Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 July 10

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:Kenneth Whiting class seaplane tenders. --Xdamr^talk 14:02, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Whiting class seaplane tenders to Category:Kenneth Whiting class seaplane tenders

Nominator's rationale: Rename. U.S. Navy classes are typically named for the full name of the lead ship, which in this case is USS Kenneth Whiting. The Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships identifies three of the four ships ([1], [2], and [3]) as Kenneth Whiting class ([4] is listed as Whiting class). Two other RS give the class name as Kenneth Whiting: Globalsecurity.org ([5]) and Navsource.org ([6], [7], [8], and [9]). — Bellhalla (talk) 19:50, 10 July 2009 (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: Rename to Category:Vernacular photography. --Xdamr^talk 14:03, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Photography, vernacular to Category:Vernacular photography

Nominator's rationale: Rename. The CfR was never completed. I am doing so on behalf of the nominator, and I agree that the proposed rename is better, per the main article Vernacular photography Now, whether or not others feel that this category has little room for growth is another matter. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• If kept, Rename to Category:Amateur photography. More readily understood term. ^{Carlaude:Talk} 06:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd be fine with that. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:27, 12 July 2009 (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: Delete per snow and G4 speedy. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sex symbols (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. This category is too subjective. It includes things like Boy band, Playboy, Jenna Jameson, and Girls with guns. It seems to just be a collection of things related to sex symbols and has no objective defining characteristic. Dismas|^(talk) 18:26, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. No future in it. (Sorry, I just read some of Steven Brust's books.) I mean, no clear purpose, no clear criteria for inclusion, no clear meaning. If the articles and categories were moved from other categories, rather than just being added to this one, restore the other categories. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no clear definition. Darrenhusted (talk) 18:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: There was a 2005 discussion closed as a no consensus keep and a second 2005 discussion resulting in a delete and a 2006 speedy delete as empty and previously deleted. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - per previous discussion of this any other similar categories. No objective inclusion criteria, requires POV and OR. Somebody calls pretty much every famous attractive person a "sex symbol" or the like. Otto4711 (talk) 19:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as there is no clear method for identifying the rationale for an article's inclusion. Plastikspork (talk) 21:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as recreation of previously deleted category. (Also delete as a completely POV form of categorization - it doesn't contain men, especially Brad Pitt ;) That's a joke, folks.) Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete pretty much per everybody above. Category created and populated today (my time) by lone editor with idiosyncratic seletion criteria. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 02:59, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete because of lack of criteria. Debresser (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete one person's sex symbol....let's not go there. Subjective is a kind word about this cat. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unuseful category, and certaily misused currently. The category has such child categories as Category:Barbie, Category:Polyamory, Category:Celibacy(!!!) etc. No objective definition of what should be included. Jafeluv (talk) 08:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Totally subjective. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as G4, and salt because it just keeps f@ckin' coming back over and over again. Bearcat (talk) 19:54, 14 July 2009 (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 Category:18th century in the United Kingdom to Category:18th Century in Great Britain. --Xdamr^talk 13:48, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:18th Century in Great Britain to Category:18th century in the United Kingdom

Nominator's rationale: Merge. Duplicate category. Tim! (talk) 17:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Was there a "United Kingdom" in the 18th century? It was formed by the Act of Union (1800) and came into being in 1801. That being so, Category:18th Century in Great Britain is the better named. AllyD (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Reverse merge as per AllyD comment Mayumashu (talk) 06:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Down (reverse) merge as per AllyD and Mayumashu ^{Carlaude:Talk} 06:39, 11 July 2009 (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: Rename to Category:Order of Leopold recipients. --Xdamr^talk 13:49, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Order of Léopold recipients to Category:Order of Leopold recipients

Nominator's rationale: The actual article is without the accent (since a move in November 2007). The category should reflect this. English name for the king is without accent. Fram (talk) 14:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nominator. No accents in categories. Debresser (talk) 22:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• No problem, but renaming should be to Order of Leopold (Belgium) as there are two Orders of Leopold (Belgium and Austria) whoch are clearly distinct orders. This category only refers to the Belgian one. Bheuninckx (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:12, 13 July 2009 (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 to Category:Tamagotchi. --Xdamr^talk 13:50, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Tamagotchi Versions to Category:Tamagotchi versions

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Technical nomination. Found as incomplete doing cleanup. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Upmerge - to Category:Tamagotchi. No reason I can see for breaking these three articles out from their only parent, especially since two of them are already there. If kept, rename to Category:Tamagotchi releases to match List of Tamagotchi releases. Otto4711 (talk) 19:39, 10 July 2009 (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: Rename to Category:Hochschule für Musik Hanns Eisler alumni for consistency with the parent article and Category:Alumni by university or college in Germany. --Xdamr^talk 14:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Alumni of the Hochschule für Musik "Hanns Eisler" to Category:Alumni of the Hochschule für Musik "Hanns Eisler", Berlin

