< December 28 December 30 >

December 29

Category:LGBT theatre in Canada

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:LGBT theatre in Canada to Category:Canadian LGBT-related plays
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Everything in the category is a play or plays by author subcat. Rename brings the category in line with the similar Category:Canadian LGBT-related films. Otto4711 (talk) 23:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Figures, the one of the four I didn't open. Still makes this a small category. Cat isn't needed for the single entry. Otto4711 (talk) 00:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • "LGBT" is in line with Category:LGBT and is in extensive use throughout Wikipedia. If you think the abbreviation should be expanded then it would be best to attempt to make the change from the top down and all-inclusively rather than considering in in the isolation of a single sub-subcat. Otto4711 (talk) 15:32, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because if there is going to be an LGBT-related plays by country categorization scheme, then the country subcats should follow the Category:Fooian plays naming convention. There is no such categorization scheme currently in place and there strikes me as little need at this point to start subdividing the small (fewer than 50 articles) parent Category:LGBT plays, but I recognize the, shall we say, extremely intense interest in breaking down everything into smaller and smaller categories so rather than proposing the merger I really believe should take place I'm suggesting the rename to at least align the name with that of other similar categories. There is no large and widely accepted LGBT theatre by country structure in place under Category:LGBT theatre and maintaining a national division of a six-article parent category for a single theatre company article is classic overcategorization. Should there suddenly be an explosion of articles about LGBT theatre companies located in Canada then there is no prejudice to recreating the category but as it stands currently there is simply no need for it. Otto4711 (talk) 15:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:LGBT plays

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename Category:LGBT plays to Category:LGBT-related plays. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:LGBT plays to Category:LGBT-related plays
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Nominated previously but got muddled with another portion of the nomination. Plays don't have a sexual orientation. Renaming brings the category in line with similar categories like Category:LGBT-related films and Category:LGBT-related television programs. Otto4711 (talk) 23:41, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

Anglicanism UK categories

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename all (including the missing "the" in the third item). Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

rename per WP:NCCAT--AccountA (talk) 23:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:LR Ahlen players

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was merge Category:LR Ahlen players to Category:Rot-Weiß Ahlen players. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:LR Ahlen players to Category:Rot-Weiß Ahlen players
Nominator's rationale: Old name for the same club. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 22:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:SV Eintracht Trier 05 players

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was merge Category:SV Eintracht Trier 05 players to Category:Eintracht Trier players. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:SV Eintracht Trier 05 players to Category:Eintracht Trier players
Nominator's rationale: Two different names for the same team. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 22:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Chemical education

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was no consensus. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC) Category:Chemical education (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)[reply]

  • Oops, sorry about that -- it should have read "consistent with the main article" (I've now corrected it). Cgingold (talk) 09:32, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That agrees with what I said about Chemistry education referring to teaching. However, when research is done on this teaching it is generally called Chemical education research. It is not simple. --Bduke (talk) 00:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Fictional towns and cities (and subcategories)

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename all. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: Matching recent renames of similar categories for Mexico, China, Chile, Italy, and Sweden.--Mike Selinker (talk) 18:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Polymaths

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Polymaths (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: A vague and pointless category. As it is undefined, it could just be used to include any 'clever' people whose cleverness extends to more than one discipline. (As indeed the existing entries demonstrate). It would be possible, more or less, (with a bit of devious argument), to enter almost any human entry in WP under this heading. As it is void of encyclopaedic purpose, delete. Smerus (talk) 17:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's where I was coming from with my comments -- the Talk:Polymath page. I sympathize with BHG but practically speaking it's too difficult! --Lquilter (talk) 04:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know, you're right, but I live in hope that I may wake up with a start in the middle of the night before this CfD closes and disturb all my husbands as I jump out of bed mumbling "Yes, a robust definition of a polymath!". I'm not holding my breath … --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How many husbands do you have? — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:00, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:August Births

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:August Births (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: month of birth is hardly a defining characteristic, and adding this sort of category to articles just creates category clutter. If kept, it needs a capitalisation fix. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, delete as per nominator.--Smerus (talk) 17:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Surgery tools

