< August 7 August 9 >

August 8

Category:Arthur Loves Plastic

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:08, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Arthur Loves Plastic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization--only contains one article, one template, one book, and one category. These can all be easily navigated from the footer. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 23:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There's more to consider than the number of subcatgories in an eponymous category.There are plenty of pages that fall in the scope of Category:Arthur Loves Plastic in addition to its subcategories (namely Arthur Loves Plastic, Arthur Loves Plastic discography, Book:Arthur Loves Plastic , Template:Arthur Loves Plastic). Category:Arthur Loves Plastic albums is a bad category for Arthur Loves Plastic and Book:Arthur Loves Plastic would be uncategorized otherwise (don't really care about the template). Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 22:21, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • We have had countless cfds for eponymous musician categories and consensus has been against any with only 1 subcat. 2 subcats have gone either way. Book:Arthur Loves Plastic doesn't belong in any mainspace category in my opinion. There is no need whatever to categorise Arthur Loves Plastic in any of the categories mentioned as it is splendidly categorised elsewhere. Occuli (talk) 01:51, 14 August 2011 (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:Arthur Loves Plastic remix compilation 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: Delete. Category is already empty. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Arthur Loves Plastic remix compilation albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization (see below.) —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 23:56, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Moved per User:Koavf's suggestion. memphisto 10:21, 9 August 2011 (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:Arthur Loves Plastic remix EPs

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 is already empty. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Arthur Loves Plastic remix EPs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization by artist and the intersection of two album types. Placing these all in Category:Arthur Loves Plastic EPs and Category:Remix EPs should be sufficient. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 23:53, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Moved per User:Koavf's suggestion. memphisto 10:21, 9 August 2011 (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.

