Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 December 12

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

December 12[edit]

Category:Black River District[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. Although the support for renaming was not unanimous, I feel that there is a general consensus to rename. Those suggesting a rename feel that consistency with the page name is important (which I discounted since we could equally easily move the article again) and that we usually do not translate place names. Opposers felt that on the English Wikipedia, English names should be preferred. Both sides made solid points and this decision was not easy. However I feel this discussion is enough to show that consensus exists. delldot ∇. 04:43, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the district is Rivière Noire which mean Black River in French, if this one is translated, then the name of all the other districts, towns and villages will have to be translate, better stick to the original name, i already move the article, its category need to be move, and the actual one a redirect to the new one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingroyos (talk • contribs) 15:52, 12 December 2012

  • Rename per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:29, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless it can be shown that there is no English common name. Reading the articles and categories, it seems that there are English names available for most of the Category:Districts of Mauritius so I wonder why this is one of the few exceptions especially considering the edit comment when the article was moved. If this means renaming the article, then so be it. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:03, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to match the article name. In general categories and articles should match.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:11, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:Vegaswikian you are wrong, all the districts have French word, non of them have English names nor they has been translated into english.Kingroyos (talk) 05:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Grand Port District‎ is not English? Vegaswikian (talk) 06:16, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Port is both an english and french word, while Grand mean big in french and magnificent in english, however the original one is the french version as all districts, towns and villages are in french.Kingroyos (talk) 10:21, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • So are you saying that the name is not in English? For the record, grand in English means large among other things, but my dictionary does not include magnificent. Big and large seem to be the same, so any arguments that this example is not in English seems rather weak. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename. We don't translate foreign names for country subdivisions, except for really bland cases like Category:Provinces of Rwanda (cf. Provinces of Rwanda), and perhaps we should not even translate that one. – Fayenatic London 21:02, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is English Wikipedia after all. Benkenobi18 (talk) 21:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom to match article name. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:16, 22 December 2012 (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:Rabbis in Ottoman and British Palestine[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: split then delete. delldot ∇. 05:43, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Split then delete. Procedural nomination following approval to split head category for "Jews in..." at CFD Nov 13. Note: I have started doing a split already, but deletion requires approval at CFD. – Fayenatic London 20:34, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split then delete per nom. "Ottoman Palestine" and "British Palestine" refer to different points of Palestinian history. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:28, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split per nom. It does not make sense to have a limited timeframe category that covers to time frames that we have to refer to with different names.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:13, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split per nom. "Ottoman Palestine" covers the period from 1516/1517 to World War I. While British Palestine only covers a few decades of the 20th-century. Why mix them? Dimadick (talk) 13:01, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split per nom -- This follows a previous CFD for a parent category. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:51, 14 December 2012 (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:Jewish Comintern 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: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge. WP:SMALLCAT as there is currently only one member. Merge without prejudice to re-creation if a worthwhile number of members can be identified. – Fayenatic London 20:24, 12 December 2012 (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:Roman hermits[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 per nom. The Bushranger One ping only 19:17, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The name "Ancient Roman" is too broad and may be taken to refer to the Roman Kingdom or the Roman Republic. This would be misleading as Christian saints could only refer to the period of the Roman Empire. Would also be consistent with the parent cat of Category:Christians in the Roman Empire. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:17, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. Got a bit trigger happy. Amended now and will mark for nomination. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:40, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In many (39%) cases, people+place is used. This is particularly true of Empires. Who says that it must take an adjectival form? The parent category, which has just emerged from CFD, has this form - Category:Christians in the Roman Empire. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:40, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. While I see John Pack Lambert's point, the name proposed by the nom seems better to me. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:27, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom -- My recollection is that this was mainly an eastern phenomenon, so that "in Roman Empire" is better than using the compound noun "Roman Empire" as if it was an adjective. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:57, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to Category:Hermits of the Roman era. This should be per time period than per political division (like a kingdom or empire). - jc37 07:48, 19 December 2012 (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:Elephant Micah[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. delldot ∇. 06:29, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not enough content —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:32, 12 December 2012 (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:The Presets[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. delldot ∇. 06:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Too little content —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:19, 12 December 2012 (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:Greeks in California[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. Creator of most of these has argued for deletion here, and the discussion is almost unanimous. Most contributors do not want these categories to be about bios. delldot ∇. 06:53, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I never mentioned California. Nurse!!. If there are problems with the articles, then get busy and fix the articles. Don't mess with the categories. Ephebi (talk) 03:54, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If the category names lead to miscategorization, as these do, then we should rename them. Anyway, we have renamed the parent categories, so we should rename the children to reflect this fact.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:15, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Hi. I just wanted to say that I created most of these categories, so I'm responsible for the misleading titles. I realize now that the proposed renames are better and clearer, as the categories I created are being used for biography articles when they should be used for institutions, historical articles, etc. So, my apologies for being an inconvenience and causing all this hassle. Cheers, Vis-a-visconti (talk) 14:59, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename, per JPL. Vis-a-visconti (talk) 14:59, 26 December 2012 (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:Sparkle (film series)[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. delldot ∇. 06:37, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. There is no such thing as a "Sparkle film series". There is a 1976 film and a 2012 remake. Of the three songs in the songs category only two are original to the films, making this a small category with little to no likelihood of expansion. The "series" category is also small with no growth potential. If there is the feeling for a need then a small template could be created, otherwise I think all of the articles can be reached by existing links between them. Buck Winston (talk) 18:26, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:24, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I have removed the 1905 written song that has no place in the songs category. Songs written 70 years before a film should not be categorized just because they were used in a film.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:16, 12 December 2012 (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:Adolfo Farsari photographs[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. delldot ∇. 06:42, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This was intended, i believe, to be a category for images posted to Wikipedia of this photographers work. the works are all at the Commons (as they should be), and this category's parent cat is for articles on particular photographs or sets of photographs, not for photographers. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:31, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I created this category just as described above, but now it seems to have no purpose. Mikael Häggström (talk) 07:31, 12 December 2012 (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:People of Upstate New York[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 to Category:People from New York. The Bushranger One ping only 19:18, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: This is a category which isn't useful as currently constituted, but could potentially be salvaged for a different purpose. As things currently stand, it's been added as a direct category declaration to just 17 people out of the thousands whom it could potentially be added to — and in most cases it's been added alongside, rather than replacing, Category:People from New York or "People from Specific City or County, New York". Which means, in other words, that in its current form it's a largely unused bit of category clutter which it would not be useful to apply comprehensively — however, since people from New York (as with all other US states) are already (or should be) subcategorized by the specific county or city that they come from, the alternative also exists of repurposing this as a container category for the upstate county categories instead of for individual people.

