Category:Residential heating

Nominator's rationale: There may (I'm not sure) be a slight difference in meaning between "residential heating" and "domestic heating", but there's certainly a large overlap. The merge could go the other way ("residential" is the older category). There isn't an article at either title. If two categories are kept there should be an explanation of the distinction in the category headers. DexDor (talk) 05:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like simple duplication, owing to ENGVAR. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:21, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Residential heating appliances and restructure. One of the head categories is "home appliances" and I think this will be a shortcut to an improvement which would be more useful than a merger. – Fayenatic London 06:37, 29 May 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:The Hunger Games[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) 00:21, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:The Hunger Games to Category:The Hunger Games trilogy

Nominator's rationale: It is a series of three books, thus better categorization in general.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 00:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rebuild as a category tree Category:The Hunger Games (franchise) would sit under Category:Media franchises, while Category:The Hunger Games (novel series) would be for the books, and Category:The Hunger Games (film series) would do for the films -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 06:39, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rename because what 65.94.76.126 suggested sounds like over categorization.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 17:02, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE NeoBatfreak is the nominator. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 04:28, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment if you think it's overcat, then there should be no separate film and book categories, instead they should all appear in one franchise category. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 04:28, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The separation with the books and the films is necessary, since there are people would prefer the films rather than books. Plus, there's going to be more than three movies. The point is to rename a category. --NeoBatfreak (talk) 06:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it necessary? That people prefer the films rather than the books has no bearing on categorization. Neither has the fact that there are more than three films. If you think a category tree for this is overcategorization, then separate categories for film and books is clearly overcategorization. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 11:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
rename per nom, to match head article.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:50, 24 May 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.