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename Category:Surgery tools to Category:Surgical instruments. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Surgery tools to Category:Surgical instruments
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match main article Surgical instruments. (The last thing I want is surgeons to start referring to their "tools" before they start operating on me. Eegh.) Snocrates 14:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Spouses of U.S. State Governors

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename Category:Spouses of U.S. State Governors to Category:Spouses of United States state governors. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Spouses of U.S. State Governors to Category:Spouses of United States state governors
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Expand "U.S." and proper caps. All changes could have been done speedily individually but since there were more than one it came here. Snocrates 13:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Georgia Attorneys General

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename Category:Georgia Attorneys General to Category:Georgia (U.S. state) Attorneys General. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:49, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Georgia Attorneys General to Category:Georgia (U.S. state) Attorneys General
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Standard way of disambiguating U.S. state from sovereign state of the same name. Snocrates 13:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:U.S. Ambassadors to Cuba

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename Category:U.S. Ambassadors to Cuba to Category:United States ambassadors to Cuba. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:50, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:U.S. Ambassadors to Cuba to Category:United States ambassadors to Cuba
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match format of similar subcategories of Category:Ambassadors of the United States. Both changes could have been done speedily but since there were two changes to be made it comes here. Snocrates 13:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Hindu short story writers

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete both. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hindu short story writers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Hindu novelists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete Seems like inconsequential intersections of religion and profession. Only one article in categories — the same one in both; at most could be merged with Category:Hindu writers, but I would tend to reserve that for writers who write about topics related to Hinduism. Snocrates 12:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:LDPD member

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename Category:LDPD member to Category:Liberal Democratic Party of Germany politicians. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:LDPD member to Category:Liberal Democratic Party of Germany members
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Expand abbreviation and pluralize "member". Snocrates 12:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Skydivers of the GDR

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename Category:Skydivers of the GDR to Category:East German skydivers. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Skydivers of the GDR to Category:East German skydivers
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Comply with other similar nationality skydivers categories that use "Foo skydivers" and use "East German" since "East Germany" is the standard country name used in categories for the GDR. Snocrates 12:30, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:ARVN generals

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename Category:ARVN generals to Category:Army of the Republic of Vietnam generals. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:ARVN generals to Category:Army of the Republic of Vietnam generals
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Expand abbreviation. Relevant article is at Army of the Republic of Vietnam. Snocrates 12:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Lucan

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Lucan to Category:Lord Lucan
Nominator's rationale: Rename. The category relates to the Earl of Lucan, a title in the Peerage of Ireland, a title best best for the 7th Earl who disappeared in 1974 after his children's nanny Sandra Rivett was found murdered. (In Irish satire, this disappearance is often conflated with that of the racehorse Shergar, a meme which now appears to have entered the British House of Commons too, but that's another day's work).
The category name is misleading because it could also apply to Lucan, County Dublin, a rapidly-expanding suburb of the ever-growing capital which will probably soon need its own category within Category:Towns and villages in County Dublin. Convention would suggest that Category:Lucan be renamed to Category:Earls of Lucan, but in this case that seems inappropriate because the title is best known for the missing earl who is nearly always referred to as "Lord Lucan", and because it also includes the nanny Sandra Rivett.
Alternatively, since there are articles on only 3 of the peers, plus the article on the title and the nanny (all of which are adequately interlinked), this category could be deleted per WP:OCAT#EPONYMOUS. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Lucan, the town in Dublin is a large and expanding suburb and needs this category name; after all Lord Lucan took his name from here. (I've no idea where he is btw). (Sarah777 (talk) 15:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]
You can't get off the hook that easily. You are still the prime suspect as organiser of his escape to an old cottage near Borris-in-Ossory … ;) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply looking at it again, I think that deletion is better than renaming, since the articles are so closely grouped. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I'd support delete; Lucan says that's best too. Sarah777 (talk) 18:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And I'm saying nothing. Shergar 01:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are no other categories by title for Earls in the Peerage of Ireland, and even in the more heavily populated Earls in the Peerage of the United Kingdom there is only one. There are several in Earls in the Peerage of England, but mostly for the more long-lasting titles such as Earls of Surrey, with 18 articles. I don't think we need this one. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Plus an Earls of category should really only contain the Earls themselves. Johnbod (talk) 01:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:James Beard Award winners

