Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 October 18

< October 17October 19 >

October 18

Category:People from Underhill, Vermont

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. (NAC) Armbrust The Homunculus 02:55, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Small community with just 3 entries. ...William 22:25, 18 October 2013 (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:David S. Goyer

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Too small Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 20:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per Difficultly north (or reverse merge). The bio-article will fit well as the main article for the "works by" category. The point is that we do not need the eponymous category. This is a different situation from the normal performance category rule, which is about not categorising actors and TV people by what they work on. Most works do not have a host of authors. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:58, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - needless category layer. Merger is not needed and Goyer's article shouldn't be placed in the Works category since he is not a Work by David S. Goyer. He is linked as a headnote in the Works category, which is appropriate. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 01:42, 25 October 2013 (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:Wikipedia motd templates

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 Category:Wikipedia motd templates to Category:Wikipedia Motto of the day templates. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:53, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Wikipedia motd templates to Category:Motto of the Day
Nominator's rationale: This is really the only category for the Wikipedia:Motto of the day project but a separate one could be created for the templates. Either that or the name should be either Category:Wikipedia Motto of the day or Category:Motto of the day templates. Simply south...... cooking letters for just 7 years 18:42, 18 October 2013 (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:General elections in Finland

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. -- Black Falcon (talk) 01:47, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Finland has two types of elections; presidential and parliamentary. For some reason the latter have been put in a category called "General elections" despite all being named "Finnish parliamentary election, XXXX". The category should be renamed "Parliamentary elections in Finland" to match all the articles in it. Number 57 18:40, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The current name fits the convention of Category:General elections by country. "General elections" is a more inclusive term which includes all types of national legislature, whether they are called "parliament", "congress", "national assembly", etc. Navigation is easier if categories follow a consistent naming structure, and while the convention could be changed through a group nomination, I see no reason to remove consistency.
(Dislosure: I created Category:General elections by country and most of its subcats). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Three main counter-arguments:
1. There is no consistency - the category you refer to (General elections by country) includes several examples of categories named "parliamentary", "legislative", "federal" elections (e.g. Category:Federal elections in Australia, Category:Parliamentary elections in Moldova, Category:Israeli legislative elections), whilst several others (e.g. Category:General elections in France, Category:General elections in Latvia) are similarly misnamed as none of the articles in the category match the category title.
2. "General election" is not specific enough, and means different things in different countries - in some it refers only to parliamentary elections, whilst in others it refers to holding multiple elections (president/parliament/local/regional) on the same day. The inclusion of Filipio and American general elections in the aforementioned category is thus a mistake as their general elections refer to mixed elections
3. The main point is that it completely overlooks the fact that none of the articles in the Finnish category are called "general" elections.
  • Reply.
  1. 21 out of 29 subcats are called "general elections". That's not uniformity, but there is a clear convention.
  2. If general election is not specific enough for Finland, then it is not specific enough for many other countries. The solution would be a group rename for the lot, rather than piecemeal changes
  3. As above, the elections may be called various things in various countries. Using a consistent, generic term aids categorisation by editors and navigation by readers. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:47, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Re point three, I think you've missed the point. You're categorising different types of elections in the same tree "General election" can't be a generic term is it means different things in different places - "Parliamentary election" would probably be the best generic term as it's specific to parliamentary elections and couldn't accidentally include presidential elections. Number 57 11:41, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have also nominated the general elections by country category (and some subcats) for renaming. Number 57 20:11, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename Category:Parliamentary general elections in Finland would be more precise. "general election" is essentially a UK term (as opposed to local election or by-election). BHG's rationale is correct in principle, but we need to be more precise in naming subcategories. Even where the US is conducting elections for the all representatives, 1/3 of senate, and president on one day, it is in British terms a general election. I am not familiar with all the procedures related to filling casual vacanies there. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:33, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Parliamentary general elections" is not precise - general has no meaning in this context. It's like calling a category "Parliamentary legislative elections". Number 57 12:14, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • There are two types of elections to parliaments:
  1. "Parliamentary general elections", where there are vacancies either all all seats or in a tranche (as with the US Senate)
  2. "Parliamentary by-elections", which are elections for casual vacancies.
I think that the two should both be subcats of a broader category. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:32, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But as pointed out already, "general election" is a vague term because it doesn't necessarily mean a parliamentary election. Number 57 19:51, 21 October 2013 (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:Jaclyn Smith (actress)

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:01, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Works categorized by actor. I don't think that's how this works. Not all of these were primary roles fo her. I don't see any other actors with all their works in a category, and this gives undue weight to her involvement in each. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument is faulty. WP:OC#PERF pretty much means this category is doomed. The others categories named after actors contain articles related to them, not what they appeared in. Oh, yeah, my vote is delete in case you couldn't guess. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 20:29, 18 October 2013 (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:Esham

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:  Relisted at 2013 NOV 4 CFD. Good Ol’factory (talk) 20:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Too little content —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:37, 18 October 2013 (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:Albums produced by Don Fury

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:  Relisted at 2013 NOV 4 CFD. Good Ol’factory (talk) 20:51, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redlink producer —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:34, 18 October 2013 (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:Olympic water polo 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: no consensus. There is a consensus that this usage of a venue is WP:DEFINING in some cases but not in others, but no consensus on whether that justifies keeping this category.
As the nominator noted in the course of the discussion, similar issues to many other sub-categories of Category:Olympic venues. I suggest that editors may want to consider an RFC on the general principle of categorising olympic venues for sports which rely on pre-existing facilities. Lakes and rivers are not purpose-built, so similar considerations will apply to sailing, rowing, etc. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:05, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: That somewhere was used (for a few weeks at most) for Olympic water polo is not a WP:DEFINING characteristic of a swimming pool, a park or a river. For info: There is already a List of Olympic venues in water polo. The list article should be upmerged to Category:Water_polo_at_the_Summer_Olympics and Category:Water_polo_venues. DexDor (talk) 05:17, 18 October 2013 (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 Vienna, West Virginia

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. (NAC) Armbrust The Homunculus 02:57, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Only has 2 entries. ...William 01:02, 18 October 2013 (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/2013_October_18&oldid=1138398658"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 October 18, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.