Kyrgyz people (nationality)
[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 11:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: Rename. Following up from this discussion, in which we rejected a change from "Kyrgyzstani" to "Kyrgyz" in the name of consistency and it was generally agreed that "Kyrgyz" is an appropriate adjective for an ethnicity and "Kyrgyzstani" is the appropriate adjective for the nationality. The nominated categories are nationality categories, not ethnicity ones. Of course, there will be a great degree of overlap between people who fall into the two classifications, and some of these categories (especially Category:Kyrgyz people) may be able to legitimately be re-created as ethnicity categories, but for now we need to convert them into nationality ones. These are all "people from Kyrgyzstan", not "people of Kyrgyz ethnicity". This proposed system will mirror how things are dealt with re: Category:Kazakhstani people (nationality) and Category:Kazakh people (ethnicity). (For this nomination I haven't included the categories within Category:Kyrgyz culture, which may require a fuller consideration of whether the culture categories are meant to be country or by national ethnic group.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:41, 8 October 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:14th-century BC women
[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: Do not rename. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:05, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose renaming Category:14th-century BC women to Category:Women from the 14th Century BCE
- Nominator's rationale: The current name seems a tad clunky. Also, aren't BCE and CE preferred over BC and AD? Irbisgreif (talk) 23:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The proposed rename makes it sound like they're time travelers. At any rate, oppose because it follows the conventions observed by every other member of Category:People by century. The use of BC is, for better or for worse, also observed all the way up the category structure to Category:Centuries and all included articles. There's probably a MOS on point somewhere addressing the date issue, as I know I've seen ridiculous edit wars over it. Postdlf (talk) 23:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong oppose
- +This would make the category name(s) longer.
- +Convention is to begin with the century name in people categories.
- +To the contry, Wikipedia policy clearly states that there is no preferrence of BCE/CE over BC/AD or vise versa.
- +Per "BC" vs. "BCE" the convention is to follow the pattern of the parent category, which uses BC, as does every other member of Category:People by century.
- +Convention is to not change from BC to BCE or vise versa except to follow a convention.
- +Use of "from the" would be as if the women are time travelers. Carlaude:Talk 00:34, 9 October 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:Specials albums
[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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose renaming Category:Specials albums to Category:The Specials albums
- Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per main article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:34, 8 October 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:Law-related articles lacking sources
[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: Withdrawn, pending results of TfD for the template that populates it. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 03:36, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Category:Law-related articles lacking sources (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Nominator's rationale: Empty; easier to list here than waiting four days since it was just emptied (is there a template somewhere to set a timer for C1 deletion?) –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:58, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This is a maintenance category. It is intended to be empty from time to time as issues are addressed (and to fill up as new issues are discovered). bd2412 T 22:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- keep At this time it has 55 articles. Hmains (talk) 03:31, 9 October 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.
- 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) 04:06, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose renaming Category:Ford to Category:Ford Motor Company
- Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match main article and since the contents of the category include more then products with the Ford brand. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:38, 8 October 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:Orthoptera of Michigan
[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. --Xdamrtalk 11:18, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Category:Orthoptera of Michigan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Nominator's rationale: Delete, OCAT. The two included species are widely distributed throughout North America and their articles do not even mention Michigan. The only geographic subcategory of Category:Orthoptera is for Europe. If someone wants to create one for North America, be my guest, but otherwise these are already in Category:Insects of North America so no merging is needed. Postdlf (talk) 20:20, 8 October 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:Dictyoptera of Michigan
[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: Merge Category:Dictyoptera of Michigan to Category:Insects of North America. --Xdamrtalk 11:11, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggest merging Category:Dictyoptera of Michigan to Category:Insects of North America
- Nominator's rationale: Upmerge, OCAT. The only entry does not even mention Michigan; instead, it's an Asian species that was introduced to North America and is now spread throughout the NE United States. Category:Dictyoptera only has subcategories for taxa, none for regions, and certainly none for subnational entities. Postdlf (talk) 20:13, 8 October 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:Arachnids of Michigan
[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: Merge Category:Arachnids of Michigan to Category:Spiders of North America. --Xdamrtalk 11:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggest merging Category:Arachnids of Michigan to Category:Spiders of North America
- Nominator's rationale: Upmerge, OCAT. Neither of the two included articles even mention Michigan, but instead are of much wider distribution; one is even primarily known as a European species. There are no other region-specific subcategories of Category:Arachnids. Aside from Category:Spiders of Chile, the only geographic subcategories of Category:Spiders (which both included "Michigan arachnids" are) are for continents; certainly none for subnational entities. Postdlf (talk) 20:03, 8 October 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:Odonata of Michigan
[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: Merge Category:Odonata of Michigan to Category:Insects of North America. --Xdamrtalk 11:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggest merging Category:Odonata of Michigan to Category:Insects of North America
- Nominator's rationale: Upmerge, OCAT. None of the included entries even mention Michigan, as they all have far wider distributions. There isn't even Category:Odonata of the United States or Category:Odonata of North America, so a subnational entity that doesn't appear to even have endemic species seems a poor place to start. See also the contents of Category:Regional dragonfly lists. Postdlf (talk) 19:57, 8 October 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:2010 Winter Olympics ice hockey roster templates
[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: speedy delete per author request (G7). JamieS93 21:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Category:2010 Winter Olympics ice hockey roster templates (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Nominator's rationale: Delete. Empty category (replaced by another category). LarRan (talk) 19:55, 8 October 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.
