Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 September 14

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< September 13 September 15 >

September 14

[edit]

Category:United States Marine Corps in media

[edit]
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. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:United States Marine Corps in media to Category:United States Marine Corps in popular culture
Nominator's rationale: I believe this should be renamed so as to bring it into line with parent Category:Topics in popular culture, which I just added. If there's a better master category, let me know. Please note that this category includes both fictional and non-fictional portrayals. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:58, 14 September 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:Non-fiction books by war correspondents

[edit]
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) 18:41, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Non-fiction books by war correspondents to Category:Non-fiction books about war
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge Now, does it matter if a non-fiction book about a war is written by someone considered a "correspondent," as opposed to some other profession? I don't believe so, and more importantly I don't see a parent category for Category:Books by journalists. I don't believe this offshoot of Category:Non-fiction books about war is really helpful for readers, who are going to be looking for books about specific wars, not by the author's title or journalistic assignment. I think it's just one more way for User:Stefanomione to populate his Category:War correspondents by medium grouping. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:47, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep without prejudice to further, more systemic approaches resulting from discussion in appropriate wikiprojects War correspondents often write fiction, often based on their experiences, and this category is a useful one to distinguish fiction from non-fiction. War correspondents are indeed a topic of some independence and of great literary interest, perhaps most famously Ernest Hemingway brought sexy into the field. Hence the categorizations do increase the encyclopedic value to our readers - the perspectives of War correspondents, as opposed to military men and other witnesses to war, are often seen in historiography and in popular overviews as distinct in reliability, perspective, impetus, and even literary value. Also, I see nothing wrong with Category:War correspondents by medium except it is incomplete in the subcats (for example has a category on fiction about war correspondents, but not one on non-fiction), so I do not understand the issues here. I do think that individualist efforts of categorization without involvement of interested wikiprojects is a bad idea, but that is a reason to discuss, not delete.--Cerejota (talk) 20:31, 14 September 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:Documentary films about war correspondents

[edit]
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 adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: upmerge.--Mike Selinker (talk) 18:40, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose upmerging Category:Documentary films about war correspondents
Nominator's rationale: I've been trying to figure out what to do with User:Stefanomione's parent,Category:War correspondents by medium. It includes works about and by war correspondents, so a "works about foo" rename won't work, I think.
Anyway, per WP:SMALLCAT, upmerge this one to Documentary films about journalism, Documentary films about war and Films about war correspondents, I suggest. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:52, 14 September 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 adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Religious history by country

[edit]
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/merge all, including Wales. This was a tough call, given a divided vote. I was more persuaded by the rename arguments and how the contents seemed more about histories of particular religions, as well as the overlap between the two India categories.--Mike Selinker (talk) 16:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Religious history by country to Category:History of religion by country
Propose merging Category:Religious history of India to Category:History of religion in India
Propose renaming Category:Religious history of Moldova to Category:History of religion in Moldova
Propose renaming Category:Religious history of Poland to Category:History of religion in Poland
Propose renaming Category:Religious history of Romania to Category:History of religion in Romania
Propose renaming Category:Religious history of Serbia to Category:History of religion in Serbia
Propose renaming Category:Religious history of the United Kingdom to Category:History of religion in the United Kingdom
Propose renaming Category:Religious history of the United States to Category:History of religion in the United States
Propose renaming Category:Religious history of England to Category:History of religion in England
Propose renaming Category:Religious history of Scotland to Category:History of religion in Scotland
Propose deleting Category:Religious history of Wales
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Matching head category Category:History of religion and lead articles such as History of religion in the United States. – Fayenatic (talk) 18:43, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The category for Wales contains only a sub-cat, not history-specific, which is already in other suitable head categories. – Fayenatic (talk) 08:53, 15 September 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:Operating System user templates

[edit]
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 C2A. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:51, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Operating System user templates to Category:Operating system user templates
Nominator's rationale: General sense.
Also rename all subcategories accordingly. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:48, 14 September 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:Scruff (TV series)

[edit]
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) 21:27, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Scruff (TV series) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Links only three articles. Not enough articles to populate. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 10:15, 14 September 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:Articles created by User:Marshallsumter

[edit]
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: Content moved to article so we don't loose more of the edit history. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:28, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Convert Category:Articles created by User:Marshallsumter to article Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomy/User:Marshallsumter Incident Article Fix-up Coordination Page
Nominator's rationale: I created this category to help with identifying and collaborating on fixing this mess. Since almost all of the articles have been deleted, and those who were kept in general are not considered problematic, I think there is no longer a need for a category. However, the actual text of the category has become a strong collaborative effort to fix, recreate, and otherwise deal with the mess. I propose a name, but any name would do, but think the WikiProject Astronomy has been the most active in fix-up, so this should be a subpage there. Cerejota (talk) 07:42, 14 September 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:Kohanim sons of Tzadok

