Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 February 12

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

February 12[edit]

Category:1912 establishments in the United States Virgin Islands[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:45, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: anachronism. In 1912, the islands were the Danish West Indies. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:22, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. While I'm not disputing that the name of the islands were different back in 1912, that is hardly how anyone would find a topic of interest on those islands today. If the name is the reason for the deletion, then I definitely oppose, since I believe it is the right name. We are supporting 21st century readers, not 20th century ones. Perhaps a redirect to the Danish West Indies could also be added to reflect the history of the islands.
Now that being said, I see that the category is empty. That seems like a more serious consideration for why this category should be deleted. A really paranoid android (talk) 11:41, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • DElete -- The present category is now empty. This probably due to articles being moved to a Danish WI cat, which is crossreferenced to the US Virgin Islands tree. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:33, 17 February 2019 (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:Medieval Iraqi 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: relisted at WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 March 19#Category:Medieval_Iraqi_people. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:34, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge/rename, Iraqi people is anachronistic in the Middle Ages, until halfway the 13th century Iraq was part of the Abbasid Caliphate. This nomination is related to this other discussion. Note: a few articles are not about people of the Abbasid Caliphate, either because they are pre-Abbasid (before 750) or post-Abbasid (after 1250), in that case they may instead be added e.g. to an Arab category. So if agreed this requires a manual merge/rename (@closing admin: in that case please add this to WP:CFDWM). Marcocapelle (talk) 22:01, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the principle but I am not sure that "of" is the right proposition, perhaps "under", The caliphs were a ruling dynasty, not a nationality. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:36, 17 February 2019 (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.

OECD[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 all per nominator. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:13, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: The title of the main article in this category has been changed from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to the OECD. Beagel (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As for the main article, it was moved after requested move discussion here based on WP:ACRONYMTITLE exemption (the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and that abbreviation is not even primarily but in this case only associated with the subject. It is not ambiguous. As for the request to rename these categories, the logic is that category names usually follow the naming of the main article in that category. The OECD is not different from the category:NATO or the category:NASA – in both cases the abbreviation is not expanded for the very same reason. Beagel (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support/Correct Venue per WP:C2D. I agree with Peterkingiron about the article name. But, there was a Requested Move for that rename and I'm not going to disagree with that outcome here in the wrong venue. Having articles and categories mismatched hinders navigation. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:07, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, the earlier RM should be leading here. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:39, 13 February 2019 (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:Wikipedia education userboxes[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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:24, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Both categories are longstanding, but I cannot see any distinction. As far as I can see, all user templates are userboxes. – Fayenatic London 13:52, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No strong opinion ,but seems fine. It's so many years since I worked on these. --Chriswaterguy talk 03:47, 14 February 2019 (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:!Userboxes for occupations[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:23, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category to Category:Profession user templates. This was recently created, containing two templates that are academic rather than occupational; I have recategorised one, and added the other into a suitable academic category, so there is no need to merge. – Fayenatic London 13:26, 12 February 2019 (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/2019_February_12&oldid=888470926"