Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 May 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 24 May 26 >

May 25[edit]

Category:History events[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:Historically themed events. With all of these nominations for Stefanomione categories, the solutions reached are not necessarily the final word on how to deal with things. Cleaning up is going to be a process. So feel free to reassess and reorganize (or de-organize the Stefanomione organization) after the renaming. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:52, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Another WP:POINTy creation by Stefanomione, his all-too-brief one-week block just expired. He has of course resumed his practice of combining a field of study plus the word "works" (or "events" in this case) -- either x/y or y/x -- and then off he goes, to create categories that make no useful contribution, other than to stake out his WP:OWNership.
In this case, "history events" is obviously flawed, in that it's going to be forever confused with events in history. More importantly, it just isn't needed -- Category:Historical reenactment events‎, Category:History education and Category:Commemoration does an adequate job of grouping. This is once again a category creation by Stefanomione for Stefanomione -- and whatever sockpuppets he wishes to create this time. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - As creator. Other wikipedians than me built the tree either x/y or y/x. We can have
  • I see you have removed Category:Commemoration, which is an improvement, since it contained a great many things that aren't "history events." 15:33, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I've struck through some of my comments above. This is indeed at least a reasonable effort to add to Events by topic, though I still believe it is a redundant category. And while I do still believe you should be topic banned from any further category creation as a net negative at Cfd, I see it is not the pointy creation I made it out to be. The existence of Events by topic opens the door for a number of other Foo events categories, for better or worse. And I daresay we'll have more of them before too long. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:06, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment how is this different than Category:Observances, and its daughters like Category:Anniversaries (where things like Jubilees, Bicentennials, V-E days, etc. seem well categorized). This seems like a parallel tree, and one that may not be necessary. I'd like to know how it's different. If it cannot be articulated as basically a duplication (i.e, much of the articles in the current schema would need to be in both) or a replacement (i.e, much of the articles in the current schema would need to be moved to the new one), I'm not sure it belongs. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:45, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • God knows I'm not defending this category, but what his intention seems to be that these are for events that are about history as a "topic." But then there seem to be virtually none that aren't already adequately categorized as reenactments. But yes goal would seem to be make a bridging category so that people searching in the container Category:Events by topic would see the field of history represented. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:40, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • On that point, Category:Events by topic isn't populated solely by categories named "Foo (single noun) events." There's no reason why Category:Historical reenactment events can't be added directly to Category:Events by topic, if this cat is deleted. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:48, 25 May 2016 (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:Cricket deliveries[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:48, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary sub-category as all its entries are bowling terms. Delivery itself is a bowling term. Many of the articles in the two categories need to be merged with parents as they are superfluous and WT:CRIC are currently discussing that. Jack | talk page 09:27, 25 May 2016 (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:Ministry of Tribal Affairs[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:Ministers of Tribal Affairs (India). Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:52, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplication. Shyamsunder (talk) 07:45, 25 May 2016 (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:Mathematical sciences[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:49, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: downmerge per WP:OVERLAPCAT, the concept Mathematical sciences is too closely related to Applied mathematics to have separate categories for them. As an illustration: both categories are parented to Category:Applied sciences and Category:Fields of mathematics. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:47, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Applied math refers to a set of tools used in the mathematical sciences and is thus appropriate as a subcategory of mathematical sciences. But looking at the entries in both categories, it is a complete mess, with little distinction made between the two concepts. Merging the categories makes sense as a first step to cleaning it up. Lucis Aeternae 03:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
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:Lists of countries by economics[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:50, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content, the category contains lists of countries with a certain economic indicator. Just "economics" is too vague in this context. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:45, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • rename per nom. The proposed name is far more accurate. Mangoe (talk) 18:29, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Economic indicator is indeed the better term. Lucis Aeternae 03:23, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Support I created this category to break up Category:Lists of countries into smaller categories. The proposed name is a significant improvement. Forbes72 (talk) 18:17, 27 May 2016 (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:Footballers from Barnet (London borough)[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: no consensus. Users can monitor the situation; if population of the categories is not carried out, a re-nomination may be in order. Users are often keen to say that population should happen, but whether it does or not is another issue ... (There was a similar discussion on these and other categories in 2014, and as far as I can see, no further population of the categories since then.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Category with just 1 entry. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:50, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- but only of you will also nominate the other 3 London Boroughs with 1 member. In contrast one borough has 9 and some others a couple of dozen. Is there an explanation for this? It could be that the problem that a split of the Greater London parent has been incompletely undertaken. In that case the answer is populate. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:06, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:45, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and I've taken the liberty to add the other three categories here. After merging, Category:Footballers from Ealing (London borough) and Category:Footballers from Hounslow (London borough), which are currently container categories containing only one subcategory, will become empty and can thus be deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The problem is the split of the Greater London parent has been incompletely undertaken so the answer is to populate, as per Peterkingiron above. For instance, I have found 3 entries to add to the Southall cat and 4 entries for Feltham. The Barnet cat needs subcats added as per the other borough footballer cats to match the "People from" cats, as there are separate areas within the boroughs. I have added 1 entry to the Barnet subcat. Cjc13 (talk) 20:23, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for any categories that have less than 5 players. If you think the categories can be populated, please propose who they can be populated with. It is not obvious that there are more footballers out there from these towns/boroughs. ~ RobTalk 03:30, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Footballers from Southall and Category:Footballers from Feltham already have at least 5 entires. Category:Footballers from Waltham Forest (London borough) needs reworking to match Category:People from Waltham Forest (London borough) as the current entryAdam Smith (footballer, born 1991) should be in the subcat Category:Footballers from Leytonstone which would also include David Beckham and at least 3 entries from Category:People from Leytonstone that include footballer in the title. Another subcat Category:Footballers from Leyton would include Benik Afobe, Leonard Graham, Solomon Shields, Matt Harrold, Nico Yennaris and Roy Woolcott from Category:People from Leyton. Cjc13 (talk) 14:36, 11 June 2016 (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/2016_May_25&oldid=1074817135"