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:James Beard Award winners (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization of people by awards they have won. The half-dozen award-winners here can certainly have this award listed in the articles about them, but this is not a defining award like a Nobel Prize. (Attention to this category brought by debate below.) Lquilter (talk) 08:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:If.comeddies award winners

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:If.comeddies award winners (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete; overcategorization by award. Includes two comedian articles, and this award can certainly be included on those articles, but this award is not a defining attribute of these comedians. (Attention to this category brought by related debate; see below.) Lquilter (talk) 08:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Professional baseball teams in Pennsylvania

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was merge Category:Professional baseball teams in Pennsylvania to Category:Pennsylvania baseball teams. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Professional baseball teams in Pennsylvania to Category:Pennsylvania baseball teams
Nominator's rationale: A merge is appropriate because: (a) the new Category:Professional baseball teams in Pennsylvania in unnecessary because all of the articles shown in Category:Pennsylvania baseball teams are or were professional teams, making the two categories equivalent for practical purposes; (b) the merger would be consistent with the categorization used for baseball teams in other U.S. states, which (although not complete) are categorized as State baseball teams rather than Professional baseball teams in State. BRMo (talk) 03:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I created the separate category because the "Pennsylvania baseball teams" category was created for current pro teams in PA, not semi-pro or historical teams. There should be a separate category for those sort of teams.

JaMikePA (talk) 14:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created the category to unify current, pro baseball teams in PA, just as there are separate categories for current MLB teams and historical ones. I wish to keep the same distinction for PA teams, too. JaMikePA (talk) 18:12, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a few questions and comments: (a) Separate categories for professional, semiprofessional, and amateur teams by state would imply some very small categories (see Wikipedia:Overcategorization). What's the harm of showing all of these types of teams in the same category? (b) I just discovered that there's an existing category for Category:Defunct Pennsylvania baseball teams, which could be used for the historical teams. (c) Developing categorization schemes shouldn't be done separately for each state. I recommend discussion of any proposed changes to the geographical categorization scheme through Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball. BRMo (talk) 18:54, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Thelema portal

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. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Thelema portal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Empty category... Judgesurreal777 (talk) 02:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Portal:Thelema was deleted on November 12. JPG-GR (talk) 03:56, 29 December 2007 (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:Recipients of the Nuclear-Free Future Award

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Recipients of the Nuclear-Free Future Award (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:OC#Award_winners, categories for awards should not be created except for the most notable awards, like the Nobel Prizes - this is not one of them. It is the most notable fact about many of the people included, but that probably just means they are non-notable and should have their articles deleted as well. Terraxos (talk) 02:33, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I would regard this category as at least as important as most of the award categories which we have on WP, and certainly more important than the following categories which seem to be sitting there quite happily:

In terms of individuals who have received the Award, many are university professors or members of parliament. Some of the most notable include:

Johnfos, I sympathize, but three points:
(1) a category is not a recognition of "importance"; it is a recognition of a type of indexing information that is best handled with mediawiki's automatic indexing feature. Deleting a category is therefore not necessarily any kind of statement about the importance or value of an article or topic, or the concepts that article represents.
(2) Other stuff exists is not a great argument. The fact that we have WP:OCAT#Award winners is an acknowledgement that this is a problem area, and it appears to me that each of those categories should likely be deleted as overcategorization by award-winner. The impulse that leads people to create categories for everything that belongs on a list is borne out of a misunderstanding of how categories work, so we end up with a lot of crappy categories. Hence, OCAT#Award winners. Now that you've brought these to other people's attention, my guess is we'll soon see CFDs for them, too. But they don't help the case for this category. (I stepped up and took on two of them.) (update 1/1: all have been posted for CFDs now.)
(3) The very point that the people you list are highly notable people who have made multiple great contributions in the field in which the award recognizes, as well as other fields, argues against this category. A category is an indexing feature that should generally only be used to capture defining aspects of the articles categorized. I think of it as: If I think of this category, do I think of this member? If I think of this member, do I think of this category? Here, when one thinks of Helen Elizabeth Clark, one might think of her anti-nuclear work or her political career, but one would not think of her as a "recipient of the nuclear-free future award". She is not therefore defined by the award-winner attribute, and so it's not a good category for her; my guess is the analysis is similar for all the award-winners.
--Lquilter (talk) 08:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Jersey Jews

