Category:Joint Enclaves in the United States[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. -- Black Falcon(talk) 03:16, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Made up term that, at best, rests upon a very loose and ultimately ambiguous use of the term "enclave". WP:OR and WP:NONDEFINING. postdlf (talk) 23:27, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Creator's explanation: I welcome this discussion, because I am in doubt about how best to handle this.
As I was adding cities to the Enclaves in the United States, I encountered the issue that, while there are dozens of U.S. cities which are completely surrounded by other cities, there are about an equal number which, though often referred to as enclaves, in fact shared an enclave with another municipality.
For example, you could say that Beverly Hills, California is an enclave within Los Angeles, because Los Angeles territory completely surrounds it -- but it doesn't meet the expected enclave criteria of adjoining exactly one other city. Rather, Beverly Hills and West Hollywood are TOGETHER surrounded by Los Angeles.
I note that the article List of enclaves and exclaves (which I have never edited) lists several joint or shared enclaves, including Beverly Hills/West Hollywood and Culver City/Ladera Heights in Los Angeles, Norridge/Harwood Heights in Chicago, Highland Park/Hamtramck in Detroit, Elmwood Place/St. Bernard in Cincinnati, Highland Park/University Park in Dallas, two enclaves in Houston (one with three cities, the other with six). The article refers to several enclaves as "the combination of" a list of cities; in three cases (in Bangladesh, Germany, and the U.S.) they are called "composite enclaves".
My intent was NOT to "make up" a term, but to use an ordinary word to describe the situation.
If the category is retained, I would advocate changing the category name, to use "shared" instead of "joint". Kestenbaum (talk) 02:40, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unnecessary categorization. DexDor(talk) 05:35, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, trivial characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:30, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I love a good enclave myself, but these are too trivial, even for me. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:12, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, these entries don't qualify. postdlf (talk) 13:39, 22 October 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.
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.
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary categories, none of them include enough articles to meet the threshold for stub categories, and they have no hope of being populated. Delete categories, and upmerge templates to Category:Western (genre) film stubs. Fortdj33 (talk) 13:23, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd question the "no hope of being populated", given the number of redlinks still remaining on articles such as List of Western films of the 1990s, but certainly they're not currently at the necessary stub threshold for separate categories. Delete for now, with no prejudice against them being recreated if and when... Grutness...wha? 23:56, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PS - support RedRose's amendment to a double-upmerging of each. Grutness...wha? 01:40, 16 October 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:Sports governing bodies of Uzbekistan[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. -- Black Falcon(talk) 04:29, 22 October 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:Ancient Jewish history of Roman Republic and Roman Empire eras[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.
Nominator's rationale: merge or reverse merge overlapping categories. See the picture at the category talk page, the picture makes perfect sense until you realize that in this case the white top category is a history category in and by itself, so that a blue subcategory is redundant. Note: I have tagged all six categories, thus allowing a merge or a reverse merge either way. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:25, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly merge these -- However I wonder whether the Republic/Empire split is a useful one, when the crucial dates are the Fall of Jerusalem in about AD 70 and the final Jewish rebellion in AD 135. I expect there is nothing to include between the foundation of the Republic and about the 70s BC when Pompey conquered the whole region. Thus perhaps merge all to Category:Jews and Judaism in the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, which may need splitting into categories relating to Judea and the diaspora in exile after the rebellions. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:32, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(as nom) I wouldn't have an objection against the previous proposal to merge all six categories into one. From Jewish perspective the distinction between Republic and Empire is quite trivial. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:49, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep since these categories focus on specific categories and known periods of Roman history that these changes would destroy. If it ain't broke, don't "fix" it! IZAK (talk)
@IZAK: By this comment it seems like you're opposing merging Republic and Empire categories. What about the original nomination, to merge history and history categories? Marcocapelle (talk) 06:28, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose all merge proposals as they just do away with useful categories from the Roman POV since this is about both Roman and Jewish history and cannot be swung in either direction to come up with artificial reasons to either merge or delete. Thanks. IZAK (talk) 21:30, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The proposal as originally nominated does not propose to merge categories from different Roman eras or different Jewish eras, it just proposes to merge categories with an identical scope. That is not a very artificial reason. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:08, 17 October 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.
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.
Nominator's rationale:merge, the category hinders navigation in the sense that if you are in Category:Christian music it's not very intuitive that the well populated Category:Church music and Category:Contemporary Christian music can only be found via this genres category. A direct link would be much more transparent. Besides a categorization by genre is a bit questionable at this level, the music genre is actually "religious music" so this category contains sub-sub-genres. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:01, 14 October 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.
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.
Nominator's rationale: Not 100% certain of the intent of this category, but seems duplicative of Wikipedians in Canada. VegaDark (talk) 07:19, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I'm no expert, so forgive me if I'm wrong, but I would have thought it would be "Wikipediens en Canada" anyway. As far as I know, "au Canada" is the national anthem. Grutness...wha? 11:14, 16 October 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.
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. -- Black Falcon(talk) 03:43, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom, with a Z. Grutness...wha? 23:58, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge To match the parent cat. AusLondonder (talk) 18:13, 16 October 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:Homeland's Gratitude Medal recipients[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. -- Black Falcon(talk) 04:38, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Homeland's Gratitude Medal comes in different grades for 20, 15, 10 and 5 years of service in the Croatian armed forces. Serving in the military is defining but receiving an award for serving an arbitrary number of years is not. I listed the recipients of the award here.- RevelationDirect (talk) 00:31, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Appears to be awarded for length of service only, not for merit. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:41, 16 October 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.
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.
When foreign leaders visit Oman, or vice versa, one of these awards is given out as souvenir to commemorate the visit. Japanese Emeperor Akihito, Malaysian Sultan Perak, and Queen Elizabeth all have received two of these awards while none of the recipients are from Oman. If you want to see the clutter this type of category creates at the article level, take a look the train wreck at the bottom of this article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:31, 14 October 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.
Question: Does this need to be upmerged to Category:Enclaves in the United States? -- Black Falcon (talk) 04:29, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 October 23#Category:Ancient Jewish history of Roman Republic and Roman Empire eras. ℯxplicit 05:13, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
