Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 March 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 11 March 13 >

March 12[edit]

Category:Stone Age sites in France[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. – Fayenatic London 20:09, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Excessive categories All the best Wikirictor 21:36, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Marcocapelle: I am always willing to work around this place, if only people would ask. Just added 5 new entries now. SteveStrummer (talk) 15:13, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose delete, if anything should be done here it would be an upmerge per WP:SMALLCAT. I can't judge the potential for growth. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:40, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge no longer needed, since category is decently populated now. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:29, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to Palaeolithic sites in France and purge of the stone circles (which are Neolithic to Bronze Age). One day this may need to be split into Cro-magnon, Mousterian, Magdalenian, and a few more. There should be plenty to populate it with, unlike Britain much of which was covered by ice at the time. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:51, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose delete - it's a severe understatement to say that this is a category likely to expand rather than contract. If it's deleted here, expect someone to propose its re-creation within months. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 08:41, 30 March 2017 (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:Chilliwack city councillors[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:56, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for city councillors, in a city not large enough to get its city councillors over WP:NPOL for that fact. As always, this is not a "comprehensive" tree where a city automatically gets a dedicated subcategory the moment one article could be filed in it -- if there were five or six or ten former Chilliwack city councillors with articles, then this would be acceptable, but it's not warranted for just two. Bearcat (talk) 21:15, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It's a town of 80,000 people, there's no need for a subcategory dedicated solely to its municipal council members. Werónika (talk) 23:02, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:27, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge -- 80,000 population is too small to need such categories. The mayors category (4 articles) probably needs similar treatment. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:53, 18 March 2017 (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:Langley city councillors[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:05, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for city councillors in a small (25K) city; the only contents here are a one-entry mayors subcategory which is also listed below, and three past councillors of whom one is a duplicate filing with the mayors category. Langley is not large enough that being a city councillor there would be an WP:NPOL pass in and of itself -- all three of the people here have articles for going on to serve in the provincial legislature, not for Langley City Council per se -- so there's no visible prospect of expansion. As with the mayors, every city does not automatically get one of these the moment there are just two or three councillors to file in it. Bearcat (talk) 21:03, 12 March 2017 (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:Mayors of Langley (city)[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:02, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for just one past mayor. The city is not large enough that being its mayor would be an automatic WP:NPOL pass in and of itself -- the one person here has an article for going on to become a provincial MLA, not for being mayor of Langley in and of itself -- so there are no other potential articles for this as things currently stand, and no prospect of more being created anytime soon. As always, a city does not automatically get one of these the moment one former mayor has an article -- they are not created until at least five or six former mayors have articles to file in it. Bearcat (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:32, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge (also the councillors cat). A city of 25000 does not need such a split it is too small. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:56, 18 March 2017 (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:Sharjah (emirate)[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 22:35, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To achieve consistency with the other emirates. This was opposed as a Speedy nomination on the grounds that the sub-cats were not also nominated. However, there is no need to change the sub-categories – see the contents of Category:Emirates of the United Arab Emirates, especially of Category:Emirate of Abu Dhabi‎. – Fayenatic London 20:37, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of speedy nomination
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:2017 Alpine Skiing World Cup[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:50, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No longer needed after deletion of sub-pages, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 Alpine Skiing World Cup/Men's Alpine Combined. – Fayenatic London 20:26, 12 March 2017 (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:Perth City Link precinct[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, as the category's creator has not demonstrated that the "precinct" has an identity of its own, separate from the development project Perth City Link. – Fayenatic London 19:56, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename to align with article Perth City Link. Speedy rename was declined. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:52, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion

