< July 5 July 7 >

July 6

Category:Celebrities sentenced to jail

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. BencherliteTalk 15:31, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Celebrities sentenced to jail (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Recommending deletion as a cross-section more suited to a tabloid newspaper than an encyclopaedia. Failing that, rename to something less tabloidy (ie without the word "celebrity"). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest change to "Category:Entertainers sentenced to jail" Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:01, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was not aware of this. However, there is a real difference now. Previous discussions have never addressed what the purpose of categories are and how this category fulfils an educational purpose. If the purpose of categories is not to assist others in finding similar articles then the whole idea of categories may be in question. Very interesting question...what is the purpose of having categories? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:46, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying none of the many previous discussions for similarly named categories considered this in the context of what the purpose of categories is? I find that unlikely, though I haven't read through all of the discussions recently. Have you? Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have read every deletion discussion that you linked. If it is a matter of "a stupid category" versus "I like it", I can see the point. However, there has never been a discussion taht I can see where the discussion is "what is the purpose of categories-this fulfills it" versus "it does not fulfil the purpose of categories".
If it is a nasty, rude, and BLP, then I want it deleted. But this fills an educational need. I asked the help desk and they said that categories serve the purpose of maintenance and the educational purpose that I mentioned. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk#Delete_all_categories.3F Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 01:11, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I only linked to the most recent full discussion. There were others preceding it and some speedy deletions since that one. I find it unlikely that no one has ever put their mind to the purpose you describe. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:45, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The deleted category was deleted along the "stupid category" versus "I like it" rationale but never has there been a discussion on what is the purpose of categories and how this fulfills that purpose. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 14:36, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
See...I use categories often for the exact reason that the OP states, to find related pages. Dismas|(talk) 08:10, 7 July 2010 (UTC) from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk#Delete_all_categories.3F Info mentioned here as a courtesy to the Wikipedia community to foster information exchange. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:05, 7 July 2010 (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:Members of the European Parliament from Ireland

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. Courcelles (talk) 18:59, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Members of the European Parliament from Ireland to Category:Members of the European Parliament for Ireland (or delete?)
Nominator's rationale: Rename or delete(?). I have separated this category from the nomination immediately below because I'm not sure if it should be kept or not. It is essentially a container category for the corresponding categories for the Republic of Ireland and for Northern Ireland. Since these two regions have never been a unified country under the jurisdiction of the European Parliament, is this a meaningful categorization? And if it is, does it make sense to use "for Ireland" here? I'm not sure. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:47, 6 July 2010 (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.

MEPs by country

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. Courcelles (talk) 19:00, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming
Extended content
Nominator's rationale: Rename. A second follow up from my earlier aborted nomination. Using "from" in these category names is ambiguous, because an MEP does not need to be a national of the country he or she represents as an MEP. They are MEPs "for" a country. This usage is already reflected in most of the list articles for MEPs for specific countries. I suggest that for these top-level categories, we can continue to use the full "Members of the European Parliament". If subdivisions are created by term or constituency, we could use "MEP", as in Category:MEPs for Austria 2004–2009, for example. Yes, many of these categories have subcategories that also need to be renamed, but we're just taking this stepwise right now. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:25, 6 July 2010 (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.

MEPs by term

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. Courcelles (talk) 19:02, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:MEPs serving 2009-2014 to Category:MEPs 2009–2014
Propose renaming Category:MEPs serving 2004-2009 to Category:MEPs 2004–2009
Retain current format Category:MEPs 1999–2004 (recently created by me; added here in case there is consensus to use different format)
Nominator's rationale: Rename. This is an initial follow-up to my earlier aborted nomination. Hopefully we can agree on making these changes. Having "serving" in the category name is unnecessary. (I would prefer to see parentheses around the dates or at least the dates set off by a comma, but I am willing to leave that to another day.) Yes, both of these have subcategories that need renaming, but we're just taking this stepwise right now. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:17, 6 July 2010 (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:Fossil fuel power stations

