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The result of the discussion was:Nomination withdrawn. kelapstick(bainuu) 14:25, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, please do not second guess my request - I am asking for one change not for the others you have quoted - the combination of geology X - where geology is the main noun, and the plural quantifier that follows is a plural noun. Geology as a noun and literature is a noun is not a common usage, the word before the second noun is usually changed - in this case geology noun becomes geological the adjective, and is the appropriate usage. satusuro 14:36, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
' Nomination Withdrawn - after further investigation it is valid usage - despite it sounding wrong.satusuro 14:22, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]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.
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. I did not see an effort to rename the article as suggested below, so this should move forward. If someone later decides to get the article renamed we can reconsider this name. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:41, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Do not "speedy" this, as WP:ENGVAR; I believe "autistic spectrum" is the usual term here in the UK. The evidence from Google Scholar used at Talk:Autism_spectrum/Archive_1#Rename_to_"Autism_spectrum" showed only a marginal weight for "autism spectrum". Scholar now shows a majority for "autism spectrum", although Google Books shows a majority for "autistic spectrum". – FayenaticLondon 15:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I think that's an argument for renaming the article. I would be open to delaying this discussion if you want to work on that name change. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:50, 6 October 2014 (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.
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) 22:38, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support, current naming convention. --Cavarrone 11:31, 23 October 2014 (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.
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:Withdrawn. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:25, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There are currently only Roman Catholic bishops in the Bishops of Mexico tree so it is not meaningful to have two categories. Possible alternatives: downmerge instead of upmerge, or upmerge and rename back into Roman Catholic. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am surprised that Marcocapelle would make such a nomination. Even a junior editor would know that this cat is part of a long tree structure and also has ample opportunity to grow. I would urge him to withdraw the nomination. Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:26, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per RevelationDirect satusuro 23:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw nomination per RevelationDirect. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:38, 4 October 2014 (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.
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) 22:37, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: to make it more clear that this is a country category, not a nationality category. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support bishops in America are not inherently American. Although see my comment below in the Jamaica section regarding in or of. and have a look at Category:Italian bishops (the contents not the probably improper name). --kelapstick(bainuu) 11:42, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom satusuro 23:58, 2 October 2014 (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.
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:Anglican bishops in Jamaica. There is a consensus to rename, but the issue in choosing in/of is not clear. Based on the suggestion below that Category:Bishops in Jamaica be the parent, if I read the replies correctly, it should follow that name. If there is a substantial objection to my logic we can have a new nomination to only discuss the two letters. This rename fixes the more important larger problem. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:34, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per main article these are Anglican bishops, in contrast to Roman Catholic bishops in Jamaica who are in another category. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Something I agree with the spirit of the nomination and will defer to others what preposition to use. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:50, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well put, I am sure there is a WikiProject or style guideline that covers this sort of thing. I have raised the question regarding where people do their bishoping at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:05, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I presume that the category is named "of Jamaica" because Jamaica is not only a country but also the Anglican diocese. Personally I don't have a clear preference for either "of Jamaica" or "in Jamaica". Marcocapelle (talk) 16:54, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jamaica is an exception: for the Anglican Communion, the bishops may be said to be both bishops in and bishops of Jamaica. In the RC church, there are multiple dioceses so the issue does not arise. IT should then be a child of Category:Bishops in Jamaica. Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- The Anglican category should follow the title actually used, if necessary with the prefix "Anglican". There should be a parent covering bishops of all denominations. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:21, 13 October 2014 (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.
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.
Support All the articles in this category are mathematical in nature, so adding the disambiguation term is natural. "pretzel knot" gets 751 hits in Gscholar and "pretzel link" gets 276 hits; this agrees with my impression that pretzel knot is the more familiar term, even within mathematics. Thus I'd prefer Category:Pretzel knots and links (mathematics). --Mark viking (talk) 03:37, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Background@Hyacinth: I recently created Category:Pretzels and there is no main article for pretzel knot. That may or may not sway your opinion but that's where this nomination is coming from and I should have mentioned that in the nomination. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:16, 1 October 2014 (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.
