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.
Delete one category, either Category:African diasporas or Category:African diaspora. But if the former then Category:Asian diasporas and Category:European diasporas should be renamed to “diaspora” also, ie to Category:Asian diaspora & Category:European diaspora (there is no category for North America, South America or Oceanian diasporas). Perhaps though as each continent category for diaspora is for a number of countries then the plural “diasporas” should be used for all continents, so retain only Category:African diasporas? PS: The article African diaspora does deal only with Sub-Saharan Africa, although the section on Italy notes that only a minority of people of African descent in Italy relate to Sub-Saharan Africa (and presumably the same applies to France, with many there from ex-North African colonies). Hugo999 (talk) 01:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
delete Category:African diasporas per nom Diaspora is used as a singular word in most all WP categories. No particular reason to make it plural. Hmains (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2011 (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:West Slavic countries
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.
DeleteUpmerge This appears to have something to do with the coloring of the map at right, but since I can find no explanation for that I question the meaningfulness of this category. Mangoe (talk) 13:50, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge to Category:Slavic countries. I can see no justification for this separately category (Also, I note that there are no corresponding East Slavic countries and South Slavic countries categories.) However, it should be upmerged into the parent category. Davshul (talk) 16:47, 25 December 2010 (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:Union College, New York alumni
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.
Keep -- Rename article back to Union College (New York), and use "Union college" as a dabpage. The NY college may be the oldest and thus have a claim to primacy, but the dabpage lists six Union Colleges. The proposed target is dangerous, because it will attract entries from other colleges. For that reason, while the article on Birmingham, England is at "Birmingham", its categories are at Birmingham, England, so that it does not attract articles on Birmingham, AL. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:33, 24 December 2010 (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:Basins of the Gulf of Mexico
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 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:Historical nations of Poland
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. This pair of nominations is over one empty category and a category with one member. With no strong consensus to keep, this can also be deleted under OC small. If anyone can find more articles to populate a better defined category in this area, they can do so. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would certainly agree that at most one of Category:Historical nations of Poland and Category:Historical nations in Poland should be kept. As for 2, this looks like a valid rationale for deletion. Occuli (talk) 01:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge this and "nations in" then Rename to Category:Tribes of Poland or Category:Ancient tribes of Poland, matching article Tribes of Poland and populate usinng that article. However, one of the tribes appears to be in Dacia (i.e. Roumania) not Poland. We also need a category for nations that preceding the present Poland, including Greater and Lesser Poland, Silesia, and the Grand Duchy of Warsaw; may be this already exists. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:44, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; The next problem with the Category:Tribes of Poland is, that it's a kind of "reverse history", like Category:Tribes of Soviet Union :)
The term "Tribes of Poland" can only describe the tribes of West Slavs that lived from around the mid-7th century to the creation of first Polish state by the Piast dynasty in the territories that became Polish.
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:Historical nations in Poland
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. This pair of nominations is over one empty category and a category with one member. With no strong consensus to keep, this can also be deleted under OC small. If anyone can find more articles to populate a better defined category in this area, they can do so. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:59, 5 January 2011 (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:Scheduled sporting events
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 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:America's Cup venues
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:As the category is currently empty, there is nothing to listify. Therefore, it is a delete.. Courcelles05:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Listify and delete as the city is not a "venue"; if retained it should be renamed "host cities" in line with the roughly analogous Category:Host cities of the Summer Olympic Games and Category:Host cities of the World Championships in Athletics.- choster (talk) 21:56, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was the category creator and confess to not thinking this through! I fully support a Listify approach which will enable America's Cup venue specifics such as courses etc to be properly described. The main article should be focussed on the challenges, results and changes to the cup format I would prefer a separate article America's Cup host cities and venues rather than List of America's Cup host cities and venues but I will fully support the majority decision on this. Boatman (talk) 19:12, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for coming to comment. To be honest I think people were just suggesting the article name starts "List of" because we were talking about a very basic listification. Once some more content gets fleshed out, that's a rubbish title (I think "list of" is worth avoiding unless necessary for clarification) so I think you should feel free to go ahead at America's Cup host cities and venues. TheGrappler (talk) 19:08, 31 December 2010 (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:Ukrainian soccer clubs outside of Ukraine
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.
Oppose. The common term is "soccer". While it is appropriate that soccer redirects to the formal title, making this change throughout the project reduces accessibility. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:43, 23 December 2010 (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:Islands in the West Indies
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 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:Naxos
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.
Keep the other cities have been just ruins for over 2000 years. There is no need for a seperate cat between the island and the city on it. Johnbod (talk) 23:15, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There are articles on the island and the main city. The category can and should cover the lot. If you set up an island category you might want a city one in addition. Johnbod (talk) 03:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No there absolutely isn't! The Sicilian one was abandoned for a better site in 358 BC, and hasn't even left any proper ruins, and it is unclear is the Cretan one ever actually existed. Both are as obscure as can be, whereas the island is a major tourist destination. Johnbod (talk) 04:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I'm too insignificant to avoid a finding of "absolutely" no chance of confusion, but I'm a reasonably well-read person, and I had heard of the Sicilian one in my line of work but was unaware of the island of the same name (except in the mythic sense), so I at least have anecdotal evidence that it's possible. (Admittedly, I have little interest in reading about or visiting Aegean islands and would not choose to pursue material about that topic.) In any case, that seems to be a debate more suitable to fixing the name of the article, not the category.
