Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 January 18
January 18
Hong Kong doctors
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.
Nominators rationale There are about 22 or more categories of medical doctors based on the local usage issues, personally I think we could reasonably apply this name to all categories in this tree. It clearly is justified in the Hong Kong case. However without medical the name is too ambiguous so we should add medical to the name.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
if we must rename, then as nom. Hong Kong as a former British colony uses British English and (I expect) British practice. However, I am not sure we need a rename. In British English, if some one is referred to as a doctor, it usually means a medic. I have Ph.D. but would not normally be referred to as "a doctor" in a non-academic context. It should be sufficient to include the word "medical" in the headnote. As a matter of information, a generation ago, a doctor who qualified as a surgeon would drop the title Dr and become Mr (or Mrs or Miss), but that is (I understand) a dying practice. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:56, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely not a dying practice in the UK. Still very much a current one. I've never seen an NHS webpage referring to a surgeon (or gynaecologist, who also use the style) which didn't refer to them as Mr etc. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:12, 25 January 2022 (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:Current member states of the United Nations
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.
Merge removing (or replacing) the headnote. The former members consists of countries that have merged or split, and are better as a subcat. We do not normally encourage "current" categories, but in this case it is unlikely to become obsolete. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:06, 23 January 2022 (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:War video games
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: It's rather unclear whether this category refers to wargames or video games thematically about war. (It's the latter - Category:Computer wargames is the former.) The title change would make it more clear and prevent the current confusion. ZXCVBNM (TALK)00:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: "War video games" is meant to be for games that are - plot/setting wise - about war, but not necessarily wargames. Something like "Call of Duty" would fall under the category, despite obviously not being a wargame. That is the confusion that is taking place here - people are assuming it is a wargame category and putting things outside of it. ZXCVBNM (TALK)04:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment wouldn't it be Category:Video games based on war ? The games are based on war, but not "about war", which is what you're trying to distinguish it from. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:33, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- There are two slightly different things involved, but I am not sure whether a robust boundary between them can be identified. One is what was once called a tactical exercise without troops, in which generals planned tactics for war as part of their continuing training. another is video games where the proponent is invited to shoot his enemies. These are two extremes, but I expect there is a continuum between them. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:12, 23 January 2022 (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.