Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 November 12

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

November 12[edit]

Category:Libertarian organisations[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 (every users' !vote was considered only once). Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: to match List of libertarian organizations Rathfelder (talk) 23:07, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - organisations is also a valid spelling. If we are going down this path, we could easily argue "z" should be changed to "z". Leave it as it is, or organise a site-wide forum about which spelling people want to settle on. - Master Of Ninja (talk) 08:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: to match Category:Political organizations‎ Rathfelder (talk) 23:06, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - organisations is also a valid spelling. If we are going down this path, we could easily argue "z" should be changed to "z". Leave it as it is, or organise a site-wide forum about which spelling people want to settle on. - Master Of Ninja (talk) 08:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: to match Human rights organizations Rathfelder (talk) 22:55, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - organisations is also a valid spelling. If we are going down this path, we could easily argue "z" should be changed to "z". Leave it as it is, or organise a site-wide forum about which spelling people want to settle on. - Master Of Ninja (talk) 08:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

___

I have combined 3 similar noms. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for the reasons I set out in 2 noms of the previous day. This nom is an act of American imperialism. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, for consistency. Most organizations categories above country level already have a 'z', so why not all, making category names better predictable? Marcocapelle (talk) 18:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Peterkingiron is wrong to see the use of z an act of American imperialism. See American and British English spelling differences. I would very much like to organise a site-wide forum about which spelling people want to settle on. How is that to be done? Rathfelder (talk) 19:35, 15 November 2018 (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:Uniform Resource Locator[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. Timrollpickering 23:58, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The main article is URL. "URL" is ambiguous (see URL (disambiguation)), but the meaning found in the article URL is overwhelmingly the primary meaning. I would suspect that many people who would know what URL means would not know what "Uniform Resource Locator" means. I believe that it makes more sense to have the article and category match than have a category name that is 100% unambiguous. Note that a subcategory uses the abbreviation: Category:URL-shortening services. (This was opposed at CFD speedy rename.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:45, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of speedy discussion
  • Oppose - Note argument about "URL shortening services", however the "shortening services" gives that title context. URL by itself does not, so the current category is more informative, and better suited. - Master Of Ninja (talk) 08:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Creates un-necessary ambiguity. The abbreviation works in the sub-cat Category:URL-shortening services, because the extra two words give it context and remove ambiguity; but as a bare title, it is ambiguous. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:32, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's unlikely anyone will think that "URL" in a category name refers to the "upper rostral length of a cephalopod beak" – especially when one considers the category in the context of the parent categories and subcategory. Category:London is ambiguous as well, but we don't have a problem using it because it's the overwhelming primary meaning – and it matches the main article London. The same principles can apply here. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:39, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK, I have struck my oppose. After checking the v low usage of the alternative names, I reckon the other terms are so obscure that I will make an exception to the general principle that category names should be unambiguous. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:02, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the risk of contamination by stray cephalopod beaks seems likely to be low. Oculi (talk) 09:07, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Cats should match the article title in all cases. UnitedStatesian (talk) 00:05, 23 November 2018 (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:Youth organisations in 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. Timrollpickering 12:34, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: to match Category:Youth organizations by continent‎ Rathfelder (talk) 22:42, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - support 'organization' at every level above country level (following Category:Organizations). Oculi (talk) 09:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • NO"!!!!!!! -- The European spelling follows Latin, French, Swedish and other languages in using the S-spelling. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - organisations is also a valid spelling. If we are going down this path, we could easily argue "z" should be changed to "z". Leave it as it is, or organise a site-wide forum about which spelling people want to settle on. - Master Of Ninja (talk) 08:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • As the United Kingdom is part of Europe, we should be a bit more considerate with European categories. It should probably become part of the RFC that has been announced before, by User:BrownHairedGirl. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • As Category:Organisations based in Europe currently uses "s" consistently, that tree should be considered as a whole. However, it would best be dealt with as part of a wider RFC. – Fayenatic London 12:49, 22 November 2018 (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:Organisations with royal patronage[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) 23:59, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match Category:Organizations by establishing entity. Some of the subcats are in the Commonwealth, some aren't. Rathfelder (talk) 22:35, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - support 'organization' at every level above country level (following Category:Organizations). Oculi (talk) 09:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - organisations is also a valid spelling. If we are going down this path, we could easily argue "z" should be changed to "z". Leave it as it is, or organise a site-wide forum about which spelling people want to settle on. - Master Of Ninja (talk) 08:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename The main article is Organization, and that's stable since 2008. This should follow that, as it's not a country-related category. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:54, 25 November 2018 (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.