Alumni of schools in England

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 as "People educated at.... "Alumni" is not widely used for school attendees in the UK. "Educated at" is clearly understood to mean pupils/students who attended a school, regardless of the outcome of the schooling process. (Non-admin closure, taking note of comments on the current RFC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools and the more extensive arguments rehearsed at CFD Feb 10.) Fayenatic (talk) 13:45, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Bingley Grammar School to Category:People educated at Bingley Grammar School (Bingley Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Keswick School alumni to Category:People educated at Keswick School (Keswick School)
Plus 35 similar ones, present names all including 'alumni'
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Bournemouth School to Category:People educated at Bournemouth School (Bournemouth School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Calderstones School to Category:People educated at Calderstones School (Calderstones School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Canon Slade School to Category:People educated at Canon Slade School (Canon Slade School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Chesterfield Grammar School to Category:People educated at Chesterfield Grammar School (Chesterfield Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of City of Bath Boys' School to Category:People educated at City of Bath Boys' School (City of Bath Boys' School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Consett Grammar School to Category:People educated at Consett Grammar School (Consett Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Dunstable Grammar School to Category:People educated at Dunstable Grammar School (Dunstable Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Easington Community Science College to Category:People educated at Easington Community Science College (Easington Community Science College)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Gravesend Grammar School to Category:People educated at Gravesend Grammar School (Gravesend Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Great Yarmouth Grammar School to Category:People educated at Great Yarmouth Grammar School (Great Yarmouth Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Haslingden Grammar School to Category:People educated at Haslingden Grammar School (Haslingden Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of High Storrs Grammar School for Boys to Category:People educated at High Storrs Grammar School for Boys (High Storrs Grammar School for Boys)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of King Edward VI Grammar School, Retford to Category:People educated at King Edward VI Grammar School, Retford (King Edward VI Grammar School, Retford)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Quarry Bank High School to Category:People educated at Quarry Bank High School(Quarry Bank High School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Sheffield Collegiate School to Category:People educated at Sheffield Collegiate School (Sheffield Collegiate School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Silverdale School (Sheffield) to Category:People educated at Silverdale School (Sheffield) (Silverdale School (Sheffield))
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Simon Langton Grammar School for Boys to Category:People educated at Simon Langton Grammar School for Boys (Simon Langton Grammar School for Boys)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Sir William Turner's Grammar School, Redcar to Category:People educated at Sir William Turner's Grammar School, Redcar (Sir William Turner's Grammar School, Redcar)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of St Joseph's Academy, Blackheath to Category:People educated at St Joseph's Academy, Blackheath (St Joseph's Academy, Blackheath)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Tapton School to Category:People educated at Tapton School (Tapton School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of the Arts Educational Schools to Category:People educated at the Arts Educational Schools (the Arts Educational Schools)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of The Crypt School, Gloucester to Category:People educated at The Crypt School, Gloucester (The Crypt School, Gloucester)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of The Queen's School, Chester to Category:People educated at The Queen's School, Chester (The Queen's School, Chester)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of the Royal Ballet School to Category:People educated at the Royal Ballet School(Royal Ballet School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of the Royal Naval School to Category:People educated at the Royal Naval School(Royal Naval School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Totnes Grammar School to Category:People educated at Totnes Grammar School(Totnes Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Ulverston Grammar School to Category:People educated at Ulverston Grammar School (Ulverston Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Westminster City School to Category:People educated at Westminster City School(Westminster City School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Wycombe High School to Category:People educated at Wycombe High School(Wycombe High School)
Propose renaming Category:Leicester Collegiate School alumni to Category:People educated at Leicester Collegiate School (Leicester Collegiate School)
Propose renaming Category:Liverpool Collegiate Institution alumni to Category:People educated at Liverpool Collegiate Institution (Liverpool Collegiate Institution)
Propose renaming Category:Liverpool Institute alumni to Category:People educated at Liverpool Institute(Liverpool Institute)
Propose renaming Category:Northfield School Alumni to Category:People educated at Northfield School (Northfield School)