[edit]
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) 21:30, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Kohanim sons of Tzadok to Category:Sons of Zadok
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Firstly WP:EN, secondly WP:RS, thirdly redundancy - since all Sons of Zadok in Ancient Israel were by definition kohen/priests. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Overcategorisation of three people by family relation. Debresser (talk) 07:59, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Delete, 2 of 3 are already under Category:High Priests of Israel anyway. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:18, 14 September 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:Kohanic gifts

[edit]
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:Twenty-four priestly gifts. If the main article is moved to "The" then the category can be speedied to matched it. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:05, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Kohanic gifts to Category:Twenty-four priestly gifts
Nominator's rationale: Rename. In line with WP:EN, WP:RS for content related to Ancient Israel, Ancient Near East religion and Hebrew Bible. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:29, 14 September 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:Kehuna

[edit]
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. Timrollpickering (talk) 21:28, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Kehuna to Category:Priesthood (Judaism)
Nominator's rationale: In line with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) and WP:IRS, very little evidence for kehuna as a word in English, overwhelmingly "priesthood" in Google Books, JSTOR. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:26, 14 September 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:The spread of Islam in Indonesia

[edit]
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:History of Islam in Indonesia.--Mike Selinker (talk) 13:42, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:The spread of Islam in Indonesia to Category:Islam in Indonesia.
Rationale: The only subcat is already in that category, so that just leaves fifteen articles (one of which is the main article for the subcat.) This is overcategorization. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:43, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dont change - the Indonesian project topics that could fill the sub cat are sufficient enough to get over the hangup about 15 arts - there are potentially a large number of other articles and topics that could complicate this - it dosnt need simplifying at this stage - SatuSuro 12:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dont change this is one of numerous historical era categories that form a series. While it can fall under the Islam in Indonesia category, it should stand alone as a sub cat of the History of Indonesia. If anything, a parent cat refinement might be in order. 15 pages is hardly too little. --Merbabu (talk) 00:45, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
in what way is the existing cat name not neutral? --Merbabu (talk) 00:45, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we could go through all the other "History of (each religion) by country" pages, e.g. Category:History of Christianity by geography or ethnicity and Category:Bahá'í Faith by country, and decide whether each one was mainly a "spread of" or just a "history of" or simply "faith in Foo" page. Let's keep it simple, just have "Faith in Foo" and, if there is a separate history article, "History of Faith in Foo". Although, to be fair, I have just spotted a bunch of "Christianization of Foo" articles in the category I just linked to. - – Fayenatic (talk) 09:16, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - 'to keep things simple' ? - the Indonesian project worked had and troubled and discussed over the component parts of a template and sequences of history in the country - and it just so happens that The spread of Islam is a pertinent indicator of the article and the correlated template found at - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Indonesia - I fail to be convinced that the ruminations above have any consideration of the context of that - and see no reason to fit into other ways of considering it - foo or no foo SatuSuro 11:25, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further Comment - much work has been done to create era articles for Indonesian history. These are perhaps most clearly seen as they appear in the History of Indonesia template that's on the History of Indonesia page. The Spread of Islam is on that page. This is first and foremost an historical era with article and category to match about which there is much literature and describes how Islam first came to Indonesia around 1200 and by 1600 was the dominant religion. It is not a History of Islam in Indonesia, and it is not about Islamisation which is still happening and is a much broader topic. thanks --Merbabu (talk) 14:14, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to Category:History of Islam in Indonesia. The "Spread of" formation is non-neutral because it is set up as an argument that the religion has expanded throughout the contry over history. It is a "we began small but took over" formulation. The fact of the history of Islam in Indonesia is there are parts of Indonesia that were more heavily Muslim in 1500 than they are today, and the history of Islam in the country is not just one of expansion. Anyway, we do not use the "spread of" formation in other countries, so there is no reason to use it in Indonesia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:07, 18 September 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:Christian martyrs of Modern Times

[edit]
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. I did not see consensus on "of" versus "in," so if that's a point of contention, propose it again for renaming.--Mike Selinker (talk) 16:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Christian martyrs of Modern Times to Category:Christian martyrs in modern history
Category:Catholic martyrs of Modern Times to Category:Catholic martyrs in modern history
Category:Eastern Orthodox martyrs of Modern Times to Category:Eastern Orthodox martyrs in modern history
Category:Protestant martyrs of Modern Times to Category:Protestant martyrs in modern history
Nominator's rationale: Per modern history/modern era/etc. If this is renamed, subcategories can be speedily renamed. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:40, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (as original creator of category). I have tagged and added its denominational sub-cats to this nomination. – Fayenatic (talk) 11:59, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Why the "in" - these are just biographies of people martyred after 1700, and we might as well say so. A slight improvement on the existing title, but sdo we really need these sub-groupings anyway? Johnbod (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good point - "of" would be better than "in". When I originally created these sub-cats, it was the first time that Christian martyrs had been subdivided; there were no century categories. Now that century categories have been added, I acknowledge that these era-categories are no longer essential, but they are still useful for navigation as sub-cats of the history categories by era:
Category:Ancient
Christianity 		Category:Early Christianity
Category:Christianity in late antiquity
Category:Christianity in the Middle Ages
Category:Christianity in the early modern period
Category:Christianity in the late modern period
1st BC 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th
11th 12th 13th 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th 21st