But with categories, don't we tend to default to disambiguation if there is a possible problem, especially if the category name is different from and more ambiguous than the article name, which this one is? These questions aren't being addressed directly. Good Ol’factory(talk)04:40, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom and per Occuli; the category name should match the article name, with an extra disambiguator if necessary. AFAICS, if there is a primary usage for "Naxos" there is a case to be made for Naxos Records, but for now the situation is that there is no primary usage. If anyone disagrees with that, please start with a WP:RM request. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 19:38, 23 December 2010 (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.
Native American tribes of South Carolina
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 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.
Dinghies by designer
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.
Propose renaming Category:Ian Proctor designs to Category:Dinghies designed by Ian Proctor or other (nom adjusted in comments below)
Propose renaming Category:Jack Holt Designs to Category:Dinghies designed by Jack Holt or other (nom adjusted in comments below)
Nominator's rationale:Rename. These are categories for dinghies by designer, so I think "dinghies" needs to appear somewhere in the category name. (Category:Ian Proctor dinghies and Category:Jack Holt dinghies are other options; this would mirror the naming pattern of Category:Buildings and structures by architect.) I am fine with either format. (These people did design non-dinghy things, but the parent category is Category:Dinghies, so I suppose it should be limited to dinghies they designed.) Good Ol’factory(talk)05:57, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Rename Either option is fine but I think the original options in the nom are clearer. The problem with "Ian Proctor dinghies" is that it doesn't make it clear whether Ian Proctor is a designer, a style named after a designer, the person/company who physically made the dinghies... lets keep it nice and clear. TheGrappler (talk) 23:02, 23 December 2010 (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:Yachts by name
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.
Nominator's rationale:Rename. The name of this category is not quite right; it is a little bit nonsensical, or at least somewhat redundant. Earlier this year there was discussion of the problematic nature of this category name in a discussion that resulted in the renaming of Category:Sailboat names to Category:Individual sailing vessels. This category was never followed up on, but I suggest that it should be renamed in a similar fashion, since what it contains are articles about individual yachts as opposed to classes of yachts and the other things in Category:Yachts. Good Ol’factory(talk)05:49, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom to better reflect the actual purpose of the category, which is articles on yachts rather than on their names. Also, the current name wouldn't work for multiple yachts of the same name, such as the series of twenty-something craft named Yeoman by their owner Owen Aisher. His son(?) David has continued the tradition, and is now up to Yeoman XXXII. We do not yet appear to have any articles of any of those 32 craft, but given the number of prizes they have collected I think it's very likely that at least a few of the 32 would pass WP:GNG. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 16:20, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
comment How is the content of this category supposed to differ from the category Category:Yachts? Looking around various categories in the boat/ship tree, it seems that most just have a plural name of the boat/ship in which the individual vessels are included. Category:Individual sailing vessels may be the exception, not the rule. Of course, Category:Yachts would need additional subcats such as Category:Types of yachts to rid itself directly of articles other than those of individual yachts. Alternatively, the entire boat and ship category branches need to be re-examined and a single pattern established and created for all of them regarding individual boats/ships. Hmains (talk) 18:41, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I don't think there is a difference, meaning that this could just as well be merged to Category:Yachts, or if it is kept, many of the articles in Category:Yachts still need to be moved to this category. I'm not really convinced it's necessary, but as long as it exists, I thought the name should at least be fixed. Good Ol’factory(talk)01:01, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or rename, but don't merge to Yachts. The topic is broad enough to support both an overall descriptive category, and a "... by name" category. Any mis-categorization is an issue for the articles, not a reason to delete the category.
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:Companies that have entered administration
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.
Rename as nom, but re-create present form as a parent. This should not be a category of defunct company, as the purpose of adminstration is to save the business, not close it. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:54, 24 December 2010 (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:Hundred Percent Free
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.
Category:Hundred Percent Free songs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (empty category added to nomination at 02:52, 23 DEC 2010 UTC)
Nominator's rationale:Delete. Unneeded eponymous category. No subcategories for songs or albums; apparently there are not even other articles to include—a template has been created but it is Hundred Percent redlinked. Good Ol’factory(talk)02:00, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Protest at the nom's gross misrepresentation of the template - it contains an endangered bluelink to this category. Otto's argument about Hundred Percent Free being a navigational hub rendering all else redundant is valid in this case as no navigation is possible. ('What links here' reveals Category:Hundred Percent Free songs - the template has missed a trick, indeed Fifty Percent of the tricks.) Yes, delete. Occuli (talk) 02:31, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Gee, I'm not sure how I missed that songs category. That empty songs category. ... I've added it to this nomination since it's empty and I can't find anything to go in it. Good Ol’factory(talk)02:49, 23 December 2010 (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:Change albums
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 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.