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was keep. the wub "?!" 22:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jersey Jews (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Category is very small (only one article) and would seem to have extremely limited potential. The whole category is generally a bad idea. Descendall (talk) 02:12, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete - We have a Category:American Jews, this looks like it is contrary to WP:OC#Intersection by location. --Kimontalk 02:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jersey is in Europe, not America. --Descendall (talk) 06:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Doh! I should've read the single article in the category. :) I am now changing my vote to keep as this is part of Category:Jews by country, like Tim says below. --Kimontalk 14:41, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Consititutionally, the Channel Isles (and Isle of Man) are self-governing, but their foreign affairs are dealt with by the British Foreign Secretary. British subjects are frequently categorised into the constituent nations of England, Wales, etc. Jersey, Guernsey and Man ought to fit well into that level of category. Due to their modest population categories will probably not be large, but they should be allowed to exist. Peterkingiron (talk) 00:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I suppose there might be one on Guernsey too, but this will mess up the parents (categories I mean). Johnbod (talk) 19:33, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
True, so don't bother, if it's too much work. But if the closer wanted to.... LeSnail (talk) 19:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Radio stations in CITY

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename all. the wub "?!" 22:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Flagstaff to Category:Radio stations in Flagstaff, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Tucson to Category:Radio stations in Tucson, Arizona
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Los Angeles to Category:Radio stations in Los Angeles, California
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Sacramento to Category:Radio stations in Sacramento, California
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in San Diego to Category:Radio stations in San Diego, California
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Atlanta to Category:Radio stations in Atlanta, Georgia
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Savannah to Category:Radio stations in Savannah, Georgia
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Honolulu to Category:Radio stations in Honolulu, Hawaii
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Boise to Category:Radio stations in Boise, Idaho
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Chicago to Category:Radio stations in Chicago, Illinois
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Des Moines to Category:Radio stations in Des Moines, Iowa
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Baltimore to Category:Radio stations in Baltimore, Maryland
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Worcester to Category:Radio stations in Worcester, Massachusetts
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Detroit to Category:Radio stations in Detroit, Michigan
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in St. Louis to Category:Radio stations in St. Louis, Missouri
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Las Vegas to Category:Radio stations in Las Vegas, Nevada
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Atlantic City to Category:Radio stations in Atlantic City, New Jersey
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Saratoga Springs to Category:Radio stations in Saratoga Springs, New York
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Fayetteville to Category:Radio stations in Fayetteville, North Carolina
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Akron to Category:Radio stations in Akron, Ohio
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Cleveland to Category:Radio stations in Cleveland, Ohio
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Oklahoma City to Category:Radio stations in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Altoona to Category:Radio stations in Altoona, Pennsylvania
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Philadelphia to Category:Radio stations in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Pittsburgh to Category:Radio stations in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Providence to Category:Radio stations in Providence, Rhode Island
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Rapid City to Category:Radio stations in Rapid City, South Dakota
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Chattanooga to Category:Radio stations in Chattanooga, Tennessee
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Nashville to Category:Radio stations in Nashville, Tennessee
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Abilene to Category:Radio stations in Abilene, Texas
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Amarillo to Category:Radio stations in Amarillo, Texas
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Austin to Category:Radio stations in Austin, Texas
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Corpus Christi to Category:Radio stations in Corpus Christi, Texas
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in Houston to Category:Radio stations in Houston, Texas
Propose renaming Category:Radio stations in San Antonio to Category:Radio stations in San Antonio, Texas
Nominator's rationale: Per naming conventions and recently affirmed precedent (see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 December 22 for assorted examples), the above noted radio station categories for geographic regions in the United States should be renamed to incorporate the name of the state, as their parent geographic categories already do. (It should be noted that there are additional categories that will need some re-tooling to properly fix names - this discussion includes only the "clean" ones listed above.) JPG-GR (talk) 00:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:American Colonial Peers

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename Category:American Colonial Peers to Category:American Peers. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:American Colonial Peers to Category:American Peers
Nominator's rationale: Rename. As per the talk page, and in keeping with similar categories , eg Welsh Peers, Australian Peers, etc. Petedavo talk contributions 00:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.
More