Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 December 1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< November 30 December 2 >

December 1[edit]

Category:Chinese Nationalists[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 for now. – Fayenatic London 22:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All four categories are reserved for members of the Kuomintang and not all Chinese nationalists. Charles Essie (talk) 23:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • do not change at this point These categories are always a mess. A better explanation is needed to show that changes will actually improve things and not make a worse mess: nationalists vs Nationalists vs Kuomintang first need to be sorted out in article text defining these groups before working on category organization. Then each article needs to have valid text pointing the way to which categories would be appropriate for the article. Hmains (talk) 02:49, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
also the 'Kuomintang; was a political party while 'Nationalist China' was an alternate name for the state/government: Republic of China. Hmains (talk) 19:09, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for now -- Sometime back we had a long series of contested CFDs, over the Republic of China. The outcome of this was that WP decided that the mainland Republic of China c.1912-48 and present island Republic of China on Taiwan (1945-present) would be treated as separate polities. KMT was the dominant party on the mainland throughout the period of the Republic: effectively it was a one-party state. The party subsequently ruled Taiwan for many years, but no longer: I understand Taiwan is now a multi-party democracy. With both republics being dominated by KMT for so long, there is inevitably a close coincidence, but the two are conceptually different: both generals and presidents were officials of a nation, not a party. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:57, 5 December 2015 (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:Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities[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. (non-admin closure) sst✈(discuss) 15:07, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: according to our article: "The Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU) is a research, policy, and advocacy organization of public research universities, land-grant institutions, state university systems, and higher education organizations." Membership in this association of over 200 institutions of higher education is WP:NON-DEFINING. Being a public university or a land-grant university is, but those categories already exist: Category:Public universities and colleges in the United States and Category:Land-grant universities and colleges. There are numerous research, policy, and advocacy organizations for universities, but membership in most is not a defining characteristic for the institution. In fact, more notable (perhaps a sad state of education in the US) would be NCAA membership (another policy research and advocacy organization), and Category:American colleges and universities with football teams etc., but we needn't compound one error with more. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Being a public university (including Land Grant ones) is clearly defining. Belonging to this trade association is not. RevelationDirect (talk) 18:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and per RevelationDirect. Non-defining. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:52, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - as above. Neutralitytalk 22:51, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Non-defining to member organizations.John Pack Lambert (talk) 08:44, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- AS with a number of other university-association membership categories previously deleted. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:59, 5 December 2015 (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.

Medieval Gaels[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. (non-admin closure) sst✈(discuss) 15:30, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete/merge per WP:OCAT. These categories add very little value since individual biographies are already in e.g. Category:8th-century Irish people or in Category:12th-century Scottish people. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In any case, if the parent category is kept, the child categories should be kept as well, otherwise the parent category will unnecessarily miss a lot of content. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:57, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There were medieval people in Ireland who were not Gaels (e.g. Normans). We can live without the relatively new Category:Medieval Gaels from Scotland and Category:Medieval Gaels from Ireland. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:25, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- This has become a bit of a mess. As Laura says, after the arrival of Normans in Ireland and Scotland not all the people of each country were Gaelic speaking. In Scotland, it may be earlier. Edinburgh was Edwin's burgh, named from an Anglian king of Northumbria. I am not clear what the language of Strathclyde was, but its province of Cumberland may have used a variety of Welsh, since the name is cognate with Cambria (Wales). I am unhappy with seeing Irish people categories as subcategories of Gaels: they are not the same. Furthermore the pre-Norman period in Ireland is known as "Early Christian". That is a much better term than one based on language. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:09, 5 December 2015 (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/2015_December_1&oldid=1074814433"