Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 September 6

< September 5September 7 >

September 6

Category:Monorchistic people

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: speedy delete WP:CSD#G7 ([1]). – Fayenatic London 20:28, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete I suppose a link to monorchism will be helpful. This medical problem is not a defining characteristic of an individual. Pichpich (talk) 22:04, 6 September 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.

Faculty by university in Sri Lanka

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:03, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Faculty by university in Sri Lanka to Category:Academics by university in Sri Lanka
  • Propose renaming Category:Faculty of the University of Colombo to Category:Academics of the University of Colombo
  • Propose renaming Category:Faculty of the General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University to Category:Academics of the General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University
  • Propose renaming Category:Faculty of the University of Kelaniya to Category:Academics of the University of Kelaniya
  • Propose renaming Category:Faculty of the University of Peradeniya to Category:Academics of the University of Peradeniya
Nominator's rationale: Rename following recent precedent for Thailand. There is no reason to use this term of American English for Sri Lankan academics. Further renames should follow. – Fayenatic London 19:19, 6 September 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 from Arlington, Washington

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. All categories have 3 or fewer entries ...William 17:52, 6 September 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:Tintin

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. It seems from the discussion that there might be scope for a wider renaming of this category and all is subcats, or for creating a new sub-cat Category:The Adventures of Tintin. Either way, feel free to bring this back to CfD for a further discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:18, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Brought from speedy to full at suggestion. Propose renaming to follow the main article for the category, The Adventures of Tintin. If passed subcats would be speedied. The Bushranger One ping only 16:22, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak oppose It's clear enough as the bare Tintin. Not strongly against it, but I'm not in favour of it either. 'Tintin' also covers things like the Paris Tintin shop or whatever cons and the like Tintin fans might get up to, whilst 'The Adventures of Tintin' sounds too much like a category only for the original book series, and nothing else. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: it was my suggestion that this should have a full discussion rather than a Speedy decision, because at first glance it seemed pretty obvious what the category is for. Although Tintin is a disambiguation page, many of the other meanings are derivative from this character & franchise. Many of the articles in Category:Tintin are just named according to "Tintin", not "The Adventures of Tintin", e.g. Ideology of Tintin not "Ideology of The Adventures of Tintin". My starting point is that it would be unnecessary to rename such pages, so I need to think through why we would rename the categories. I didn't know there was a Tintin (magazine) which carried other stories (such as Alix and Blake and Mortimer), but confusion with that seems unlikely. Would it be helpful to expand this nom with proposed renames for the sub-categories as well? (except for Category:Tintin games which was already nominated on Sept 1 to "Video games based on..." but with options for the short or long name.) – Fayenatic London 17:40, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The category covers the entire franchise, not just the comic series entitled The Adventures of Tintin. Compare at Category:Bambi, Category:Sailor Moon, and much else in Category:Media franchises.- choster (talk) 19:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think that if the rename happened, the rest of the franchise as well as the unofficial works should still come within the category as "works based on The Adventures of Tintin"; that would fit within a wide-ranging series of CFDs to distinguish original works and clarify which categories are for "works based on" them. – Fayenatic London 08:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Such an outcome would result, on the one hand, for most franchises with few articles, in the equivalent of an eponymous band category containing the main article and a single subcategory for albums; on the other hand, for large franchises, of making Category:Star Wars a subcategory of Category:Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope called Category:Works based on Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope. One of the main points of the Category:Media franchises branch is to capture cases where the original work is overshadowed in popular usage by its extended universe of sequels, adaptations, merchandise, and extended fictional universe.- choster (talk) 15:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename and redirect to help with the "works based on..." renaming project. – Fayenatic London 08:57, 7 September 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:Melvillians

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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:26, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Melvillians to Category:Wikipedians who read Herman Melville
Nominator's rationale: Rename When possible, titles of user categories should clearly indicate their nature. Moreover the rename would be consistent with the format of other categories in Category:Wikipedians by interest in an author. Pichpich (talk) 14:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm tempted to agree, it would be a little unfair to target this one and not Category:Wikipedians by interest in an author as a whole. Pichpich (talk) 21:28, 6 September 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:Wolverine

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: Keep and rename to Category:Wolverine (comics). Timrollpickering (talk) 17:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT; category just contains ol' Wolvy and his Ultimate alterverse alter-ego which are already properly categorised under Category:Marvel Comics superheroes, along with the "titles" category which is already properly categorised under Category:Marvel Comics titles. The Bushranger One ping only 14:28, 6 September 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.