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. Vegaswikian (talk) 17:48, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Fossil fuel power stations to Category:Power stations
Nominator's rationale: Merge. One inclusion criteria is if we don't know what type of fossil fuel is used by the plant. That is a cleanup category some place. The other is when multiple fuels are used. That is simply listing in multiple categories. If someone suggests simply deleting, I would not object. Not a well focused categoryVegaswikian (talk) 21:36, 6 July 2010 (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:Former nuclear power stations projects

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 to Category:Cancelled nuclear power stations.--Mike Selinker (talk) 15:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Former nuclear power stations projects to Category:Proposed nuclear power stations
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Planned but not built is not former for me. Also these should be listed by plant and not project to match the rest of the plants. If kept, the sorting of the articles needs correcting. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed my support to the proposal by Cgingold which seems to be better solution than merging this category with future projects. Beagel (talk) 20:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
By my understanding you can't cancel the power station, you can cancel the project. Beagel (talk) 20:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you can. In fact I believe that there have been several cases where a project included multiple plants and something less then the proposed number were built. This is why splitting hairs on what each one is may not really be helpful. Plants were proposed and plants were not built. It is that simple. Of course we could also argue that they are not plants but units. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:49, 13 July 2010 (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:Emergency power system

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. Courcelles (talk) 23:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Emergency power system (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. I wonder if this category is really needed given the diverse nature of the contents. While there is a main article, I still wonder about the usefulness. Maybe all it needs is someone to adopt it and fully populate? If Kept, rename to Category:Emergency power systems. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:43, 6 July 2010 (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:Mobile Internet

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. While what the last commenter says is true, the head article should guide what goes in the category, and seems to do so.--Mike Selinker (talk) 15:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Mobile Internet to Category:Mobile Web
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match name of the main article. Mobile Internet is a redirect to Mobile Web. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:18, 6 July 2010 (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:Vehicles with seating for 6 or more

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. Courcelles (talk) 16:55, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Vehicles with seating for 6 or more (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Vehicles should not be categorized based on number of seats. See Category:Car classifications for classifications preferred for categories. Vossanova o< 15:51, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Simply not true. Many SUVs do not have three rows of seats. Seating for 6 is a legit criteria used by manufacturers. There is a list page List of 6-passenger sedans but per WP:CLN a category seemed appropriate and fitting to broaden group. There are a lot of catagories used for vehicles ranging from the first year of manufacturing to the engine location Category:Rear mid-engine, rear-wheel drive vehicles. While I agree "6 or more" might be to braod a term, the solution seems to be to create catagories for all seating capacities, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 etc. GtstrickyTalk or C 20:37, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sure they can go to 5 or 10 dealers, why use WP for research anyway? As for your other argument a rename seems appropriate to remidy not an axe. GtstrickyTalk or C 20:37, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see buying guide on there at all. How are you fitting this into WP:NOTGUIDE? GtstrickyTalk or C 20:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Legal, per the number of seatbelts. It is not hard to source. GtstrickyTalk or C 20:37, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that is not clear in the category name. Also your comment totally ignores the issue of seats in a truck bed which may have seatbelts. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:59, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So we can tweak the name then? I am not aware of any production vehicles with seats in the truck bed. Of course someone could add them but that is the same as cutting the roof off of any vehicle and calling it a convertible or putting a larger engine in any car or truck and calling it a muscle car. That does not mean they go into category:convertible or category:muscle cars.GtstrickyTalk or C 00:49, 7 July 2010 (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.

