Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 June 4

June 4

Category:Human–animal linguistic communication

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 Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 June 21#Category:Human–animal linguistic communication. ℯ xplicit 04:21, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Human–animal linguistic communication to Category:Human–animal communication

Nominator's rationale: Why should we constrain it to linguistic communication? It would be better to use the broader category. Alternatively a superordinate category could be created but I don't think there's enough pages to warrant that. Fixuture (talk) 18:48, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:00, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disperse content among the two parent categories, then delete, this category is mixing up three relatively unrelated topics: talking animals, animal language and human-animal communication. There is too little content to split, so merging is a better idea. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:08, 10 June 2017 (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:Rulers of Kievan Rus'

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 on target name. ℯ xplicit 04:21, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Rulers of Kievan Rus' to Category:Princes of Kiev

Nominator's rationale: rename in order to clarify that this is for princes of Kiev proper rather than for princes in the entire Kievan Rus' federation of principalities. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:26, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment to @Marcocapelle: that does not seem to fit all the members of the category; N.B. Igor of Kiev and Olga of Kiev who are each described as "ruler of Kievan Rus'". (I have moved another one to the sub-cat Grand Princes of Kiev as he was so described.) – Fayenatic London 14:10, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fayenatic london: That's a fair comment. I was looking for some name to disambiguate this category from e.g. Category:12th-century princes in Kievan Rus' which contains princes of any small principality in the wider Kievan Rus' region. To be more precise the latter could be called Category:12th-century rulers of Kievan Rus' principalities. In contrast, the nominated category is clearly for rulers of the early undivided principality with Kiev as its capital. It should be noted that while Kievan Rus' has become the common name, it is also merely a modern historiographic name while the rulers at the time simply called themselves princes and grand princes (or dukes and grand dukes, dependent on translation) of Kiev. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:01, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 23:14, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I have added two more WikiProject banners to the talk page in an attempt to alert more editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 15:00, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle -- not quite sure what the targets should be. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:18, 10 June 2017 (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.

Ottoman history by country

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 all as Option C, "Ottoman period in Foo". ℯ xplicit 04:21, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Option A: rename all to "Ottoman ..."

Propose renaming Category:Ottoman period in the history of Qatar to Category:Ottoman Qatar
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman period in the history of Saudi Arabia to Category:Ottoman Saudi Arabia
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman period in the history of Hungary to Category:Ottoman Hungary
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman period in the history of Moldova to Category:Ottoman Moldova
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman period in the history of Romania to Category:Ottoman Romania
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman period in the history of Slovakia to Category:Ottoman Slovakia
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman period in the history of Ukraine to Category:Ottoman Ukraine

Option B: rename all to "Ottoman period in the history of ..."

Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Algeria to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Algeria
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Egypt to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Egypt
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Eritrea to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Eritrea
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Tripolitania to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Tripolitania
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Tunisia to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Tunisia
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Anatolia to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Anatolia
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Armenia to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Armenia
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Cyprus to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Cyprus
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Georgia to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Georgia (country)
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Iraq to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Iraq
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Lebanon to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Lebanon
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Syria to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Syria
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Yemen to Category:Ottoman period in the history of Yemen
Propose renaming Category:Ottoman Balkans to Category:Ottoman period in the history of the Balkans

Nominator's rationale: rename for consistency. Either option is fine with me. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:16, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Option B but Category:Ottoman period in Algeria etc, as briefer. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:14, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Let's call this option C. Better than option B for sure, as said it's briefer. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:39, 10 June 2017 (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:History of the Catholic Church

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: withdrawn. ℯ xplicit 23:30, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose ~~merging~~ renaming Category:History of the Catholic Church to Category:History of Catholicism

Nominator's rationale: rename to allow Catholicism topics that aren't strictly within the Catholic Church, e.g. Category:Catholic Worker Movement is already in the category, and Category:Roman Catholics by century and Category:Catholic political parties may be added. This is follow-up on an earlier discussion in which User:Chicbyaccident was also involved. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:07, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Since there are more articles called History of the Catholic Church (of X) than History of Catholicism (of X) - if there should be a merge, actually Category:History of Catholicism (and equivalent) should rather be merged into Category:History of the Catholic Church than the other way around. Chicbyaccident (talk) 06:38, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The first preceeded the second. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:07, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
REverse merge -- as suggested by the last two contributors. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:12, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I take it we got a 1 against 3 here. What do you think about the arguments presented for a reverse merge, Marcocapelle (talk · contribs)? Chicbyaccident (talk) 09:05, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. I haven't seen arguments that directly challenge the rationale of the nomination to have a category including e.g. Category:Catholic Worker Movement, Category:Roman Catholics by century and Category:Catholic political parties which aren't strictly within the Catholic Church. Having said, the nomination originally contained a mistake by stating "merge" instead of "rename" which may have distracted the discussion, so perhaps we can still get to a compromise solution to allow both categories, one as the parent of the other. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:14, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean. However, what about having these categorised in Category:Catholicism, in addition to possibly Category:Catholic Church in the United States (and equivalent)? I have a scepticism about depth structure under Category:Catholicism - as a result of perceiving the category as somewhat problematic per se. However, to conclude, I can support your latest suggestion here above as an improvement at least. Chicbyaccident (talk) 10:06, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note @Chicbyaccident, Laurel Lodged, Peterkingiron, and Marcocapelle: The nominator proposed renaming the category, not merging. Could you please clarify what the merge target is inteded to be? ℯ xplicit 04:21, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The thinking here has gotten quite muddled. Recommend nom withdraws and proposals a new proposal. Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:21, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Feel free to ping me when you do that. Chicbyaccident (talk) 12:20, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fair. @Explicit: Would you be willing to close this as withdrawn? Marcocapelle (talk) 20:15, 21 June 2017 (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:New Jersey Hall of Fame inductees

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 ℯ xplicit 04:21, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:New Jersey Hall of Fame inductees (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Induction into the New Jersey Hall of Fame is not a defining characteristic for any of the individuals included in the category. Alansohn (talk) 01:59, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:15, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- I do not favour Hall of Fame categories, but sometimes get jumped on when I say so. I think the criterion should be whether the Hall of Fame is a physical museum (which we might keep) or just a virtual one, consisting of a list that is someone's original research (which we should not). Which is this? Peterkingiron (talk) 12:11, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and per WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:13, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The New Jersey Hall of Fame is real, but it's not in an actual building. It's more of an on-line tributeVincelord (talk) 16:22, 13 June 2017 (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.