Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 December 8: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
(sorry, fixed edit) adding Category:Crime in Kosovo; closing Category:Farragut class destroyer (1958) as speedy by author request; commenting on T.J. Litafik
BL Lacertae (talk | contribs)
6,342 edits
Line 6: Line 6:
Proposal: [[T._J._Litafik]] feels more like a resume than a article. no outside references or outside material. {[[User:Jabencarsey|Jabencarsey]] 20:03, 8 December 2005 (UTC)}
Proposal: [[T._J._Litafik]] feels more like a resume than a article. no outside references or outside material. {[[User:Jabencarsey|Jabencarsey]] 20:03, 8 December 2005 (UTC)}
:Shouldn't this go to AfD, not here? It doens't seem to be a catagory... [[User:JesseW/sig|JesseW, the juggling janitor]] 23:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
:Shouldn't this go to AfD, not here? It doens't seem to be a catagory... [[User:JesseW/sig|JesseW, the juggling janitor]] 23:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
:yeah this should be on [[WP:AFD]]. <font color="red">[[User:BL Lacertae|BL]]</font> <small><font color="#555555">[[User talk:BL Lacertae|kiss the lizard]]</font></small> 23:20, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

====Ethnic groups by country====
====Ethnic groups by country====
Proposal: That "in country" be established at [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories)]] as the guideline of how to name categories that have a scope of collecting [[ethnic groups]] by [[country]], and that existing categories that use the wording "of country" be renamed to use the wording "in country".
Proposal: That "in country" be established at [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories)]] as the guideline of how to name categories that have a scope of collecting [[ethnic groups]] by [[country]], and that existing categories that use the wording "of country" be renamed to use the wording "in country".

Revision as of 23:20, 8 December 2005

December 8

Category:Crime in Kosovo

Only contained one article Trafficking of women in and from Kosovo which I, quite justifiably, recatagorzied into Category:Kosovo and Category:Sex crimes. After that, the category was empty. While it is possible that, if we get an editor devoted to writing about Kosovo, eventually he/she will write so much that it will require, not just a Crime in Kosovo article but so many seperate articles that a catagory would be helpful, I think this is unlikely, and, in any case, would require so much effort that the effort of recreating the catagory would be neglible. Therefore, Delete(for now) JesseW, the juggling janitor 23:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

T.J. Litafik

Proposal: T._J._Litafik feels more like a resume than a article. no outside references or outside material. {Jabencarsey 20:03, 8 December 2005 (UTC)}[reply]

Shouldn't this go to AfD, not here? It doens't seem to be a catagory... JesseW, the juggling janitor 23:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
yeah this should be on WP:AFD. BL kiss the lizard 23:20, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic groups by country

Proposal: That "in country" be established at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories) as the guideline of how to name categories that have a scope of collecting ethnic groups by country, and that existing categories that use the wording "of country" be renamed to use the wording "in country".

Currently categories that group ethnic groups by country mostly have "of country" in their name. For example, Category:Ethnic groups of Canada. However, there currently is no listed guideline at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories) of how such ethnic groups by country categories should be named. For several reasons, I am proposing that ethnic groups by country categories be named "in country", such as Category:Ethnic groups in Mexico. This proposal has been discussed at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (categories), with all commenting Wikipedians in favour of the change. Arguments in favour of the proposal are as follows.

The existence of some ethnic groups, such as indigenous peoples, pre-date the formation of the countries that they are now located in. For example, see the First Nations or Inuit in Canada, or the Awá in Brazil. If the ethnic group existed prior to the formation of the country, then the word "in" is more accurate than the word "of", and avoids implying belonging. A Google search also confirms that generally "in" is more widely used than "of" in describing ethnic groups by country. See Google searches for "ethnic groups in Australia" vs. "ethnic groups of Australia", and "ethnic groups in France" vs. "ethnic groups of France".

The choice of "in" instead of "of" in regard to ethnic groups and political entities has also been made through debate or has not been objected to for several articles and categories including Aboriginal peoples in Canada, Indigenous peoples in Brazil, Indigenous peoples in the United States, List of ethnic groups in Laos, List of ethnic groups in Vietnam, Category:Native American tribes in Arizona, Category:Native American tribes in Florida, and Category:Native American tribes in Wisconsin.