Alternative musicians

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. Courcelles (talk) 23:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Scottish alternative musical groups templates to Category:Scottish alternative rock musical groups templates
Propose renaming Category:English alternative musical groups templates to Category:English alternative rock musical groups templates
Propose renaming Category:Irish alternative musical groups templates to Category:Irish alternative rock musical groups templates
Propose renaming Category:British alternative musical groups templates to Category:British alternative rock musical groups templates
Propose renaming Category:Japanese alternative musical groups templates to Category:Japanese alternative rock musical groups templates
Propose renaming Category:European alternative musical groups templates to Category:European alternative rock musical groups templates
Propose renaming Category:Canadian alternative musical groups templates to Category:Canadian alternative rock musical groups templates
Propose renaming Category:Australian alternative musical groups templates to Category:Australian alternative rock musical groups templates
Propose renaming Category:American alternative musical groups templates to Category:American alternative rock musical groups templates
Propose renaming Category:Alternative musical groups templates to Category:Alternative rock musical groups templates
Propose renaming Category:Alternative musicians templates to Category:Alternative rock musicians templates
Propose renaming Category:American alternative musicians to Category:American alternative rock musicians
Propose renaming Category:Alternative musicians by nationality to Category:Alternative rock musicians by nationality
Propose renaming Category:Alternative musicians to Category:Alternative rock musicians
Nominator's rationale: Per List of alternative rock artists, alternative rock, and the parent category: Category:Alternative rock. Also to dab from alternative country/Category:Alternative country/Category:Alternative country musicians/List of alternative country musicians. See also Category:Alternative rock navigational boxes for the templates. See also Category:Canadian alternative rock musicians. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:53, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not too clear on why Category:Canadian alternative rock musicians is included in this batch of nominations, considering that it's already consistent with the proposed new name for the rest of them — and that as constituted, you're suggesting that we rename it to itself. No objection otherwise. Bearcat (talk) 15:14, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Response I posted that, deleted it, you commented on it, and I have now responded, not necessarily in that order. By the time you posted your comment, it should have been removed from here and the CfD deleted from there. Anyway... —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:47, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm the creator and yet I support the change. I created those cats a lifetime ago. The new names are better choices. --User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 23:50, 6 July 2010 (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:Wikipedians by interest in films

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 to Category:Wikipedians interested in film.--Mike Selinker (talk) 15:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Wikipedians by interest in films to Category:Wikipedians interested in films
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Makes more sense grammatically for those Wikipedians interested in films in general. —Eekerz (t) 09:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support and comment Your name is certainly better, but should it be film or films? I think that "film" is preferred, but either one is superior to what we've got. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:09, 6 July 2010 (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:Sportspeople from Windsor, Ontario

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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 15:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Sportspeople from Windsor, Ontario (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Merge to Category:People from Windsor, Ontario and Category:Sportspeople from Ontario per prior consensus not to sort sportspeople by city per this discussion. TM 08:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It has just come to my attention that the same user who created this category also created a number of other sportspeople by city categories, see Category:Sportspeople from Paris etc--TM 09:14, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, that dividing larger cities can be done by borough etc. Yeah, if the other occupation ones (aside from local politicians, I guess) are done away with, then not having this one too would work for me too. Mayumashu (talk) 23:23, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the bottom line on all of these if to decide whether by city is defining characteristic for sportspeople. If it is, then we should keep. Personally, I think the intersection of occupation and city is a tenuous at best. Do basketball players from Paris have more in common with each other than all French basketball players? Unlikely.--TM 05:15, 8 July 2010 (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:Miles Franklin Award winners

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. No prejudice against a deletion discussion whenever someone feels like starting one, but there's no consensus relating to deletion here. Courcelles (talk) 16:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Miles Franklin Award winners to Category:Miles Franklin Award winners (books)
Nominator's rationale: The current name of the category does not make it clear whether the pages are books which have won the award or the authors of those books. The articles populating this category are all books, but the parent category is Category:Writers by award. Canley (talk) 05:44, 6 July 2010 (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:United Nations albums

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. Courcelles (talk) 16:49, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:United Nations albums to Category:United Nations (band) albums
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Propose disambiguating to match article United Nations (band). Given the existence of Category:United Nations media and, eg, Voyces United for UNHCR (an album), the potential for confusion does exist. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:00, 6 July 2010 (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.