Comment - Perth city link and its connotations in the media do not necessarily fit the 'Perth City Link' - they can be seen to be different JarrahTree 07:59, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It may be helpful if the {{cat explanation}} on Category:Perth City Link precinct explicitly and unambiguously stated the intended scope of the category, in particular whether it is the same as or different to the scope of the Perth City Link article. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:01, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the Project is that - a 'development project' , the 'precinct' is the land in/on which it is contained - I fail to see how the two are seen as synonymous to encourage this form of action. JarrahTree 09:17, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I fail to see how the project and the land are distinguishable in terms of providing content for the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:22, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment in that case maybe it needs to go somehwere else than speedy JarrahTree 15:03, 12 March 2017 (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:Alumni of business schools[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, it has already been implemented (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:45, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, suggest we sort alumni by school/college Aloneinthewild (talk) 17:36, 12 March 2017 (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:Dallas Tennis Classic[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 here. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:13, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Tournament changed names. Even the tournament on the Dallas Tennis Classic redirects to Irving. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:25, 12 March 2017 (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:Jews who immigrated to the United Kingdom to escape Nazism[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. – Fayenatic London 20:00, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename to same format as Category:Jewish emigrants from Nazi Germany to the United States‎. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:15, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. It's not just about Jews who emigrated from Germany, but from all over Nazi-occupied or to-be-occupied-in-the-near-future Europe. Nothing wrong with the current title. Although the proposed category could certainly be created as a sub-category. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:23, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subcategorize. I agree with User:Necrothesp that there are articles about Jews who escaped to the United Kingdom from other countries in Europe, but looking over the category, the vast majority seems to come from Nazi Germany. I propose making a separate category Category:Jewish emigrants from Nazi Germany to the United Kingdom and making it a subcategory of the existing category. Werónika (talk) 19:51, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • In a sample I hadn't found any emigrants from other countries in Europe (except from Austria after it became part of Nazi Germany in 1938) and it is indeed highly unlikely that we have more than a handful of articles regarding people escaped to the United Kingdom from other countries because emigrating the midst of war (since 1939/1940) was very difficult. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:29, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, many of the Kindertransport refugees (a subcat of this one) for a start didn't come from Germany; they came from Czechoslovakia and Poland (as did others in the main cat). Nazi expansionism began in 1938, remember, not 1939 or 1940, and non-German Jews from threatened countries starting fleeing from that time. French, Belgian, Dutch and Scandinavian Jews also fled before the advancing German forces even after the war began. And European Jewish names often look German even if the people didn't actually come from Germany. Lumping all these people together as German when they weren't is inaccurate. And removing them from a renamed category (as we would have to do to avoid such inaccuracy) is certainly not a step forward. Yes, it's true that most of these people were from Germany, but certainly not all, so what is the problem with creating the proposed cat as a subcat? -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:40, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, because I don't have a problem with it as it is at the moment! -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:16, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split -- The simple way of doing this is to move articles to subcats until this has no articles, and then upmerge. I am not volunteering, but suggest that if this is agreed the CFD be left open while this happens. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:08, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done, so the discussion may be closed. The opposition against the rename proposal was justified. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:36, 31 March 2017 (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:National Basketball Association on radio[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 22:46, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It appears this category was moved without discussion last June (2016). The proposed rename is the category's original name, and would match similarly named categories such as Category:Major League Baseball on the radio and Category:National Football League on the radio, as well as the related template {{NBA on the radio}}. Please also note that the associated talk page was not moved properly and now serves as a redirect to the original talk page target. Levdr1lp / talk 07:07, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
At first I was going to depopulate one category and populate the other on my own, but I wasn't sure if the edit history for the original must be preserved or not (and I couldn't move the category back to its original name which by then already had a soft redirect), hence this rename request. Levdr1lp / talk 07:20, 12 March 2017 (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:Hispanic and Latino-American people[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. – Fayenatic London 20:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I looked through all of the Category:Hispanic and Latino American subcategories, and there seems to be some disagreement over whether to spell it with the hyphen ("Hispanic and Latino-American") or without the hyphen ("Hispanic and Latino American"). There are 14 categories with the hyphen and 106 categories without (e.g. Category:Hispanic and Latino American, Category:Hispanic and Latino American culture in Boston, Category:Hispanic and Latino American novelists, Category:LGBT Hispanic and Latino American culture), so the overwhelming consensus seems to be to write it without the hyphen. Standardizing one version would make the categories more internally consistent. Werónika (talk) 03:59, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Although as a general rule I don't work with this tree particularly often, when I do have to do something with it it's a major inconvenience to always have to double check whether any individual category is with hyphen or without. Bearcat (talk) 21:34, 12 March 2017 (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:Pleistocene paleontological sites of Europe[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. – Fayenatic London 20:07, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: excessive number of categories All the best Wikirictor 01:00, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • REname to Category:Paleontological sites of Europe -- AS far as I can make out Paleontology refers to the period of the Pleistocene, immediately preceding Holocene. In archaeology the equivalent is Palaeolithic. Paleontology needs a definition in a headnote, which will no doubt mention the relationship to Pleistocene. If I am wrong in my interpretation, please tell me. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:17, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, this category is part of a complete tree by continent. It shouldn't be nominated without the Pleistocene paleontological sites categories of the other continents. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:00, 18 March 2017 (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/2017_March_12&oldid=1138411115"