Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 October 10

< October 9	October 11 >

October 10

Category:Mario Universe games

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 to Category:Mario video games. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) JOE BRO 64 11:11, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Mario Universe games (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Not a defining characteristic for games. I think WP:OR could also apply here, because you could argue that Perfect Dark takes place in the Mario universe because it's in Rare Replay and Banjo-Kazooie is in Rare Replay and Banjo from Banjo-Kazooie appears in Diddy Kong Racing. JOE BRO 64 23:42, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Simply change the name (and therefore the scope) to just Category:Mario video games, which would follow other common categories like Category:The Legend of Zelda video games. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 04:33, 13 October 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:Birmingham Bears cricketers

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. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:31, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Birmingham Bears cricketers to Category:Warwickshire cricketers

Nominator's rationale: As per consensus on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Birmingham Bears Twenty20 Cricket Club, Birmingham Bears are not a distinct club from Warwickshire CCC, but are just the name for Warwickshire's T20 team. As the pages are getting merge, so should these categories Joseph2302 (talk) 19:46, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:35, 11 October 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:Beetles of Great Britain

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. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:27, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Beetles of Great Britain to Category:Beetles of Europe
Propose merging Category:Beetles of the British Isles to Category:Beetles of Europe

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining e.g. for Aleochara. See previous CFDs e.g. for spiders. For info: there is a list that is much more comprehensive than the category. DexDor^(talk) 19:06, 10 October 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:Automobiles

This discussion was listed at Wikipedia:Move review on 23 November 2018. The result of the move review was close endorsed.

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. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:12, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Automobiles to Category:Cars

Nominator's rationale: I tried to get this done through speedy, but now I'm here. The main article was moved from 'automobile' to 'car' four years ago, and this subject is clearly the primary topic of the word 'cars'. Consistency with the main article is desirable, and 'cars' is a better title for the category for all the reasons we moved the article. There is already a category for motor vehicles broadly, to match with the article motor vehicle, so that should not be an issue. Can we tidy this up? RGloucester — ☎ 16:21, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

copy of speedy renaming discussion

Category:Automobiles to Category:Cars – C2D: The main article was moved to Car years ago. Consistency with the main article is desirable. RGloucester — ☎ 15:51, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I support this and would allow it as speedy, despite the slight ambiguity over secondary meanings Category:Cars (film) and Category:The Cars (band). – Fayenatic London 17:26, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose This proposal was rejected at speedy four years ago. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:52, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was rejected at that time because a certain administrator wanted to contest the RM outcome, right after it occurred...but now the article title has been stable for four years. Do you have any legitimate reason to oppose this request, rather than going on about what happened four years ago? RGloucester — ☎ 00:29, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support in the spirit of WP:C2D. Having the article at the new title for four years is a sufficiently long time. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support, noting that there are many sub-cats which would need to be renamed accordingly. If this looks like it will be approved, I suggest that someone re-lists it, adding at least the main sub-cats at the next level, after which the rest could follow as speedy. – Fayenatic London 20:57, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per my reasoning at Commons:Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/07/Category:Automobiles. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:12, 18 October 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:Establishments in Lower Burma by year

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. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:50, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Establishments in Lower Burma by year to Category:Establishments in Myanmar by year
Propose merging Category:1852 establishments in Lower Burma to Category:1852 establishments in Burma and Category:1852 establishments in the British Empire
Propose merging Category:1861 establishments in Lower Burma to Category:1861 establishments in Burma and Category:1861 establishments in the British Empire

Nominator's rationale: these outliers within Category:Establishments in Myanmar by year do not help navigation. Note: Upper Burma, ruled by the Konbaung dynasty, remained independent of Britain until 1885, so I agree that Category:1852 establishments in Burma etc should not be sub-cats of British Empire. – Fayenatic London 09:57, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, merge the first one but keep the others, and split/rename all the establishments and year categories within Category:Years of the 19th century in Burma from 1824 to 1885 to Lower Burma / Upper Burma. I think only 1852 would require both. – Fayenatic London 10:31, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support for consistency. If desired, the alternative should be discussed in a separate nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:59, 11 October 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:U.S. Highways by state

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: do not rename. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:29, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:U.S. Highways by state to Category:U.S. highways by state

49 subcategories

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary capitalization of "highways". Should also apply to all 49 subcategories (are there no highways in Hawaii?) Brad v 05:28, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment these are specifically about roads that are part of the United States Numbered Highway System, which indeed is not in Hawaii. (Alaska Route 2 isn't actually part of that system either, though it was proposed at one point). The various Category:Interstate Highways in Wyoming categories are a similar (and possibly stronger) argument to rename to avoid excessive capitalization. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:52, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The nom would be correct if this was a set of descriptive titles per WP:NDESC ... but it isn't.

This is a set of cats based on a proper name, the capitalised United States Numbered Highway System, known as "U.S. Highways" for short. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:58, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

oppose since it's a proper name: see United States Numbered Highway System. Mangoe (talk) 15:10, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Since there is no entity called "U.S. Highways", then it is not a title. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:44, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but you are incorrect. Mangoe (talk) 20:53, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. U.S. Highways refer specifically to the United States Numbered Highway System. –Fredddie ™ 04:02, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per proper name of system and component highways. Sounder Bruce 04:03, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because this refers to just the U.S. Highways, not the U.S. highways (meaning any highway in the US). --Rs chen 7754 05:41, 14 October 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.