- 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. --Xdamrtalk 11:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose renaming Category:SGI to Category:Silicon Graphics
- Nominator's rationale: Rename. Change from acronym to name of main article. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep (and rename main article), as the current company almost exclusively refers to itself as SGI. In part this is to differentiate "modern" SGI (Silicon Graphics International, the rechristened Rackable Systems) from "historical" Silicon Graphics, Inc.- choster (talk) 16:41, 10 October 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:Roller coasters in Las Vegas
[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) 04:07, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose renaming Category:Roller coasters in Las Vegas to Category:Roller coasters in the Las Vegas metropolitan area
- Nominator's rationale: Rename. The contents cover the metropolitan area and this is reflected by the parents including Category:Visitor attractions in the Las Vegas metropolitan area. This should not be renamed to indicate it is for the city since only one entry for a defunct coaster is actually in the city. One of the coasters is about 25 miles or so outside of the city. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:33, 8 October 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:University of Pittsburgh needing cleanup
[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; category has remained empty. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:12, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Category:University of Pittsburgh needing cleanup (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Nominator's rationale: This category was populated by ((Cleanup-Pitt)), a cleanup template used only on The Pitt News at the time. I redirected the template to ((Cleanup)) because its scope seemed too small to have a whole cleanup template, and now this cat is empty. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Then wait for four days, and speedy it. You did wisely, especially since the template's creator (who probably was the one who was volunteering to check the category's contents), hasn't been on Wikipedia since April 2008. Debresser (talk) 19:32, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I didn't know if this would be a controversial discussion because I also redirected the template without discussion; I don't care how the category is deleted, as long as there isn't any major opposition to it. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:40, 8 October 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:Integral economics
[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:08, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Category:Integral economics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Nominator's rationale: Delete. Category = original research by User:Gospelnous. Category only contains one article. That article also consists of original research by User:Gopspelnous. Citation goes to an unpublished manuscript, a rather thin reed upon which to based a category. I can imagine the the user would like to add articles on various economists like Hayek to the category, but he will most likely fail to obtain consensus since that categorization would also be original research. — goethean ॐ 14:55, 8 October 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:Actors from South Africa
[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: Merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:08, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggest merging
- Nominator's rationale: Merge. To match with the other categories of Category:Actors by nationality . -- Thaejas (talk) 14:50, 8 October 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:Georg Hegel
[edit]Category:Atletico Nacional seasons
[edit]Irish international rules players
[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: Merge all to Category:Irish international rules football players. --Xdamrtalk 10:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose renaming Category:Irish international rules player 1998 to Category:Irish international rules players
- Propose renaming Category:Irish international rules player 1999 to Category:Irish international rules players
- Propose renaming Category:Irish international rules player 2000 to Category:Irish international rules players
- Propose renaming Category:Irish international rules player 2001 to Category:Irish international rules players
- Propose renaming Category:Irish international rules player 2002 to Category:Irish international rules players
- Propose renaming Category:Irish international rules player 2003 to Category:Irish international rules players
- Propose renaming Category:Irish international rules player 2004 to Category:Irish international rules players
- Propose renaming Category:Irish international rules player 2005 to Category:Irish international rules players
- Propose renaming Category:Irish international rules player 2006 to Category:Irish international rules players
- Propose renaming Category:Irish international rules player 2008 to Category:Irish international rules players
- Delete Category:Irish international rules players by series
- Nominator's rationale: A classic case of overcategorization where there is substantial overlap between categories per WP:OC#OVERLAPPING. This means a player like Seán Marty Lockhart is tagged with 8 separate categories. The articles on the individual series (e.g. 2006 International Rules series) list the squads so listification is not required. After renaming Category:Irish international rules players by series is not needed. Tassedethe (talk) 12:51, 8 October 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:Ibuki class cruisers
[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) 04:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose renaming Category:Ibuki class cruisers to Category:Ibuki class battlecruisers
- Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match main article, Ibuki-class battlecruiser. Bellhalla (talk) 12:38, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename per nominator. After all, a battlecruiser is not a mere cruiser. Debresser (talk) 19:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: The main article was just written and it seems that the ship class was a transitional class considered armored cruisers when built, but later re-classed by the Imperial Japanese Navy as battlecruisers (which they were for the majority of their service life). — Bellhalla (talk)
- 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:Barcelona KIA
[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: merge; category has remained empty and no objections. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggest merging Category:Barcelona KIA to Category:Barcelona Ladies Open
- Nominator's rationale: Merge. The tennis tournament was named Barcelona KIA after a sponsor in 2007 and 2008. It was renamed to Barcelona Ladies Open in 2009. The main article Barcelona Kia was moved but a new category was created instead of renaming the old. Category:Barcelona KIA had two articles and one subcategory. I changed them to Category:Barcelona Ladies Open before officially suggesting this merger. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:27, 8 October 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.
- 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) 23:09, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose renaming Category:Ertl to Category:Ertl Company
- Nominator's rationale: Rename. To switch from ambiguous name to match the main article. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:30, 8 October 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:Education academics
[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: No Consensus. --Xdamrtalk 11:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggest merging
- Nominator's rationale: these two seem to be meant for describing the same group of people, and the suggestion here is to merge the considerably less developed 'category tree' into the more developed one Mayumashu (talk) 00:49, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It is of course typical that the one is not yet categorized under the other as a sub-cat, but i'm not sure a full merge is right. By no means all educationists were or are academics, including many of the most famous like Friedrich Fröbel, A.S. Neill etc. If only to keep it in academics trees, a Rename to Category:Academic educationists & placement as a sub-cat may be best. Johnbod (talk) 19:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Both are under a wider educational categorisation via Category:Educational personnel (ugly name, reeking of the HR dept.) But Category:Education academics also needs to link through Category:Academics by subject and as Johnbod said, not all educationalists are in the academy, so it is helpful to distinguish those who are. AllyD (talk) 19:27, 8 October 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.