Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 May 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 26 May 28 >

May 27[edit]

Category:People killed by the Turkish Armed Forces[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. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:15, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one person in the category, not likely for expansion. SMALLCAT, NONDEF. MSJapan (talk) 21:01, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- I suspect that the category is capable of being further populated. The story is during a Greek Cyriot incursion into Tutkish-occupied northern Cyprus a man attempted to interfere with the Turish flag and was shot for doing so. What about people killed in the 1974 invasion of northern Cyprus or during the Turkish War of Inspendence? Peterkingiron (talk) 14:20, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - What he did was irrelevant to the fact that there's only one artice in the cat. So we're going to keep his cat just so we can find somebody to make a bunch of BIO1E articles just for the sake of populating the cat? By and large, we do not list every war victim - otherwise we'd have hit the 6 million mark of articles just on Holocaust victims. People are killed in wars, and very rarely is it a defining characteristic. MSJapan (talk) 23:29, 31 May 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.

A few more award 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: merge Category:Recipients of the Star of the Grand Cross of the Iron Cross to Category:Recipients of the Grand Cross of the Iron Cross; delete the others. – Fayenatic London 21:05, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OCAWARD, per WP:NONDEF, per previous discussion and many discussions before. The first three categories are mainly heads of state, nobility, ministers and generals to whom the granting of the order is merely a gesture. In the latter three categories there are not just heads of state, politicians etc. but nevertheless the awards are not defining at all for the persons of those categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:39, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral on Star of the Grand Cross of the Iron Cross/Delete Other 5. As the top military honor in Prussia and early Germany, Star of the Grand Cross of the Iron Cross probably is defining but there are only 2 recipients. The rest are clearly not defining. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete first two. Keep the rest. My view is that honours granted to heads of state and ministers of foreign countries, evidently for diplomatic reasons should not be the subject of categories. However, those given by a state to its own citizens as a mark of honour for their achievements should be allowed. The third item has only two names, those of outstanding Prussian generals, but the fact that awards were so scarce is in fact a reason for keeping it. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all none of these awards are defining to the recipients.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the Star. This is the highest grade of a highly prominent Prussian/German decoration. Yes, the category is small, but that's because it was only twice awarded, vaguely comparable to the US Medal of Honor with oak cluster. It could stand to be merged into Category:Recipients of the Grand Cross of the Iron Cross (I would support such a merger), but outright deleting it or merging it into a much lower-on-the-tree category would be a bad idea. Nyttend (talk) 04:57, 30 June 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:Suicidology[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. – Fayenatic London 19:26, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The items in this category have nothing to do with the study of suicide, except that they like all other topics can be studied. The "Suicidology" Wikipedia article might not even pass AfD if it were submitted as it is an essay and original research. All of these topics would fit well into the category for suicide. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:08, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. These can all be in the suicide category. Neutralitytalk 21:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. As Neutrality says they are better in the target, but that would not necessarily be the result of his vote. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:32, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Comment: "-ology" categories should be just for articles about the study of the relevant topic. DexDor (talk) 07:52, 13 June 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:Hyde F.C.[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. MER-C 13:14, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The club has been renamed (see here). Del♉sion23 (talk) 17:22, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 17:47, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - per nom. GiantSnowman 17:48, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but really should have been a speedy rename (WP:C2D) rather than a full CfD. Number 57 09:06, 28 May 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:Thompson albums[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:Thompson (folk rock band) albums. – Fayenatic London 19:32, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category not needed. Contains only one entry, for a single album recorded by an ensemble. --Another Believer (Talk) 13:49, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apologies, I thought that based on WP:MOS-ALBUM I had to create that category, as it states that "Each album should be placed in the two categories, Category:<Artist name> albums and Category:<year> albums".Dennisthemonkeychild (talk) 13:55, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but rename, as Thompson is a dab page. Albums should indeed all be in a 'by artist' category. Oculi (talk) 15:06, 27 May 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:Olympic medalists for Great Britain[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. MER-C 12:57, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming:

Rationalle: Per ENGVAR - the word is spelled "medallist" in the UK. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support renaming any "medallist" category that is particular to British athletes. Most of the related British athlete categories for the Commonwealth Games and other international competitions already use the British spelling. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:41, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support all – it is indeed medallist in the UK. Oculi (talk) 00:08, 22 June 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:jewish crimes[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 WP:G7. – Fayenatic London 07:33, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Empty, motivated by SPA editor that wants to promote BATTLEGROUND and edit war over contents -- Aronzak (talk) 10:55, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - POV pushing category (examine creator's other recent contributions). There is nothing "Jewish" about the crimes listed in this category, it is merely a clear antisemitic attempt to list Jewish criminals. Brad Dyer (talk) 17:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Salt There is no such thing as a "Jewish crime". There are, of course, Jewish criminals; and these are included in relevant categories, such as Category:Jewish-American mobsters. This category is a nasty POV attack, trying to equate all Jews with criminals, and it has no place on Wikipedia. RolandR (talk) 17:41, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question The category is a red lik. Is it already deleted or is there a typo in the nomination? RevelationDirect (talk) 18:42, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy close -- Some one seems to have deleted it already. If it exiusted it ought to be Category:Jewish crimes, but I cannot imagine what crimes could be specifically Jewish. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:35, 29 May 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:Historical gangs[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 all to use former. (NAC) Armbrust The Homunculus 02:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per the spirit of WP:C2C, bringing a category into line with established naming conventions for that category tree. This nomination would change "historical" to "defunct" to match one parent category, Category:Defunct organizations, and change "of" to "in" to match the other parent category, Category:Gangs by city. My concern is that "historical" could also mean an old but still active gang but these categories are only intended to group gangs that no longer exist. (The preposition change was at Fayenatic's request and based on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 March 12#Gangs.) RevelationDirect (talk) 04:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Subcategories
Note: Notified 152.163.100.138 as the apparent category creator and this discussion has been included in WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography. – RevelationDirect (talk) 04:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Background & Alternative Rename I originally ran this through the speedy renaming process but @Fayenatic london: thought "former" would be a better adjective for gangs.RevelationDirect (talk) 04:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alternative rename to "former gangs", which IMHO is a better wording in this case, despite the majority use of "defunct" in sibling categories. Thanks for this full and clear nomination. – Fayenatic London 10:11, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • rename to former -- A while back, we had a long series of discussions over "former" categories. This was on the basis that WP disparaged a present/former distinction. Personally, I prefer former to defunct. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:41, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • rename to former this sounds better to me.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:00, 3 June 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_May_27&oldid=1090392117"