– Fayenatic (talk) 09:00, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Are these categories necessary now that categories of Christians, Martyrs etc by century already exist up to the 20th-century, and could be created if necessary for the 21st century, with by-century categories placed directly into the various eras, eg Christianity of the Early Modern era to include 16th, 17th & 18th century Christians. Unlike some in the the Ancient and Medieval eras, the correct century should be known for every Christian. Hugo999 (talk) 12:57, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, I can be sold these as sub-cats of the ones in the table above, but the martyrs break at 1700 while the main cat breaks at 1800! Johnbod (talk) 22:13, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Like mathematicians and artists, Christians who live in multiple centuries get put in the multiple categories. There is nothing that makes it so century categories are exclusive. On the specific question though, we would classify martyrs by the century in which they were killed. So we could put each martyr in a distinct category by when they died. Some their death year may be iffy, but very few since 1700 it would be unknown which century they died in.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:11, 18 September 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:Eccentricity

[edit]
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) 21:29, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Eccentricity (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Simply including someone in a category for having been eccentric seems like an overly broad system of classification. See, e.g. Category:Recluses. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:51, 14 September 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:People from Ravensburg

[edit]
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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 13:21, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:People from Ravensburg to Category:People from Ravensburg (town)
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To disambiguate from people from Category:People from the District of Ravensburg. Mayumashu (talk) 04:43, 14 September 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:2006 in Australian motorsport

[edit]
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 by nominator. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:04, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:2000 in Australian motorsport to Category:2000 in Australian sport
Propose merging Category:2006 in Australian motorsport to Category:2006 in Australian sport
Propose merging Category:2009 in Australian motorsport to Category:2009 in Australian sport
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. Overcategorisation. Noting that there are no other categories of the form "YYYY in <country> motorsport". DH85868993 (talk) 03:24, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Given the category has 10 articles, it doesn't appear to be overcategorisation to me. It makes these articles very easy to find, and is populated with articles. Other sports have similar categories. Beyond over categorisation, is there a reason to merge? --06:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
To be honest, I'm not especially passionate about the categories being merged. My main rationale for listing them here was to gauge opinion on whether this is a desirable category tree to introduce, in which case it should be extended to other years (and possibly countries) or not (in which case we can kill it easily now while there are only a few categories to process). DH85868993 (talk) 12:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with above comment 10 plus articles is more then enough to justify a category, definitely not overcategorization Djln--Djln (talk) 11:34, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A logical subdivision with a sufficient number of articles to ensure that it is not overcategorization. In the United States, the most well-known racing series each have their own category instead of a country-based category (which is another fine way to do it). Royalbroil 04:29, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw nomination There's obviously support for the "YYYY in Australian motorsport" categories, so I hereby withdraw the nomination. DH85868993 (talk) 11:39, 17 September 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:Hindu temples around Chennai

[edit]
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/rename as nominated. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:59, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Category:Hindu temples around Chennai (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Rename Category:Temples around Madurai to Category:Hindu temples in Madurai district
Rename Category:Temples around Trichy to Category:Hindu temples in Tiruchirappalli district (note: category is incorporated in Template:Temples around Tiruchirappalli)
Nominator's rationale: I've moved all articles in Category:Hindu temples around Chennai to Category:Hindu temples in Chennai as per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 August 2#Category:Temples around Thanjavur, Kumbakonam. This cat can now be deleted. The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 02:15, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I added two similar categories in Tamil Nadu to this nomination for renaming. – Fayenatic (talk) 12:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to in either for a city or district. Remove all categories using "around".John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:14, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I am moving existing pages to district category. It would be slightly irrelevant as temples in Tamilnadu are not administered district-wise. Need to invent a bit more classification to achieve finesse. For now, it can be moved.S Sriram 01:30, 19 September 2011 (UTC)ssriram_mt
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:Interactive theorem proving software

[edit]
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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:57, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Interactive theorem proving software to Category:Proof assistants
Nominator's rationale: Rename. More common, more concise name. —Ruud 00:10, 14 September 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_September_14&oldid=1089914559"