< November 10 November 12 >

November 11

[edit]

Category:Jewish eugenicists

[edit]
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. postdlf (talk) 16:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Jewish eugenicists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete This looks like a meaningless intersection per WP:Overcategorization. Is "Jewish eugenics" a particular sort of concept, or is this just a random categorization providing an association of a subset of individual people known for their pro-eugenics views with the subset's membership in the Jewish ethnic/cultural category? If it's the latter, what actual helpful or scholarly purpose for Wikipedia might it accomplish? Anti-Nationalist (talk) 23:43, 11 November 2009 (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:Qt

[edit]
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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Qt to Category:Qt (toolkit)
Nominator's rationale: To match parent article, Qt (toolkit), as QT is ambiguous. — ξxplicit 23:18, 11 November 2009 (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:Action on climate change

[edit]
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/2009 November 21#Category:Action on climate change. postdlf (talk) 13:01, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Action on climate change (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. It's still unclear what should be put in the category. But, more to the point, the 99. anon will put any people, organizations, events, slogans, campaigns, protests, movies, murals, postcards, neckties, samplers, stained-glass windows, tattoos or categories which, even tangentially relate to mitigation of global warming. Unless anons can be prevented from adding articles to this category, it's unmaintainable, even if there were an appropriate definition. However, I cannot imagine an appropriate definition, so it would probably be better to delete the category and start over. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rename and heavily weed: I suggest a rename to something like "Climate change activism" or "Global warming activism", and to weed out all of the cruft. This could then run parallel to some kind of weeded science-ey category, perhaps a weeded "global warming" one. Every category on this topic, in fact, looks really crufty, and I've just started running into 99.X's additions of random tangents to them. Awickert (talk) 20:50, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But wait... even if I go through and organize the categories, every Fred, Jane, and Harry will add their favorite things to "cat:global warming", so maybe completely not worth the effort. Awickert (talk) 20:58, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion. I found the category useful. It certainly needs to be better organised in subcategories (like many other categories). A guideline or even discussion on what qualifies and what doesn't on the category's talk page might help cleanup and maintenance. Elekhh (talk) 20:37, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It would only help if the anon 99.* were prohibited from adding articles or categories to the category. They are still (as far as I can tell, randomly) adding articles. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 09:36, 14 November 2009 (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:Kagero class destroyers

[edit]
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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:13, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Kagero class destroyers to Category:Kagerō class destroyers
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match name of main article, Kagerō class destroyer. — Bellhalla (talk) 17:27, 11 November 2009 (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.

Subcategories of Category:Rolling stock by country

[edit]
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 per nom. --Xdamrtalk 15:16, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: (1) WP:NCCAT suggests that in ‘by country’ categories, it should be “Rolling stock of Foo” rather than “Fooian rolling stock”; (2) It is “Rolling stock of Foo” on Commons, so not having to remember two different forms is an aid to users; (3) Avoiding the adjectival form of country names is an aid to users for whom English is a foreign language.
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:Living performers of Christian music

[edit]
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: Keep as administrative category. --Xdamrtalk 15:20, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Living performers of Christian music (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need "living people" subcategories for each individual occupation? Delete as WP:OCAT, sez me. Bearcat (talk) 09:41, 11 November 2009 (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:Jugoslovenskih Železnica locomotives

[edit]
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. — ξxplicit 06:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Jugoslovenskih Železnica locomotives to Category:Yugoslav Railways locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to maych the English name used for the main article. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:31, 11 November 2009 (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:Locomotives of the Bodmin and Wenford Railway

[edit]
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. — ξxplicit 06:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Locomotives of the Bodmin and Wenford Railway to Category:Bodmin and Wenford Railway locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match the standard form in Category:Locomotives by railway. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:18, 11 November 2009 (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:ČSD locomotives

[edit]
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. — ξxplicit 06:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:ČSD locomotives to Category:Czechoslovak State Railways locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match the name of the main article and to remove the hard to enter abbreviation. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:15, 11 November 2009 (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:SBB-CFF-FFS locomotives

[edit]
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. — ξxplicit 06:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:SBB-CFF-FFS locomotives to Category:Swiss Federal Railways locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match the name of the main article and to remove the abbreviations for three different languages. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:12, 11 November 2009 (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:SEK locomotives

[edit]
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. — ξxplicit 06:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:SEK locomotives to Category:Hellenic State Railways locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Remove abbreviation and match category name to name of the parent article. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:08, 11 November 2009 (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:SNCB locomotives

[edit]
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. — ξxplicit 06:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:SNCB locomotives to Category:National Railway Company of Belgium locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Remove abbreviation and match name to name of the parent article. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:06, 11 November 2009 (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:Tall buildings and structures in Paris

[edit]
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. Most of the buildings are already in the skyscraper category where it is appropriate. Chimneys are not skyscrapers since they are not inhabited as I understand the article. Les Invalides is an interesting inclusion since it appears that it is included in the category because of the church. So that article probably needs to be worked over and the categories moved to the individual articles. I did some of this, but it is not complete. So in the end, this category is pretty much a duplicate of Category:Skyscrapers in Paris when all is said and done. The list seems to be the best solution here since it can explain all of these differences. The discussion did not make clear why a tall building is different from a skyscraper or needs to be in a category with them. Chimneys and towers have their own category structure. The do not delete opinion was based on the failure to notify certain users. This is not a valid reason to abort a discussion based on any policies or guidelines that I am aware of. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Tall buildings and structures in Paris
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Undefined inclusionary criteria. How tall is "tall"? Selecting a defined height would be arbitrary. No comparable category for other cities or locales exists. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even a C-list God would have divined from my comment above that some tall buildings are and some aren't skyscrapers. Your powers, already dim, are appearing sub-mortal now. Oh Unmighty one, what is the cutoff that makes a building officially a "skyscrapter" [sic]? Lol. Alansohn (talk) 22:03, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dunno, but let's not compound the problem by merging. Or we can merge it, in which case the articles will be removed. Incidentally, I think the hilarity of the God joke may be waning. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This whole line of humor finds me rolling on the floor, laughing out loud. If only there were some sort of abbreviation for that phenomenon. While I was just riffing on your claim of being God, it's never seemed to bother you when you were actively trying to ridicule other editors together with your admin buddies. Is there any standard here that applies to you, or just the usual double kind? Alansohn (talk) 21:14, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I have no idea what you are going on about. You are very funny, though, no doubt about that. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:31, 12 November 2009 (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.
More