Propose renaming Category:Penistone Grammar School alumni to Category:People educated at Penistone Grammar School(Penistone Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:St Marylebone Grammar School alumni to Category:People educated at St Marylebone Grammar School (St Marylebone Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Archbishop Holgate Grammar School, York to Category:People educated at Archbishop Holgate's School (Archbishop Holgate's School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Balshaw's Grammar School, Leyland to Category:People educated at Balshaw's Grammar School (Balshaw's Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Royal Liberty Grammar School to Category:People educated at the Royal Liberty Grammar School (Royal Liberty Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Sir Walter St John’s alumni to Category:People educated at Sir Walter St John's Grammar School For Boys (Sir Walter St John's Grammar School For Boys)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Strode's School to Category:People educated at Strode's Grammar School (Strode's Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of The City School (Sheffield) to Category:People educated at The City School, Sheffield (The City School, Sheffield)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Queen Elizabeth's Grammar School, Wimborne to Category:People educated at Queen Elizabeth's Grammar School, Wimborne Minster (Queen Elizabeth's School, Wimborne Minster)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Herschel Grammar School and its predecessors to Category:People educated at Herschel Grammar School (Herschel Grammar School)
Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Gillingham Grammar School to Category:People educated at Gillingham Grammar School, Kent (Gillingham Grammar School, Kent)
Nominator's rationale: In Category:Former pupils by school in England (and generally in UK secondary school categories), there has been little support for 'alumni' in cfds. In contrast there has been substantial support since Jan 2011 for the 'People educated at' formulation; eg Old Edwardians cfd in Jan 2011 (when the formulation was first proposed); all schools in Australia in Feb 2011; Scotland & Wales and Wales in July 2011; and Scotland in Aug 2011. This change would reduce names in Category:Former pupils by school in England from the present 5 formats to 3: 'People educated at', 'Former pupils of' and the 'Old BoodleFoodleians' option. Occuli (talk) 23:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The traditional term in England is 'Old Boys/Girls', not 'Former Pupils'. The opposition to 'People educated at' (as opposed to 'alumni') in the recent cfd discussions has been from the same editor. Occuli (talk) 12:17, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why not change the parent category first, then you will have a better idea of what is appropriate? The parent category was only renamed in June 2010, a change which you supported. "Former pupils" is a perfectly workable format. Cjc13 (talk) 11:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You are opposing something that is not actually being proposed. Nobody is saying (in this CfD at least) that the "Old Tossers" categories be deleted. This CfD is aimed at the "Alumni of...." categories. --Simple Bob a.k.a. The Spaminator (Talk) 16:37, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I misunderstood. I thought the intention was to change all the England categories to this format. I see now that it is only those beginning with the word alumni. I change my vote to Support. Dahliarose (talk) 22:37, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • None of the nominated categories is (or has ever been) in the 'Old Fooian' or "former fooian" format. Broad support in the rfc and all Uk-cfds in 2011 has been for "people educated at" as opposed to former anythings or alumni (in UK categories). "Former pupils" is a dead duck in the UK. (I agree that it is more than tedious.) Occuli (talk) 15:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "broad support" seeming to mean 3 active UK CfD regulars instead of the 100s of editors of those pages? If you were to do the nomination properly in accordance with the CfD procedure and post notices on all the affected pages then could say that. Ephebi (talk) 20:32, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The only requirement is for all nominated pages to be tagged, which is exceptionally tedious even with AWB but has been done (the main creator of the 'Alumni' cats is user:Bashereyre who has been notified in the recent past and has never objected). There is broad UK-support here, so far, in this very cfd: user:Simple Bob is from Somerset and user:Dahliarose is 'in England'. Occuli (talk) 11:16, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • As you obviously haven't absorbed the WP policy I highlighted above, I will spell it out for you: Consider adding to the main article's talk page or to categories that are merge targets to notify users that the category has been nominated for deletion or renaming` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ephebi (talkcontribs)
All the categories have been appropriately tagged, which is what current WP policy requires. Consider adding categories to your watchlist instead of relying on others to notify you in other ways about discussions you may care about. Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:18, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Most projects opt in for notifications about proposed moves and changes for categories and articles and templates and so on. So in most cases, the projects are already being notified. Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools and several UK projects were automatically notified about these discussions. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:10, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent - all one needs is Wikipedia:WikiProject_Schools/Article_alerts on one's watchlist and Alertbot does the rest. Occuli (talk) 01:55, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you misunderstand as I presume you are referring to placing notifications on the category page. Only a handful of editors have created, edited or renamed the categories (hence they were renamed to "Alumni of ..."), and most of those category page editors are already involved in this discussion (although it appears that few have made significant content edits to the underlying school pages.) But none of the talk pages for the schools affected has been notified. Editors of those pages will be better qualified to accurately contribute what those former pupils are normally called. That is what I referred to earlier when I requested that notifications are placed on the main article's talk page, per the recommended CfD process cited above. Some schools use the Old Fooian concept, e.g RSLOld Boys... Ephebi (talk) 10:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: A fair point, Template:Cfdnotice could have been placed on Talk:Bingley Grammar School, etc. However, as this nomination is not touching any "Old Fooians", and is solely to rename the minority of school categories that include the word "Alumni" to "People educated", IMHO it is not such a material change as to make it appropriate to notify the school pages. Use of that notice is a courtesy rather than a requirement. - Fayenatic (talk) 11:57, 17 August 2011 (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:Dramatic works about abortion

