< August 29 August 31 >

August 30

Category:Musicians from Takatsuki, Osaka

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. (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 13:18, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorisation. When I originally made the category in 2014, there happened to be a clump of musicians from Takatsuki in the first section of data, but it turned out that there weren't actually that many. I don't think being from Takatsuki vs. being from Osaka Prefecture in general has that great influence on their music, so I'd recommend each page be recategorised into the two parent categories - Category:Musicians from Osaka Prefecture and Category:People from Takatsuki, Osaka. Prosperosity (talk) 22:50, 30 August 2018 (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:Singapore education navigational boxes

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 14:20, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category is currently unpopulated. There aren't many entries in the parent category and most of those entries are navbox templates, so this category is rather redundant. -- AquaDTRS (talk) 22:01, 30 August 2018 (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:Corporate law 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: keep. ℯxplicit 04:26, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Substantial overlap. Business law is a little wider and better populated. Rathfelder (talk) 12:53, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Completely agree on the latter. I've added the parent categories to the nomination and tagged all four categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:40, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Business law and corporate law are not exactly the same thing, especially before companies became common. Some articles are about the regulation of trade in the middle ages. Rathfelder (talk) 19:03, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please provide reliable sources for distinguishing business law from corporate law. And note that you are now undermining your own nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:57, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not all business is conducted by corporate bodies. Not all the law about business relates to corporations. To take one at random from Category:Business law: Practicing without a license. Rathfelder (talk) 17:59, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd be perfectly happy with a tree of corporate and commercial law. But this is not my field of expertise. I wonder whether anything in business law would be excluded? Rathfelder (talk) 21:56, 5 September 2018 (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:Democracy and the United Kingdom

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 16:14, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Arbitrary categorisation. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 09:36, 30 August 2018 (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:21st-century Roman Catholicism

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 by replacing 'Roman Catholicism' with 'Catholicism'. ℯxplicit 04:26, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C: following 1) Category:Roman Catholicism -> Category:Catholic Church, 2) Recent rename of Category:Christianity in the Middle Ages, as well as 3) Category:11th century-Category:21st century. Please note that this request does not pertain the Category:Latin Church, but to Category:Catholic Church. If you want to propose an equivalent category tree branch as an extension of Category:Latin Church, feel free, but please refrain from contaminating this request with too much discussion about that. Please note that there is currently no WP:CONSENSUS on what category title formula such a category tree should follow. These above preexisting categories pertains (pertained) to Category:Catholic Church, not Category:Latin Church, and there are no indications that they have pertained to the latter ever at all since their inception. Chicbyaccident (talk) 08:56, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above categories in question pertains to the Catholic Church, as evident from its contents and longstanding parent categorising. Anglo-Catholicism- and Independent Catholicism-related things are categorised elsewhere. Thus, it is quite the other way around. Feel free to go about extending category branch trees from under Category:Anglo-Catholicism and Category:Independent Catholicism, but please keep discussions about those topics separated from what has since a long time been categorised under Category:Catholic Church (only with inconsistent category titles which are now being harmonised). Chicbyaccident (talk) 09:52, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My remarks pertain exclusively to the categories to be renamed in the nom. Oculi (talk) 13:04, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid their surrounding categories and contents matter per WP:C2C, and WP:C2D. Chicbyaccident (talk) 08:13, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:C2C is for Consistency with established category tree names, and category tree names are far from established with consistency in the realm of Catholicism, as you keep arguing, rightfully so. WP:C2D is Consistency with main article's name and applies only for the Catholic Church category (as you often cite the Catholic Church article as point of reference), it does not apply mecanically to the entire category tree. Place Clichy (talk) 16:32, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Marcocapelle, as seen for instance here. You Place Clichy seem to tend to ooppose these kinds of requests with references to ostensibly established conventions - although these are far from established. Please consider contributing to Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Catholicism)#Latin_Church before you assert conventions related to these requests. Chicbyaccident (talk) 07:17, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Chicbyaccident: I actually agreed with the substance of your proposal here, and I also agree with Marcocapelle's opinion on the current nomination. I also placed a worded opinion at your invitation at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Catholicism)#Latin Church on 29 August, which I help will clarify the point. Place Clichy (talk) 16:32, 11 September 2018 (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:Health organisations in the Netherlands

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 16:15, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of Category:Medical and health organisations based in the Netherlands. Upmerge. Shyamsunder (talk) 08:35, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd support this. I can't see why I created it as a seperate category.Rathfelder (talk) 08:38, 30 August 2018 (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:Guests on Dr. Phil (talk show)

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 16:17, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NOTDEFINING for any of the names added to the category. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As it happens, I depopulated the category (using the edit summary "Not a defining characteristic; WP:CATDEF") before I even noted that this CfD had been opened. General Ization Talk 02:59, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I created the category but I now see why it doesn't need to be on Wikipedia. ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 05:01, 30 August 2018 (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:Flora of West Africa

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. ℯxplicit 04:26, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These categories appear to be for the same region. DexDor (talk) 18:14, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My reading of Category:Flora of West Africa (and in particular the linked article West Africa) is that it excludes the Maghreb (i.e. it's just the dark green area on the map). I checked a sample of articles in the category and none appear to be limited to North Africa. It'd probably be a good idea to change to a less ambigious map and then check all the articles in the category. DexDor (talk) 19:12, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've now changed Cat:FoWA to use a less ambiguous map (showing the same region as the map at Cat:FoWTA - i e. not including the Maghreb) and checked the articles in the category - none were in the Maghreb but not in WTA (but I made some category changes for other reasons). DexDor (talk) 17:28, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not in favour of User:Fayenatic london's scheme because (1) it does not fit with the scheme defined at Wikipedia:PLANTS/Using_the_WGSRPD#Category:Flora_of_Africa (which has Africa, including the islands in the Atlantic, divided into 10 regions) and (2) it is unnecessarily complicated for those unfamiliar with the category structure (e.g. many articles referring to tropical West Africa etc have been placed in Cat:FoWA and not in Cat:FoWTA). DexDor (talk) 20:57, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DexDor: Thanks for resolving the misleading map. Now, how does my proposal not fit with the defined scheme? In practice, what is the difference between our proposals? We both favour having articles only in the 10 WGSRPD Region categories, and none directly in FoWA. Is there really only one difference, namely the fate of the FoWA page: a container category in my proposal, but perhaps you would suggest redirecting it after the merge? I can accept the latter, if both FoWTA and FomAO will be placed in the current parents of FoWA. – Fayenatic London 21:19, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯxplicit 01:27, 30 August 2018 (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