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Technical nomination. Found as incomplete doing cleanup. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I think it is not neccesary to add "Berlin", since there's only one Hochschule für Musik "Hanns Eisler". In Germany there're hochschules that have no name (ie. Hochschule für Musik, Munchen), and in that case it is neccesary to specify the city. The name of the city is not neccesary here, as it is not neccesary with "The Juilliard School" ("Category:Alumni of the Juilliard School, NY"?) or "The Royal Academy of Music" ("Category:Alumni of the Royal Academy of Music, London"?). Thank you. --Karljoos (talk) 19:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Preceding comment copied from the category talk page. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments – the article is Hochschule für Musik Hanns Eisler; it would be nice if the 2 names were to be harmonised. Category:Royal Academy of Music doesn't mention London so as Karljoos says there seems to be no need for 'Berlin'. Another point is that Category:Alumni by university or college in Germany uses 'Foo alumni', not 'Alumni of Foo' (except for music); although these names are so long that 'Alumni of' is perhaps preferable. Occuli (talk) 08:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The website of the school (English version) calls it The Academy of Music Hanns Eisler Berlin (no quotes, no commas). The German version is Die Hochschule für Musik Hanns Eisler Berlin. Occuli (talk) 09:11, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Which was the similar ?Schubert, Leipzig? one we had a week or two ago? We added the city there I think. Ok, it was Category:Alumni of the Hochschule für Musik Carl Maria von Weber Dresden - but I think that should have the comma also. Johnbod (talk) 14:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• It was Category:Academics of the Hochschule für Musik "Carl Maria von Weber", Dresden, not the alumni. We don't put commas (or quotes, surely) into proper names, eg University College London, Category:University College London. And why is it in German unlike most of its non-musical siblings in Category:Alumni by university or college in Germany? Occuli (talk) 15:33, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dresden is not part of the proper name - the academics have a comma & the alumni should do too. The language question is valid - but it would sound silly literally translated as "High school". Johnbod (talk) 17:59, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Their translation is 'The Academy of Music Hanns Eisler Berlin' (no quotes, no commas). (And the other one, according to its website www.hfmdd.de is 'Hochschule für Musik Carl Maria von Weber Dresden'.) Occuli (talk) 23:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but then the article needs moving. Johnbod (talk) 00:04, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename for clarity, consistency with article, & per other debate (above). Maybe no comma - see above.Johnbod (talk) 14:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Disagree per Karljoos as not needed for disambiguation. Debresser (talk) 22:53, 11 July 2009 (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: Delete Category:Philip K. Dick Memorial Award and Category:Philip K. Dick Memorial Award winner. --Xdamr^talk 14:00, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Philip K. Dick Memorial Award to Category:Philip K. Dick Award

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Technical nomination. Was an incomplete speedy that is not eligible as a speedy so listing here. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - category is not necessary to hold the single article on the award and the subcat of award winners. The award, given by a state-level science fiction fan club, does not appear to be sufficiently prestigious to warrant a category either for the award or its winners. Otto4711 (talk) 19:25, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• I agree completely with Otto4711. Category:Philip K. Dick Memorial Award winner should be speedily renamed to Category:Philip K. Dick Memorial Award winners. Debresser (talk) 22:51, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the subcat Category:Philip K. Dick Memorial Award winner

Rename Category:Philip K. Dick Memorial Award to Category:Philip K. Dick Award

It's the Philip K. Dick Award (Philip K. Dick Award), see

http://www.philipkdickaward.org/ The official award homepage

http://www.philipkdick.com/links_pkdaward.html

http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/index.html Major Awards

http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/Pkd.html

http://www.strangehorizons.com/2002/20020415/awards.shtml

--Ultramarinblau1969 (talk) 00:22, 12 July 2009 (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: Rename to Category:Naat Khawans. --Xdamr^talk 13:52, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Naat khawans to Category:Naat Khawans

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Technical nomination for an incomplete nomination. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note the main article is at Naat and the category appears to be for an occupation based on the included article infoboxes. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Question Why should be rename to a second capital? We never have second capitals, with exeption of proper names. Debresser (talk) 23:02, 11 July 2009 (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: rename to Category:SyFy original programs. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Sci Fi Channel shows to Category:Syfy original programming

Nominator's rationale: To match new channel name and better clarify that it is for their original shows and not just anything that airs on it -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 02:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:SyFy original programs - there's not a whole lot of uniformity for these sorts of categories, but recent CFDs have expressed a preference for "programs". Currently no categories use "programming". Otto4711 (talk) 19:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to Category:Syfy original programs - Syfy is used instead of SyFy on their website and elsewhere. Also per above. ^{Carlaude:Talk} 06:51, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Programs sounds fine to me as well. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 06:51, 11 July 2009 (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: No Consensus. --Xdamr^talk 14:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Sci Fi Channel original films to Category:Sci Fi Pictures original films

Nominator's rationale: To match the company name used on the films rather than the channel name (basically reversing someone's replacing of the original cat with a less correct one) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 02:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:Syfy original films - Per above. Please cite continuing use of the old "Sci Fi" (or "Sci Fi Pictures") if it is still used on the films but not other programs.^{Carlaude:Talk} 06:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree completely here. Syfy is still calling it Sci Fi Original Pictures and not Syfy, same as they retained the name Sci Fi Wire, unless you've seen a source saying otherwise. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 06:59, 11 July 2009 (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.