Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 January 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion‎ | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jc37 (talk | contribs) at 08:35, 16 January 2012 (comments). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< January 14 January 16 >

January 15

Category:Politics of the Auckland Region

Propose merging Category:Politics of the Auckland Region to Category:Politics of Auckland
Nominator's rationale: The boundary between what "Auckland" and "Auckland Region" is is now artifical after the creation of the Auckland Council and will result in confusion and duplication. A category for "Auckland City Council" could be created for any historical articles if it is considered worthwhile. Mattlore (talk) 21:16, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History books about Confucianism

Propose renaming Category:History books about Confucianism to Category:Historical literature about Confuciansm
Nominator's rationale: Not very sure this category is needed. However if we keep it, this change would be consistent with the language and organization used by WikiProject Philosophy. Greg Bard (talk) 20:13, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is not about literature from history, or literature that are historically famous, so the requested name is highly ambiguous. The current title is accurate and unambiguous. If WPPhilosophy uses such ambiguous naming, their entire tree needs renaming. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 05:28, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I don't think you are properly using the word "ambiguous" correctly here. It's more general, and it is supposed to be that way.Greg Bard (talk) 05:56, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History books about philosophy

Propose renaming Category:History books about philosophy to Category:Historical literature about philosophy
Nominator's rationale: This change would be consistent with language and organization used by WikiProject Philosophy. Greg Bard (talk) 20:10, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – per the language and organisation used by Category:History books. Oculi (talk) 21:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is not about literature from history, or literature that are historically famous, so the requested name is highly ambiguous. The current title is accurate and unambiguous. If WPPhilosophy uses such ambiguous naming, their entire tree needs renaming. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 05:28, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the proper description you are looking for is "more general" not "ambiguous." "Historical literature about philosophy" isn't ambiguous at all. In the philosophy department, all of the subfields have a literature category so as to house essays, journal articles, etcetera. It houses books just fine also. However this category as named would not house the essays, etcetera. Are anonymous comments factored into a determination here? I certainly hope not. Greg Bard (talk) 05:54, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Body switching movies

Propose renaming Category:Body switching movies to Category:Body switching films
Nominator's rationale: Naming conventions for films by type is films, not movies. Lugnuts (talk) 19:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Images of Gawler railway line

Category:Images of Gawler railway line - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Category now empty, I moved the last image to commons today.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 16:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gettysburg Battlefield woods

Category:Gettysburg Battlefield woods - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Seems to be a case of overcategorization. There is already a Places of the Gettysburg battlefield. Wild Wolf (talk) 14:14, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gettysburg Campaign military engagements in Pennsylvania

Category:Gettysburg Campaign military engagements in Pennsylvania - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Seems to be a case of overcategorization, especially intersection by location. These articles are already in Battles of the Gettysburg Campaign and Pennsylvania in the ACW categories, so having a special category for Gettysburg Campaign battles in PA seems pointless. Wild Wolf (talk) 14:07, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pre-1914 association football players

Category:Pre-1914 association football players - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: No obvious reason to have a category specifically for players who played before WWI, there is no recognised concept of distinctly different "pre-WWI" and "post-WWI" eras of football. There are no other categories grouping players by the decade(s) in which they played. ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:57, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There appears to be no reason to categorise players in this way, and it is not done for other time periods. In any case the year chosen is arbitrary. See also this discussion at Wp:Footy. Eldumpo (talk) 14:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - if there was ever any real justification for this category, it has been lost in the mists of time. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 14:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who did not finish High School

Category:Wikipedians who did not finish High School - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Classic "not" category - We don't categorize users by what they didn't do, because that cannot aid in collaboration. Precedent to delete similar categories here. VegaDark (talk) 09:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. —Cliftonian (talk) 15:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:UCAT#NOT- Though I suppose it could be speedy per author agreement. - jc37 08:35, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiQueerians

Nominator's rationale: Delete - "This category contains the user pages of Wikipedia editors who are also editors of WikiQueer (known as WikiQueerians)." Considering there is no article on this Wiki, it is impossible for this category to aid in collaboration. Extensive precedent to delete "Wikipedians by website" categories if the website doesn't even have an article, see here. VegaDark (talk) 08:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. - jc37 08:35, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

North American Wikipedian nationality categories

Nominator's rationale: Delete - As evidenced by the fact that these are in the category tree Category:Wikipedians by ethnicity and nationality, these are not intended to describe the location of Wikipedians, but rather some sort of odd categorization to try and group nationality and ethnicity categories. We already have Category:Wikipedians in North America for the location. These categories represent unnecessary parent categories for the ethnicity/nationality categories, subdividing into the odd descriptors of "New World" Wikipedians and "Northern American" Wikipedians. I wouldn't particularly mind North American Wikipedians if we actually needed parent categories for the ethnicity/nationality categories, but I don't believe we do, and there are no categories for any of the other continents. Furthermore, "New World", "North American", and "Northern American" I wouldn't consider to be nationalities or ethnicities, so these are miscategorized by being in this same tree as its subcategories (Canadian Wikipedians are a subcategory of Northern American Wikipedians, which in turn is a subcategory of North American Wikipedians, which in turn is a subcategory of New World Wikipedians - except both New World Wikipedians and Canadian Wikipedians are in Category:Wikipedians by ethnicity and nationality - it makes no sense). These were created in August of last year so they are relatively recent, let's nip this categorization scheme in the bud before it spreads to other continents. VegaDark (talk) 08:13, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:EverGreen Party of Alberta

Nominator's rationale: Move to a lower case G in Evergreen. The main article was moved without opposition to the officially registered name, and I see no reason to have mismatched categories. To address the inevitable argument, the party isn't a month old yet, so there is no common name. The Calgary Herald reference prints a lower case G, and the only case of the party using it is in the banner of their website. The project states the registered name should be used. 117Avenue (talk) 07:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the renaming of the three EverGreen categories. Named used by the party with that spelling. Me-123567-Me (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is that a reason for it to be different than the article? 117Avenue (talk) 00:34, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, for now The main article, as currently written, is named Evergreen but then immediately says the intended format is "EverGreen". Looking at their web site, the EverGreen format is used repeatedly outside their banner in the text, with a couple exceptions. That makes me think part of their platform is abusing the English language. (Obviously, as they get more established, the disconnect betweet the cat and main article should be reconciled.) RevelationDirect (talk) 05:17, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wipeout (game show) games

Category:Wipeout (game show) games - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete As far as I can tell, only one video game (Wipeout in the Zone) has ever been based on this game show. That article is already properly categorized in Category:Video games based on game shows. Pichpich (talk) 00:20, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note: There are three video games based on the game show, at least according to List of video games based on Wipeout (2008 U.S. game show). This page was created by same editor.--Logical Fuzz (talk) 01:58, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_January_15&oldid=471646124"