Lastly, an additional reason in favour of the use of "in country" expressed by a commenting Wikipedian at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (categories) is that: 'I prefer "in" over "of", but not because of any politically correct issues over historicity. There are a number of ethnic groups who as of today are not confined to a single country, such as the Iriquois, Rroma, Tutsi, and Punjabi. Such groups can't really be described accurately by the preposition "of", but "in" is accurate.' [1]

As per the above, the following renamings are proposed:

--Kurieeto 18:05, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rename all as proposed. I particularly agree with the last point, of which Oromo and Somali people are also good examples. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 19:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • * Rename all. Makes total sense. Individual ethnic groups often cross boundaries, especially, but not exclusively, Indigenous peoples. Luigizanasi 21:10, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all per nom, though I'd hate to be the one who has to do it... --Dvyost 21:16, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hills of the regions of England

Delte all: There's no real reason to subdive by region, *everything else* English is categorised simply by county. Most of these categories contain only Hill of X-shire sub-categories. They (and teh few remaing hills from counties without such categories) should all go directly into the main Category:Mountains and hills of England. Grinner 15:28, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all The UK categorisation is complex enough already and only a few bureaucrats think in terms of regions. Carina22 21:55, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sex symbols

Supposedly people who are widely acknowledged to have sex appeal. Of course one could add names indefinitely. Rudolph Valentino, Charles Chaplin, and Harold Lloyd once wet a lot of knickers and sold movie magazines by the cartload, but you won't find them in this category now. Sic transit gloria mundi (whoever she was). Pointless category. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 15:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mountains of the United States and Yukon

Category:Verities of Rice to Category:Varieties of rice

A misspelling. It had only one article (Basmati), and I already recategorized it. — A.M. 09:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional daimyo

Only contains one article. -Sean Curtin 06:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional engineers, Category:Fictional inventors, Category:Fictional scientists

Although these aren't completely redundant, there is a very high degree of overlap, especially between the engineers and inventors categories. Merge all three into a new category, such as Category:Fictional scientists and engineers. -Sean Curtin 06:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all 3 Different things. That's why there are three different words. Scientists is massive already. Golfcam 17:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Barbie Templates

Only contains one template - and would we ever need a category for these templates at all? -Sean Curtin 06:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Too small. Golfcam 17:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chipmunks albums

See instead Category:Alvin and the Chipmunks albums. The list of albums is already on the main Alvin and the Chipmunks article. -Sean Curtin 06:00, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mysore cricketers

No need for this as the category Category:Karnataka_cricketers is already around. The Mysore team was renamed to Karnataka in around 1973 Tintin 04:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Even that is fine with me. I just want to ensure that some cricketers from there end up in one category and others in the other one. Tintin 13:16, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Foo state highways or Category:Foo state routes or Category:State highways in Foo all capitals

This is because any highway in California (for example) can be a California state highway, but the purpose of these categories is to hold articles named "California State Route 213". All categories are located in Category:State highways Also, it was proposed when this was an attempted speedy that we use the actual designation (see below for details). Note: This debate is written up, but categories are still tagged with the speedy tag. They will be fixed tomorrow.

Proposed names (bold indicates where the title differs from Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads):

--Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 03:24, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From the speedy debate:

Category:Attractions and Landmarks of Mumbai

I think this is an awkwardly named category and it contains a very mixed bag of articles. I have subcategorised the Mumbai menu and everything in here is now in one or more clearer categories: parks, buildings and structures, geography, visitor attractions (which may be almost the same thing, but is a simpler name), culture. I don't think this is needed, and it is miscapitalised in any case. Delete Rhollenton 02:10, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Societies by nationality to Category:Society by nationality

Badly named, should not be plural. Sounds like it should contain Category:Norwegian debating societies and Category:Ethiopian Chess societies. Should be singular like Category:Education by country. MeltBanana 01:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Sounds fine to me. Societies is the plural of society and many category names are plurals. Education is not a good comparison. Rhollenton 02:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Images of U.S. Congress

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was speedy delete under CSD#G7. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:47, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this, please. I created this. But it turns out there's already Category:Congress images. Mark Adler (Markles) 01:08, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Rhollenton 02:11, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_December_8&oldid=30647662"