Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 September 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< September 3 September 5 >

September 4[edit]

Category:Nutritional advice[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 to Category:Nutrition guides. There's a clear consensus to rename, and while there isn't a strong consensus to a specific target, "Nutrition guides" has the most support due to the main article at List of nutrition guides. Any future discussions about a better name should probably play out over WP:RM for that article. bibliomaniac15 19:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The term "Nutritional advice" is a little too fuzzy to serve as a category name, whereas "Nutrition [or dietary] guidelines" captures the actual content of this category with real clarity. Anomalous+0 (talk) 22:27, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, there is an article List of nutrition guides, which might suggest Category:Nutrition guides as the best category name. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:46, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I took a look at Google Scholar, and the term "Nutrition guides" hardly shows up at all there, whereas "Nutrition guidelines" gets tens of 1000s of hits. [But wait, there's more.] While I was at it, I also checked on the term "Dietary guidelines" - and discovered that it gets even more hits than "Nutrition guidelines". So I guess Category:Dietary guidelines should get serious consideration as well. Anomalous+0 (talk) 00:14, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom to Category:Nutrition guidelines maybe. Although I'd say that's a very small advantage in wording. The US and Australia seem to like 'Dietary' as I chequed but I'd suppose it to sound narrow as a notion/wording. --Just N. (talk) 20:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus is to rename, but the best target still isn't clear.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 17:34, 4 September 2021 (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:Ottoman emigrants to England[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 September 19#Category:Ottoman emigrants to England

Category:Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects[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 to Category:Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (United Kingdom). Taking into account the consensus for the UK disambiguator, as well as the convention to use the full name in categories. bibliomaniac15 19:36, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Reason 1 - change case - no need for caps. Reason 2 - Wikipedia is global, these are projects in England and Wales. 10mmsocket (talk) 17:45, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree regarding the scope, but the caps is based on the Government's official naming, rather than an arbitrary Wikipedia editor of 'big'. FDent (talk) 18:11, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I assumed this was subjective but it's an official government label, but I'm not convinced it's a defining label. - RevelationDirect (talk) 23:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree - UK government civil servants are as lax as many Wikipedia editors in their capital letter fetish. As with, for example Police and crime commissioner which is used with and without caps all over the place, there is no compelling reason for capitalisation of every word. 10mmsocket (talk) 10:16, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Support adding England and Wales, but Keep capitalisation. This is for projects so designated by a government agency. Without capitals this becomes a POV category depending on the editor's opinion of it. It should be Category:Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (England). Despite how it is parented, all the projects are in England; I suspect that is because Welsh ones would be under the developed administration of Wales, perhaps with a Welsh name. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 07:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC) [reply]
  • Oppose. I've taken advice from a senior civil servant in the Planning Inspectorate. Although most of the projects are in England the scope is not limited to England. Some big projects in Wales, Scotland and NI are included, though the rules for them are different. and they are sufficiently significant that we could expect articles about them.Rathfelder (talk) 20:15, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per Peterkingiron's logic above, keep the capitalization but specify what country or countries are involved. As a non UK person I never would have guessed based on the category name that it's their term. Dan Carkner (talk) 19:06, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 10:40, 4 September 2021 (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:Balto (film)[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) 05:46, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. Expansion very unlikely. It looks as if the two articles are already in the parent categories so no need for a merge. No Great Shaker (talk) 09:25, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Even if the 3rd movie were restored to standalone article status, it would probably fall under WP:SMALLCAT with not much potential for expansion unless the series were somehow rebooted.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 21:13, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. I'm sure there were promotional toys and coloring books and happy meals too, but this 'franchise' doesn't warrant a category. --Animalparty! (talk) 22:34, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:SMALLCAT. --Lenticel (talk) 08:41, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Orientls (talk) 17:49, 9 September 2021 (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:Deans of law schools in India[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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A subcat of Category:Law school deans where the rest of the subcats are for prominent law schools rather than based on nationalities of the Deans. I added some of the pages that were under this category under Category:Indian legal scholars because it didn't make sense to have two categories that had a majority of pages in both categories prior to my edits. The legal scholars category is essentially the same. Also, the user who created this category has been blocked indefinitely. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Indian legal scholars. The definition in the headnote fails to limit it to people who hold the appointment of Dean, which I understand to be the head of a division of a university, more senior and more wide-ranging than a professor who is head of a department. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Question - Is a dean a scholar? - jc37 13:55, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They can be, but we have two categories with the same purpose. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:19, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So, then yours is a delete vote. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:37, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, I think it can be kept or deleted, just not merged. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's better to be deleted because it's redundant to the already superseding category. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:17, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiCleanerMan: No, it is not redundant. See my !vote below: you misread the category's title. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:54, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to Category:Law school deans. bibliomaniac15 19:28, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The nomination is based on a misreading of the category's title. It is based on the location of the law school, and not as WikiCleanerMan claims based on nationalities of the Deans. Since those deans are not necessarily Indian, @Peterkingiron's suggestion of a merge to Category:Indian legal scholars would be wrong.
The parent Category:Law school deans is getting large, and could use more sub-categories, both by-school, and by-country-where-the-school is. Deleting this category would be a step backwards. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:51, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 08:05, 4 September 2021 (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:Fictional sealed locations[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) 06:00, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Whether a location is "sealed" or not seems like an arbitrary thing to base a category on, and there are hardly any category members that are actual locations. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 07:35, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Even the entries that are actually about locations are all over the place — i.e., it is unclear what the category is supposed to be about. As Category:Fictional locations is a container category, entries should be reloacted to other subcategories, where applicable. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:04, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Most of these articles do not cover locations at all. Dimadick (talk) 21:02, 9 September 2021 (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:Politics of Cabinda[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 to Category:Cabinda independence movement. bibliomaniac15 19:38, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, this is neither about the politics of the Republic of Cabinda nor strictly speaking about the politics of the Province of Cabinda. The proposed name probably covers the content of the category best. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 4 September 2021 (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.

Frederick College athletics categories[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) 11:15, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rename all to correspond with correct naming convention for college sports teams. Verification of Lions nickname found in this Daily Press article from 2006. SportsGuy789 (talk) 00:14, 4 September 2021 (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/2021_September_4&oldid=1045166481"