Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 October 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 19 October 21 >

October 20[edit]

AEL Limassol 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: relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 November 13#AEL Limassol F.C. with links to article names. – Fayenatic London 21:16, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The team was commonly known as AEL Limassol (uefa.com), with a Greek team also called themselves AEL FC from Larissa (which common name was disputed, UEFA use Larissa FC, the club just use AEL, media use AE Larissa and other combination) Nevertheless, the current category system was for the Cyprus club, which should be moved to distinguish the two clubs (a rough inspection, seem most of the wasn't mis-cated). Matthew_hk tc 15:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I also nominated
Category:AEL FC players to Category:AEL Limassol F.C. players
Category:AEL BC players to Category:AEL Limassol B.C. players (A.E. Larissa from Greek also have basketball section) Matthew_hk tc 15:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Matthew_hk tc 15:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Really we need separate articles about the football and basketball clubs... GiantSnowman 19:43, 20 October 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:Apostolic Nuncios to Naples[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: relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 November 13#Category:Apostolic Nuncios to Naples with alternative for consistency. – Fayenatic London 21:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: An opposed speedy. Original nomination suggested changing "Naples" to "Kingdom of Naples" per the parent category Category:Ambassadors to the Kingdom of Naples. A copy of the speedy nomination is included below. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy nomination
  • Comment. The issue here is that Wikipedia is wrong more often by including the regime of a country directly in the name of an article instead of as a parenthesized disambiguator, e.g. Kingdom of Great Britain instead of Great Britain (kingdom). This is primarily a problem of article space though. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:37, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • I opposed because the nunciature was not "to the Kingdom of Naples" but "to the court in Naples". The title "Nunciature to (of) Naples" is correct and is supported by scholars texts as the referred Biaudet, as well as the Karttunen. When the kingdom of Naples became the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, the nunciature of Naples continued. I suggest to stay stick to sources WP:STICKTOSOURCE. To change the title of such category is an historical error. A ntv (talk) 22:15, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • I wouldn't go so far as to say it would introduce historical error. There are plenty of instances in history where names are applied retroactively to things that did not use that name at the time. We're not necessarily bound to following sources that are contemporary or closer to the events in question that we are. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:48, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • Modern scholars may introduce new names, but this shall be done by scholars not by wikipedians (or it is WP:OR). I referred to the works of the Biaudet who published in 1910 his researches in the Vatican Archives for a period up to 1648: he was not contemporary or closer to the events in question. See also Origine e Carattere della Nunziatura di Napoli, 1523-1569 by Villani 1958, or the eminent Fonti per la Storia d'Italia: Nunziature di Napoli 1962. A ntv (talk) 22:33, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'm not doubting anything specific you have said, just the overgeneralized nature of your broader statements. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:22, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (1) Brevity is a virtue for categories (2) there is no room for ambiguity, since the Pope did not send multiple ambassadors to the same place. This is in addition to the issues others have raised. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:39, 23 October 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:Art and Entertainment[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: speedied as empty category. Bearcat (talk) 02:22, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category created by an editor solely for their autobiography article, Seiyt. Drm310 (talk) 02:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Empty category, unclear scope. Dimadick (talk) 14:40, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • No debate necessary — in a case like this, we can just speedy delete the category as empty. Bearcat (talk) 02:22, 21 October 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:Fireworks festivals[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 Category:Fireworks shows to Category:Fireworks events, merge/rename the rest as listed in the alternative proposal below the relisting comment. – Fayenatic London 20:38, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: from reading the articles, it seems virtually impossible to draw a line between 'fireworks festivals' and 'fireworks shows'. Neither fireworks festivals nor fireworks shows has a main article, we just have Fireworks with a section Fireworks celebrations throughout the world. I'm proposing to (re)name the categories after the top category Category:Fireworks shows but would also be fine with naming them Fireworks shows or Fireworks celebrations. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:51, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Hello. This just popped up on my feed as I am considered article creator. I am fine with Marcocapelle's nomination, as I can see the sense in several arguments from several perspectives. Note I only created this category because I found a "Category:Firewors festivals in COUNTRY" category floating around somewhere, and felt I should expand the category. I looked, assuming it was Canada or the US that spurred me, but that cats have undergone some confusing name changes since then - I'll have to look around to find the orignal. The creator of that category might actually have some useful thoughts to contribute here. Earflaps (talk) 21:57, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I think the original country cat might have been one of these now upmerged section here at categories for discussion. So I think might be beyond me to check w/out admin powers :/ Earflaps (talk) 22:01, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -- Neither "shows" nor "festivals" is wholly satisfactory, but "festivals" is better if anything. Some of the articles relate to annual events at which there is a firework display, for example at New Year or a national day. Two articles relate to festivals of light at which there are displays. Strictly they are "festivals with fireworks", rather than fireworks festivals. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fireworks display, according to the fireworks page, is a synonym for fireworks show. I wonder if that might work better than show, as it only denotes the visual, not the gathering of people, which could be left with the festival branch perhaps. Although not all gatherings are festivals, just like not all concerts are music festivals, so festival remains a vague category in this case. Earflaps (talk) 00:00, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
On the merge item, my vote should be reverse merge, for reasons given. I would not oppose Occuli's suggestion of "events", which is probably more neutral. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:36, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: shows, festivals, events, or displays?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 00:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • So the discussion above has led to the following alternative:
Marcocapelle (talk) 06:55, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now Support revised nom, for reasons in earlier discussion. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:41, 23 October 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_October_20&oldid=1138410373"