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: move the appropriate ones into Category:Films about abortion and Category:Novels about abortion, and the rest into Category:Abortion in fiction. Unless they're not fictional, of course, in which case move them into Category:Abortion in non-fiction.--Mike Selinker (talk) 19:49, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging:
Category:Dramatic works about abortion to Category:Abortion in fiction
Category:Fictional printed works about abortion to Category:Abortion in fiction
Nominator's rationale: We don't have categories trees for "dramatic works" which groups "films, television programs, and stage plays" as the long-retired category creator intends, and his or her creation of the source cats Category:Dramatic works about abortion and non-"dramatic" counterpart Category:Fictional printed works about abortion serve no useful purpose that I can see, especially as they do not correspond to any searchable tree. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:21, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • “Based on a true story” *is* a “representation of truth”. You may question “Which truth?” There may be more “truth” in real story of the “social pressures associated with abortion” as created in a portray populated with fully fictional characters than in a documentary of stitched primary sources. Dividing at a high level, dramatic or creative works about abortion into fiction and non-fiction would be a POV nightmare. Suggest a merge in the other direction. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:21, 12 August 2011 (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:Petitions for a writ of certiorari

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Petitions for a writ of certiorari (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete, meaningless category. A certiorari petition is how nearly all cases reach the Supreme Court of the United States; the four case articles included in this category have nothing more to do with that process than any other case. postdlf (talk) 17:00, 8 August 2011 (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:Dirty War media

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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 00:26, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Dirty War media (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: An unnecessary and poorly named container category for "Dirty War media." Its one article, La República perdida, is a film series that I have added to subcat Category:Dirty War films. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:28, 8 August 2011 (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:Contemporary 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: Keep. Timrollpickering (talk) 15:36, 15 August 2011 (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:Contemporary Indian philosphers

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 15:37, 15 August 2011 (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:Peninsular War media

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: upmerge to Category:Peninsular War.--Mike Selinker (talk) 00:24, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Peninsular War media (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: I'm going to start chipping away at User:Stefanomione's vaster media by war/war by medium schema. This one is not his but appears to be inspired by his mis-use of "media" to describe such creative works as paintings. In this case, I suggest upmerging per WP:SMALLCAT. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:54, 8 August 2011 (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:Letters by alphabet

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:45, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Letters by alphabet to Category:Letters by script
Nominator's rationale: Rename. The letters are not organized by alphabet (Spanish alphabet, Dutch alphabet, French alphabet etc., but by script.). Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 12:00, 8 August 2011 (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:Thai australian rules footballer

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Thai australian rules footballer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Grammatical errors aside, just one player in over 100 years of AFL football has had a Thai background. Category completely unnecessary Jevansen (talk) 05:57, 8 August 2011 (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:GameCube

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 rename C2D. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:44, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:GameCube to Category:Nintendo GameCube
Nominator's rationale: Per main article. If this passes, all subcats. will be speedy-able. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 05:47, 8 August 2011 (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:General Slocum fire

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 rename C2D. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:45, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:General Slocum fire to Category:PS General Slocum
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match the name of the main article. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:32, 8 August 2011 (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:Female pool players