MEPs clean-up

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: Self-withdrawal. I'm going to withdraw this for now for a more modest, step-wise proposal. I appreciate the comments that were made—it did provide some ideas of what direction we may need to head on these. I will renominate shortly, I hope. (See above.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:43, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming (or merging or deleting, as specified)
nominated categories
  • Category:MEPs serving 2004-2009 to Category:Members of the European Parliament (2004–2009)
  • Category:MEPs serving 2009-2014 to Category:Members of the European Parliament (2009–2014)
  • merge Category:Members of the European Parliament by 2004 cutoff to Category:Members of the European Parliament by term
  • delete Category:MEPs serving before 2004 (will be emptied of subcategories if other changes are implemented)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Est France constituency serving 2004-2009 to Category:MEPs representing the Est France constituency (2004–2009)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Est France constituency serving 2009-2014 to Category:MEPs representing the Est France constituency (2009–2014)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Ouest France constituency serving 2004-2009 to Category:MEPs representing the Ouest France constituency (2004–2009)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Ouest France constituency serving 2009-2014 to Category:MEPs representing the Ouest France constituency (2009–2014)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Nord-Ouest France constituency serving 2004-2009 to Category:MEPs representing the Nord-Ouest France constituency (2004–2009)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Nord-Ouest France constituency 2009-2014 to Category:MEPs representing the Nord-Ouest France constituency (2009–2014)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Sud-Ouest France constituency serving 2004-2009 to Category:MEPs representing the Sud-Ouest France constituency (2004–2009)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Sud-Ouest France constituency serving 2009-2014 to Category:MEPs representing the Sud-Ouest France constituency (2009–2014)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Sud-Est France constituency serving 2004-2009 to Category:MEPs representing the Sud-Est France constituency (2004–2009)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Sud-Est France constituency serving 2009-2014 to Category:MEPs representing the Sud-Est France constituency (2009–2014)
  • Category:MEPs representing the French outre-mer constituency to Category:MEPs representing the Outre-mer France constituency
  • Category:MEPs representing the French outre-mer constituency serving 2004-2009 to Category:MEPs representing the Outre-mer France constituency (2004–2009)
  • Category:MEPs representing the French outre-mer constituency 2009-2014 to Category:MEPs representing the Outre-mer France constituency (2009–2014)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Massif-Central - Centre France constituency to Category:MEPs representing the Massif-central–Centre France constituency
  • Category:MEPs representing the Massif-Central - Centre France constituency serving 2004-2009 to Category:MEPs representing the Massif-central–Centre France constituency (2004–2009)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Massif-Central - Centre France constituency serving 2009-2014 to Category:MEPs representing the Massif-central–Centre France constituency (2009–2014)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Île de France constituency to Category:MEPs representing the Île-de-France constituency
  • Category:MEPs representing the Île de France constituency serving 2004-2009 to Category:MEPs representing the Île-de-France constituency (2004–2009)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Île-de-France constituency serving 2009-2014 to Category:MEPs representing the Île-de-France constituency (2009–2014)
  • merge Category:MEPs representing the French constituencies to Category:Members of the European Parliament from France (over soft redirect)
  • merge Category:MEPs representing the French constituencies before 2004 to Category:Members of the European Parliament from France (over soft redirect)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Luxembourg constituency to Category:Members of the European Parliament from Luxembourg (over soft redirect)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Luxembourg constituency serving 2004-2009 to Category:Members of the European Parliament from Luxembourg (2004–2009)
  • Category:MEPs representing the Luxembourg constituency serving 2009-2014 to Category:Members of the European Parliament from Luxembourg (2009–2014)
  • merge Category:MEPs representing the Luxembourg constituency serving before 2004 to Category:Members of the European Parliament from Luxembourg (over soft redirect)
  • Category:MEPs representing the German constituency to Category:Members of the European Parliament from Germany (over soft redirect)
  • Category:MEPs representing the German constituency serving 2004-2009 to Category:Members of the European Parliament from Germany (2004–2009)
