March 27
Category:Railway stations at college campuses
- 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. There is a consensus that if the category is kept, it should be renamed. No consensus on @Marcocapelle and DexDor's suggestion to delete, so feel free to open a new deletion discussion on the renamed category. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:20, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: Requesting rename as this category includes stations serving college and university campuses in the United States and in other countries. In accordance with naming convention for categories about schools of higher education (i.e. Category: Universities and colleges in the United States, Category: Universities and colleges in Canada, etc) and to accommodate both American ("college") and non-American ("university") varieties of English. RA0808 talkcontribs 19:20, 27 March 2018 (UTC); edited 19:06, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Question is this a defining characteristic? I'm opening two articles, Harvard station and Haverford Station and both do not even mention a campus. I'm just speculating now that that these stations are near a campus rather than at a campus but that would raise the question how close to a campus a station should be to qualify for this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:26, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- There is a possibility that the category's creator or some other editors may have been a bit overzealous in adding stations and it may require cleanup. I'm also not opposed to determining what criteria define a station being "at" a campus (i.e. Would a station that exclusively serves a college/university but isn't located directly on campus be considered "at"?). I can say that even if we limit this category to stations located on or immediately adjacent to colleges/universities it would still be a useful category. RA0808 talkcontribs 18:53, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, 'College' is very Amerocentric to this Canadian and the proposal would provide the right balance. Radagast (talk) 22:59, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -- There is also one at University of Birmingham (England). Peterkingiron (talk) 17:47, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete (as we don't otherwise categorize stations by what they are at/near afaics - e.g. this is the only "Category:Railway stations at ...") or rename and purge. DexDor (talk) 11:49, 4 April 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:Lists of railway accidents in Australia
- 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. Note that this discussion was originally closed inappropriately (see WP:BADNAC) by a now-blocked non-admin sock @Artix Kreiger, who proceeded to move the pages manually. I reverted all the manual moves; full saga explained here. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:19, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: To make consistent the naming of the subcategories of this tree in line with the rename of the parent done here. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:51, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Please do. And if you find any subcats that I've missed, feel free to add them. I am busy this week and next so I probably won't get to them (if any) until mid-April. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:13, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Prefer to keep as "accidents" and purge out other incidents (if necessary). That is the focus of almost all of them. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:49, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I like expanding the inclusion for noted reasons above. I suggest less wordiness, "accidents and" seems unnecessary if we define an accident as being an incident. Why would it not be? Trackinfo (talk) 06:27, 7 April 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:Organizations based in Antarctica
Category:Television anchors from Lafayette, Indiana
- 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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 03:55, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: Category has just one entry. WP:SMALLCAT applies but the fact is that the one entry's only link to Lafayette is that they work in the city. The article also states Ms. King as being from other parts of Indiana. Consensus has been on workers based out of a city- Sportspeople for instance- that just working somewhere doesn't make the person from the place ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:44, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: Category has just one entry. WP:SMALLCAT applies but the fact is that the one entry's only link to Grand Rapids is that they work in the city. Consensus has been on workers based out of a city- Sportspeople for instance- that just working somewhere doesn't make the person from the place. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:41, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- There's a whole structure at Category:American television anchors by city. Per WP:SMALLCAT, "Avoid categories that, by their very definition, will never have more than a few members, unless such categories are part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme..." Please explain why the structure I note above doesn't qualify as "a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme" Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:28, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- As I wrote above- Consensus has been on workers based out of a city- Sportspeople for instance- that just working somewhere doesn't make the person from the place. The only link these people have with these location. If these categories are only full of people who because they worked at WXYZ in Foo, there shouldn't be categories like 'Television anchors from Foo'....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:50, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Category:American television anchors by city is not an "overall, accepted subcategorization scheme" in the sense that every city automatically gets one of these the moment there's one person from there to be filed in it — a city can have a subcategory in that tree if there are a lot of anchors from there, but does not automatically get one of these the moment the number of articles to file in it exceeds zero. By the same token, cities don't automatically get a "mayors of (City)" the moment one past or present mayor of that city has an article, either — it's a scheme where an individual city subcategory doesn't get created until there are at least five articles to file in it. Bearcat (talk) 14:31, 3 April 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.
Corbeta Uruguay base
- 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: mere & delete per revised nomination. – Fayenatic London 13:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose deleting:
Category:Years of the 20th century in the Falkland Islands Dependencies- Category:Disestablishments in the Falkland Islands Dependencies by year
- Category:20th-century disestablishments in the Falkland Islands Dependencies
- Category:Disestablishments in the Falkland Islands Dependencies by decade
- Category:1980s disestablishments in the Falkland Islands Dependencies
- Category:20th-century disestablishments in the Falkland Islands Dependencies
- Propose merging:
- Nominator's ratioanale: eight categories for one article: Corbeta Uruguay base, a 1976–82 Argentine military outpost on the British-held South Sandwich Islands.
- The categories have not expanded since they were created in May 2013, and are unlikely to grow unless there is a massive expansion of en.wp coverage of the once-huge whaling operations in the South Sandwich Islands.
- If and when that expansion happens, there may be a case for by-decade categories, but I doubt there could ever be enough to populate establishments-by-year and disestablishments-by-year. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:43, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support nomination, too few articles for this category tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @BrownHairedGirl: on a point of detail: the first nominated category would still have two sub-cats. It could be merged to Category:Years in the Falkland Islands Dependencies but, as the territory's history spans two centuries, the nominated cat might as well be kept as part of the C20 hierarchy. – Fayenatic London 08:55, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - would it not be better merging the categories to their Falkland Island equivalents, rather than British Empire ones - especially since the British Empire did not exist in 1976 or 1982? Grutness...wha? 00:59, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment According to our British Empire article, the Empire ended in 1997 with the loss of Hong Kong. Dimadick (talk) 06:47, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Interesting... it actually says "The transfer of Hong Kong to China in 1997 marked for many the end of the British Empire." (my italics). I was always under the impression that the end of empire officially came with the independence of India: The official title of the British monarch prior to that time was (in a shortened form) King/Queen of the United Kingdom and her domains and territories, and Emperor/Empress of India. As such, after India's independence, George VI was no longer an Emperor, and thus Britain no longer had an empire. Grutness...wha? 01:55, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support in principle, but this is still overkill. "British Overseas Territories" would be a better target than British Empire. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:54, 1 April 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.