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:10, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Female pool players to Category:Female cue sports players
Nominator's rationale: The name is too narrow and exclusive for a number of reasons (to the extent that the rationales given in previous CFDs for this category's existence may still be valid at all under current WP:EGRS wording, and under other guidelines/policies like WP:Neutral point of view and WP:NOT#SOAPBOX).
  1. There's too much overlap for this level of specificity to be warranted. For example, more than half of the top-5 Women's Professional Billiards Association pool players, for around the last decade, have also been professional snooker players (such crossover is less common among male players for organizational politics reasons, not chromosomes; the WPBA has actively recruited women snooker players to pool, while the predominantly male leagues like the USPPA haven't done likewise with male snooker pros).
  2. The number of individuals is too small for this level of specificity, and so is the number of specializations. Contrast Category:Female racecar drivers, which supposedly has a large enough population of drivers distributed in a large enough set of different types of drivers to warrant sub-categorization by type, though even this is debatable under EGRS's current wording.
  3. Over-categorizing so specifically amounts to starting a parallel category structure split by gender, which is precisely what WP:EGRS says not to do (though some exceptions, like the subcategories of Category:Female racecar drivers, noted above, seem to be tolerated perhaps because they've never been CfD'd).
  4. WP:EGRS advises against over-specificity as "ghettoizing", using examples like the triple intersection "Category:Gay German politicians". Female pool players is actually a triple intersection despite its brevity, of female, cue sports (billiards) players and pocket billiards (pool) players in particular, like German politicians in particular. The guideline suggests keeping any EGRS category at a high level, like Category:Gay politicians and Category:Female heads of government, and adding more specific non-EGRS categories as needed, like Category:German politicians and Category:Prime Ministers of Sri Lanka. Ergo, Category:Female cue sports players, and the extant non-EGRS qualifiers like Category:[Nationality] pool players and/or Category:[Nationality] carom billiards players, and/or Category:[Nationality] snooker players, added as separate categories.
  5. Over-specificity is a maintenance headache and can lead to inaccuracy (e.g. if a player's article does not yet happen to cite one of the sources saying that she was a pool player as well as a snooker player at some point, she would be excluded from the unnecessarily narrow pool category unless and until someone happened to use a source that happened to mention the pool side of her career and the editor happened to notice that the pool category wasn't used on her article yet). That's a lot of failure points.
  6. Female carom billiards players are actually much less common than pool players, thus more "notable" to people who think that being female in a mostly male-populated field or vice versa is automagically "notable", but there probably aren't enough actually notable ones to support a category; meanwhile there are easily enough female snooker players for a category, but there isn't one, nor any interest at WP:SNOOKER in creating and maintaining one. Category:Female pool players is a premature subcategory without a parent. Effectively upmerging female players of all three cue sports types into a Category:Female cue sports players just makes sense and makes things easier (assuming any such category is kept at all).

The extant category's parent would necessarily become Category:Cue sports players instead of Category:Pool players, and Category:Female cue sports players would be additionally populated with some non-pool players like carom player Gülşen Degener, obviously. (PS: For those new to cue sports naming issues, it's not proposed as "Category:Female billiards players" because "billiards" is ambiguous, and can mean "all cue sports" or "the game English billiards only" or "carom billiards as a class of game", depending on variety of English.) — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō Contribs. 05:14, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Then you or someone else who cares to keep these things current and in synch needs to go re-establish a consensus on the wording at WP:EGRS, since it specifically uses Category:Gay German politicians (a.k.a. Category:LGBT politicians from Germany in different wording) as one of its main verboten examples! I go by what the guidelines actually say, not by what exceptions to them I can find somewhere. PS: Sorry, but I find that any time I provide a "snappier rationale" when any sort of EGRS issue is at stake, too many people fly off the handle and leap to "defend" an "important" category/article/whatever from being "attacked" by a "sexist"/"racist"/whatever, etc., etc. Previous debates about even this category in particular demonstrate an amazing number of knee-jerk, emotive reactions that have nothing at all to do with the facts of the topic (e.g., an encyclopedic article cannot be written about it, because it would be a blatant exercise in POV pushing and soapboxing). But I'm proposing a rename to make it come a little bit closer to making sense as a category, not proposing a deletion. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō Contribs. 18:20, 8 August 2011 (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:In-flight airliner fires

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:05, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:In-flight airliner fires to Category:In-flight aircraft fires
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Merge to parent category. I don't see a reason to need both categories. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:02, 8 August 2011 (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:Fires of unknown cause