Medical and health organizations by medical specialty[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. Timrollpickering 12:36, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Moved from WP:CFDS
 – Rathfelder (talk) 20:13, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
.
  • Rename, this could have been speedied as User:Oculi correctly points out. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all. These were opposed as Speedy nominations but could be approved here. IMHO it would be helpful to do so. – Fayenatic London 12:43, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all The main article is Organization, and that's stable since 2008. These should follow that, as they are not country-related categories. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:32, 23 November 2018 (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.

State Emergency Service of Ukraine[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: procedural close, see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_November_15#Category:State_Emergency_Service_of_Ukraine. – Fayenatic London 12:38, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Moved from WP:CFDS
 – Rathfelder (talk) 20:13, 12 November 2018 (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:American Solidarity Party[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:00, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I started the category in 2016 but I now believe it should be deleted. Category contains only one article that is unlikely to grow. TM 14:49, 12 November 2018 (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.

Potential speedies[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) 03:05, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
These global categories were all created by the prolific @Rathfelder: using UK English; see {{UKian}}. A switch to Oxford English - see {{British English Oxford spelling}} - would harmonise these with American usage. Each is an isolated instance with no ‘by country’ subcats or subcats using ‘organisation’ and renaming will introduce no inconsistencies anywhere. Each contains some American entities. 'Anesthesia organisations' is particularly awkward. Oculi (talk) 10:59, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes to all these. I have submitted myself to re-education. Rathfelder (talk) 11:01, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't "anaesthesia" the Oxford spelling of the first category? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:11, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fortunately "Anesthesia" is not a term used very much in the categorization system. Rathfelder (talk) 18:44, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's a subcat of Category:Anesthesiology organizations. Happy to concede that it's a US 'z' in this case. Oculi (talk) 21:28, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We dont care where the z comes from. Rathfelder (talk) 22:23, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all and stop this American imperialist tendency to impose a spelling not found in Latin, English (except American English), French, Swedish, etc on the rest of the world. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:10, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support consistency for global categories. DexDor (talk) 19:31, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all - organisations is also a valid spelling. If we are going down this path, we could easily argue "z" should be changed to "z". Leave it as it is, or organise a site-wide forum about which spelling people want to settle on. If want global consistency we should organise a poll to work out which spelling we want, or more happily let's just go with the flow. - Master Of Ninja (talk) 08:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suspect you wanted to reply to Peterkingiron. I claim nothing about imperialism. I just think if we do this, there is technically nothing stopping other users doing the opposite change (z to s). To do this properly, and prevent future edit wars on the topic of z vs s, my feeling is that there should be a policy at a higher level that we agree to use "s" or "z", not just on this topic but similar words that have alternate z/s spellings in the future. - Master Of Ninja (talk) 19:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The point is that the 'ize' of Shakespeare, the King James Bible and Samuel Johnson is acceptable globally whereas 'ise' is not. Accordingly global categories should follow Category:Organizations. Oculi (talk) 16:33, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, in organizations categories above country level the 'z' already dominates. Let's make it consistent. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:07, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support all. I would support harmonising of all national categories to use "z" as well, which would require a centralised discussion. However, these can go ahead if agreed here. – Fayenatic London 12:45, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all The main article is Organization, and that's stable since 2008. These should follow that, as they are not country-related categories. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:53, 25 November 2018 (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.

Categories:2007 in long track to 2010 in long track[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) 22:58, 22 November 2018 (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:Redlands Bulldogs basketball[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) 22:57, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Needed to differentiate men’s from women’s teams - more clear and leaves room for future creation of women’s category. Would meet consensus for college sport categories. Rikster2 (talk) 02:05, 12 November 2018 (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:Divisiones regionales de fútbol[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) 22:50, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Matching the article name (Divisiones Regionales de Fútbol). MYS77 ✉ 19:06, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 19:21, 12 November 2018 (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/2018_November_12&oldid=871735273"