Upstate New York, for anyone who isn't familiar with the terminology, more or less means the entire state of New York once you exclude NYC and Long Island (including or excluding the northern NYC exurbs depending on who you talk to), so of the state's 62 counties, 50 would be in it right off the top, and then there'd be another five whose inclusion or exclusion would probably be a source of constant debate — so it might not actually be useful, as it would simply be an extra container category for 80 to 90 per cent of the categories that are already in Category:People by county in New York. And as there's also no actual "Upstate New York" category to parent it, it wouldn't actually add a new branch to the category tree, as its only potential parent would be Category:People from New York. And, of course, even if consensus decides that this is desirable, it needs to be named "people from", not "people of".

So what do we want to do, folks? Delete, or rename to Category:People from Upstate New York, remove it from the individual people and add it to the appropriate subcategories of Category:People by county in New York instead? Bearcat (talk) 05:13, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge to Category:People from New York. Upstate New York is not really a viabally unified area. It lacks any clear southern boundary for one thing. Some people would put Yonkers there, but lots of others would not.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:21, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge -- unless an area has a properly defined boundary, even it is "from" (which is better than "of"), on the southern margins of the area, it will be a POV issue whehter or not a person should be included. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:07, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom and per JPL & Peterkingiron. Regardless of whether it is desirable in principle to subcat ppl-by-US-state in this way, this particular grouping is too vague to make for a stable category. It doesn't quite fit with WP:OC#SUBJECTIVE, but vague categories such as this are routinely removed because they lead good faith editors into sterile and unsolveable disputes about the scope of the category. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:01, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Upstate New York is a very broad and semi-undefined area. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:22, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given that those upstate generally considered their part of the state excluding anything south of the northern edge of Westchester County, the demarcation point is clear. But given our article saying there are several opinions on that, a reluctant Merge as proposed. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:09, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I don't see why we can't do a county definition of 'Upstate New York'. My vote is for Rename, and keep. Benkenobi18 (talk) 21:16, 14 December 2012 (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:Anglican Missionary Bishops in China 1849-1949[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. delldot ∇. 05:10, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename. The capitalization on this category can be fixed, and the name is awfully specific. At least the date could be removed as unnecessary. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:51, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- There were no Anglican bishops in China before about that date. It is possible that the last expatriate bishop was not expelled until a few years after 1949, but essentially there is no possibility of sibling categories for other dates. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:09, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nominator and per Peterkingiron. The current title is unnecessarily specific. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:56, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:25, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (Rename) no-brainer here. Got a daughter category without a parent pbp 19:34, 13 December 2012 (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.

Samsun Province, Turkey, geography stubs[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 the second cat, which has already been done by someone else (speedied as an empty cat). delldot ∇. 04:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. I would lean toward throwing out the "Province" category, simply because there is only one other Turkey geography stub category using "Province" in the title. Or should we change the other dozen Turkey geo stubs to use "Province"? Dawynn (talk) 02:32, 12 December 2012 (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/2012_December_12&oldid=1088120484"