Businesspeople in the oil industry

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 for now. The oil and gas industry question is best handled in a separate nomination. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:05, 13 September 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:Sekoku no Ryuu Kishi

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. Misplaced article in category space. Creator has already properly created an article. The Bushranger One ping only 17:38, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Improper use of article text in a Category page. The category consists solely of a user space page and an empty list (that has been nominated for deletion under WP:CSD#A3. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:08, 6 September 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:Skillet members

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: Speedy rename C2D. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:21, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to match Skillet (band) and For King & Country (band) respectively and avoid any potential ambiguity. Pichpich (talk) 13:58, 6 September 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:Indian motor scooters

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: keep. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:28, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is a completely unnecessary split of the existing Category:Motor scooters. No other scooters are grouped by country. Biker Biker (talk) 06:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
oppose Category:Motor scooters by country would be a reasonable hierarchy to create. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:05, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That would make sense. --Biker Biker (talk) 21:41, 7 September 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 from Grafton, New Hampshire

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single-article by-city cat, not much reasonable chance for expansion for this town of under 1500 people. The Bushranger One ping only 05:56, 6 September 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:Alumni of the University of Malta

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; there seems to be a better case for a mass renaming in other direction. – Fayenatic London 09:25, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All subcategories of Category:Alumni by university or college in Europe except for those in the UK and Ireland use the "(X) alumni" format. As an independent nation, Malta doesn't seem to have a reason to be more like the UK and Ireland than all of the other countries in Europe.-- Mike Selinker (talk) 05:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of Speedy discussion
  • Support; the argument that Malta has close ties to the UK is a reasonable enough concern, however other 'close ties' countries - Canada, Australia, and India, for instance - all uniformly and without exception use the standard "Foo alumni" format. There's no reason for Malta not to follow the standard for Europe or, for that matter, the standard of the rest of the world. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral. The convention is as stated by Bushranger, so I will not oppose this move ... but nor will I support it.
    The "Foo alumni" convention is a bad choice in terms of usability, because it places the crucial modifier word at the end of what can be a very long title. For example, Category:University of Cincinnati – College-Conservatory of Music alumni and Category:Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania alumni would me much more easily read if they were named Category:Alumni of the University of Cincinnati – College-Conservatory of Music and Category:Alumni of the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. That "Alumni of Foo" format would also make it easier to apply these categories using WP:HOTCAT, because it would save editors from having to search through a long list of other categories relating to that university.
    I accept that "Foo alumni" is more common usage in many places, but "Alumni of Foo" is equally understandable and much better suited to the speed-reading habits of online usage. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:17, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (restated from Speedy) The current form is just as easily readable if not more so ("...alumni" is a particular source of confusion when the institution name contains punctuation) and there's no need to change in the name of European wide conformity. We already have two other European countries that use a different form and should allow other national categories to go their own way where appropriate. Timrollpickering (talk) 15:03, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Those "two other European countries" should also be renamed. Standardisation is professional and encyclopedic; letting them "go their own way" just gives the nabobs a chance to titter at how silly Wikipedia looks when they can't even keep their naming formats straight. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:24, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Bushranger, are you channelling the borg? What about local usage or comprehensibility or usability?
        I can see the case for consistency, and I usually favour it, but consistently enforcing a bad naming convention is silly. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Resistance is Futile. I'm not sure I'd call it "bad". It may not be preferable, but which is more silly: enforcing a 'second choice' system until they can all be moved to the first choice, in case that 'first choice' doesn't get passed, or having a mish-mash of category names under both systems? As I mentioned above, it can't be assured that a rename for all would be passed, which would, if it didn't, leave us back at square one with the mish-mash. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:45, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Umm, we don't have a mish-mash, we just have a grand total of two systems (shock horror!) reflecting variations in usage. Similar variations exist in many other category trees. If this one is going to be standardised, let's standardise it to the more usable format. (I don't see anyone arguing that "Foo alumni" is better). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:11, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – 'Alumni of' is vastly preferable to horrible concatenations such as Category:California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo alumni (which would merit much tittering, unlike the entirely cromulent 'Alumni of the University of Malta'). Oculi (talk) 21:49, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge one way or the other. That said, I would go with the current proposal, but I would ask those who have said oppose to reconsider. What they are currently advocating is leaving duplicate categories. There is no reason to do that. Do you mean reverse merge or are you advocating that we leave duplicate categories?John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:39, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Most of the categories use "Foo alumni", and because the University or college is listed first, then one does not have to use a default sortkey for those categories; whereas, when "Alumni" is first, a default sortkey would have to be used on every category to sort by the university or college name. I have cleaned up many categories, and the default sortkey is not used regularly by editors, so it just makes more work for those of us who like organized categories to have to add default sortkeys all the time. --Funandtrvl (talk) 00:56, 27 September 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:User en-2.5

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Joke category. "This user has significantly improved his/her vocabulary and thinks he/she is able to contribute with an advanced level of English, but may actually not." Previous similar babel categories have been deleted, see here. Does not benefit the encyclopedia. VegaDark (talk) 05:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Humorous Categories such as Category:Rouge editors seems to be permitted. ibicdlcod (talk) 08:54, 6 September 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_September_6&oldid=1074810106"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 September 6, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.