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Fires of unknown cause (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Is this really a defining characteristic of fires? While this is a nice to know, I'm not sure that it belongs as a category. The current structure (Category:Fires by type seems to favor categorizing by what burned rather then the cause or lack of one. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:59, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or make subcategory; if a fire's cause is unknown, then isn't that just as relevant as where or when it occurred?
And it isn't the lack of a cause that groups these together; it is the fact that despite intensive search the causes of these fires have remained elusive. This is notable in and of itself; see Cold case. If anything, it should be made a subcategory and brought under the umbrella of Category:Fires by type. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 18:16, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, classifying the cause of a fire as unknown depends on the skill and abilities of those doing the investigation. As forensics science has developed, we have become more able to determine the causes of fires. I suppose that if you plotted the occurrence of these, you start at 100% from unknown causes and then you get to something approaching 0% unknown. Also if you read Our Lady of the Angels School fire, while officially listed as unknown, arson seems to be the confirmed cause the way the article is worded. So in a case like that, was it arson or was it something else and did it get classified do the the skills of those doing the investigation or was the cause officially not announced for some reason? Vegaswikian (talk) 19:40, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can't prove it though, no conclusive evidence. I stand by my prior decision. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 21:59, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We should only state that the cause is unknown if reliable sources say "the cause is unknown", not based on our own judgment as to whether proof is conclusive. postdlf (talk) 22:02, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Officially, the cause of the fire remains unknown". Happy? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 00:11, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per WWPU's arguments and Postdlf's proviso. And in any case, what would we do with this article? ;) Grutness...wha? 01:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PRIMARYUSAGE? Vegaswikian (talk) 01:52, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But these are the ones that can't be categorized. We don't know what caused them. We can't put them in any other category, so in this case an "unknown" category would be pretty much unavoidable. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 17:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So they don't get categorized by cause in any way. That's how it's avoidable. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:22, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is a major difference between not knowing the cause and knowing the cause but not having the proof that rises to the level that one can make an official statement. Police commonly know who the criminal that committed a crime is. However they can not act until they have the evidence that a court would require to convict. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:24, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, well, maybe the Our Lady of the Angels school fire wouldn't fit, but we know NOTHING AT ALL about the cause of the fire on PIA Flight 740 or Saudia Flight 163. It'll probably be better if it's pared down like that, but inclusion of articles that don't quite fit is in no way grounds for category deletion. And may I point out that the Our Lady of the Angels fire is in no way typical of the fires in said category. The majority of those articles are about fires about the cause of which NOTHING IS KNOWN. If the articles about fires the cause of which is known but unproven are removed, it won't shrink the category much. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 19:04, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As I see it, we're not agreeing to a category that is a holding pen for all fires where there is no listed cause, but rather listing those where the officially listed cause is "unknown". As such, this category is analogous to Category:Unidentified flying objects, Category:Unexplained disappearances, and Category:Works of unknown authorship, which I don't think anyone is in any hurry to delete. Grutness...wha? 01:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Saudia Flight 163 has a likely cause identified so that should not be in the category. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:28, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just removed it. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 11:01, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But as Grutness says, it's analogous to Category:Unidentified flying objects, Category:Unexplained disappearances, and Category:Works of unknown authorship, which aren't in any danger of deletion. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 16:36, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Three. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 23:41, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 21:02, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:OC#SMALL. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:50, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See my above comment. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 23:00, 12 August 2011 (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 music

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 reame C2D. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:46, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Arab music to Category:Arabic music
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per key article Arabic music. Grutness...wha? 01:51, 8 August 2011 (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:Categories by revolution

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: upmerge to category:Revolutions.--Mike Selinker (talk) 00:22, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Categories by revolution (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Part of User:Stefanomione's vast and largely unnecessary Foo by revolution/Revolutions by foo schema, this category has as its contents only Category:People by revolution, which is itself well-categorized. So I can see no practical use for this container cat. Perhaps the creator intended it for additional foo by revolution categories, but as we are now deleting them at a rapid pace, the nominated category is unlikely to be useful for future searches. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:29, 8 August 2011 (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:Television series with stars' names in the title

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 01:03, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Television series with stars' names in the title (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Overcategorization of unrelated subjects with shared naming characteristic. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:24, 8 August 2011 (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:Honorary members of the Malaysian Nature Society

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 01:04, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Honorary members of the Malaysian Nature Society (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. We generally avoid categorizing people by honorary memberships or honorary degrees because they are like awards—people often receive a lot of them in their lifetime and they are not particularly defining for the individuals so honored. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:08, 8 August 2011 (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.