February 29
Category:English-language television stations in the United States
- 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. (non-admin closure) sst✈ 08:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: "Station" implies over the air broadcasting. Most of these are cable channels. Something has to be done about that. ViperSnake151 Talk 20:30, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose most people use "station" for a channel regardless of how one receives it. ("Channel" might be better, technically). "television services" seems contrived and many people, I would venture, would think that's either a cable company, the closed-captioning folks, or the pay-per-view or interactive TV type folks; Tivo and Hulu seem to be television services but not channels or stations. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:13, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per Carlossuarez46. Pegship (talk) 00:35, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose for same reason; not everything about English usage is 100% logical. Given that our category names relate to the article names (there's even a speedy rename criterion in that regard), WP:COMMONNAME applies (albeit as a secondary effect). Anecdotally, I have to say I never seen/heard the phrase "television services" before, and I'm in my 40s, in the national "market" this pertains to, and was a media-relations professional for a decade, so I think that's better than a WP:IDONTKNOWIT argument. If "television services" is actually a common-ish term now and I simply haven't noticed, it's definitely a recent and jargonistic usage. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 13:02, 3 March 2016 (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:VICE 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: rename. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:27, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: MOS:TM ViperSnake151 Talk 20:25, 29 February 2016 (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:Palestinian Orthodox Christians
- 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. – Fayenatic London 17:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: merge, the two categories have clearly the same purpose. Marcocapelle ([[User talk:|talk]]) 07:14, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge -- Obviously identical: merge this way, not reverse merge. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:07, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - being from "Palestine" and being "Palestinian" is not the same. Many Israelis are from Palestine region but they are not Palestinian. Some self-identified Palestinians are from what is now Israel. Yasser Arafat was from Egypt, but is identified as Palestinian. Palestinian != from Palestine.GreyShark (dibra) 22:20, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- While that may be the case, the two people in Category:Palestinian Orthodox Christians are definitely people from Palestine, so the merge is still correct.Marcocapelle (talk) 07:29, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Support—the first category title suggests that there is a Palestinian Orthodox Church, which is not the case. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:09, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per Greyshark. Hawaan12 (talk) 21:26, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per nom as duplicates. The issue highlighted by Greyshark is one that could potentially apply to all of the subcategories of Category:Eastern Orthodox Christians by nationality. In all cases, not all FOOian people are from FOO. (In many cases, nationality depends on the identity of one's parents more (or instead of) than the place of birth.) That's one reason why "FOOian XXXX" is a superior category name format in general when we are categorizing people by nationality and another characteristic. It just so happens that this category tree does not use the FOOian form, because doing so creates confusion. But there is no good reason to have two categories when every other nationality dealt with in Category:Eastern Orthodox Christians by nationality only has one. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:04, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge since the 2 articles in the started category clearly fit in the target. Categories are meant to aid navigation and thus we should avoid overly small ones. Especially which also suggest the existence of religious bodies that do not exist.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:00, 26 March 2016 (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.