  • merge Category:MEPs representing the German constituency serving before 2004 to Category:Members of the European Parliament from Germany (over soft redirect)
Nominator's rationale: Rename/merge/delete as indicated. This is an attempt to begin the clean-up of MEP categories. This is far from a complete clean-up, but this initial nomination is intended to accomplish a few things:
  • (1) To standardise the way a category limited to one European Parliament term is represented. Rather than "serving DATE1-DATE2" or the other various forms that are used above, I have suggested just including the dates in parentheses as a type of disambiguator.
  • (2) To eliminate the categories that use 2004 as an arbitrary cut-off in the categorization system: there are a few "serving before 2004" categories, for example. These can simply be upmerged to the appropriate parent pending future subcategorisation by specific term.
  • (3) To standardise the subcategories of Category:Members of the European Parliament by country. The ones that refer to the "German constituency", the "Luxembourg constituency" and the "French constituencies" can just be referred to as being "from Germany", "from Luxembourg", and "from France", as the other by country categories do. (This is how the categories were initially structured, but some time ago someone changed these three and redirected the old categories to the new names.)
  • (4) To correct and standardise the names of the French constituencies in category names.
  • (5) To use the term "Member of the European Parliament" except for the constituency-specific categories (using it might be too laborious in those cases, but they could be expanded if desired).
If these changes are accepted, I will follow up the nomination with further attempts at clean-up for related MEP categories. — Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:27, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your reasons, but I think you're letting the perfect get in the way of the good. The tree is a godawful mess and there's no way all the necessary changes can be made all at once. For instance, we can't here make the change in your #4, because I haven't nominated all the "from FOO" categories, so we may as well try to make some incremental changes. There can always be follow-up nominations. Your #1 I do not understand—we generally avoid the abbreviations in category names, and you at least need a comma to set off the dates, if not parentheses. If everybody wants this to remain a dog's breakfast, it can, but I do think some changes need to be made. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:24, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think BHG is using eg Category:UK MPs 1951–1955 as a model. These have been through cfd several times - the argument is that these are likely to appear several times on some pages and so a terse shorthand is appropriate. The tree is indeed a dog's breakfast. Occuli (talk) 09:18, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • That may be so with respect to the abbreviation, I could be cool with that—but what is with not setting off the dates with even a comma? That looks pretty slack, IMO. Good Ol’factory (talk) 09:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice. I got the names off the English website for the European Parliament—officially, it seems to use the French directional words, even in the English version. This is such a mess it's almost like we need to go through the issues one by one and get consensus on them, so that they can be widely implemented across all of these: (1) How to format the dates—in parentheses or out; comma or no comma); (2) What general language to use (from, representing, for, etc.); (3) Do we subcategorize by constituency when a country only has one constituency? (4) What to call the constituencies. (5) When to use MEPs and when to spell it out. ... Trying to deal with all of these all at once gets a bit much. And then there are the party groups barf-fest .... I'd be willing to start a discussion elsewhere, but I fear I would get no participation, and then things would come to CFD, and users would shoot down what was decided on by only a few editors. Any ideas? Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let a sleeping dog's breakfast lie? Do we subcat by constituency at all, or just by country? Where are PastorWayne and Nopetro when you need them to bring sanity to chaos? Occuli (talk) 16:00, 6 July 2010 (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:Arab philosophers

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 and, if needed, purge.--Mike Selinker (talk) 15:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Arab philosophers to Category:Arabic-language philosophers
Nominator's rationale: In order to be consistent with the other categories in Philosophers by language. Greg Bard (talk) 03:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can't argue against that second point. These were categories that existed prior to any efforts of mine. However the existence of specific cats like "egyptian philosophers", etcetera make this cat more useful as designating language. Perhaps, the ones you mention should be moved.Greg Bard (talk) 21:45, 6 July 2010 (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