Login
Login

Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 July 16

width = "100%"
width="50%" align="left" | < July 15

! width="50%" align="right" | July 17 >

= July 16 =

==[[:Category:Museums in Georgia, United States]] to [[:Category:Museums in Georgia (U.S. state)]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename as nominated --Kbdank71 14:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The proposal is in line with other Georgia (U.S. state) categories. Nathcer 23:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Rename as nom. Nathcer 23:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Rename per nom. Twittenham 11:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Infrastructure of Poland]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 delete --Kbdank71 14:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

This is the only such national category, and it adds little. Delete Hawkestone 23:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

:Comment. :Category:Transport of Poland (or transportation) would be in line with other country subcats. --Dhartung | Talk 07:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Voivodships of Poland]] to [[:Category:Voivodeships of Poland]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename (action has already taken by User:Elonka (talk • contribs)). --RobertG ♬ talk 12:30, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

A recent discussion/poll at Wikipedia:WikiProject Geography of Poland concluded, and the consensus was that the correct spelling of this administrative unit should be Voivodeship not Voivodship [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Geography_of_Poland#Vote_on_Wojew.C3.B3dztwa_.2F_Voivodeship_.2F_Province]. This nomination is intended to cover all of the subcategories in this category as well. --Elonka 22:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Oppose -- contrary to long established Wikipedia policy and guidelines.
  • #The current Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places)#Follow local conventions states: "Generally, use the official English name for the place and its type."
  • #The official spelling is "voivodship", published just this year at "[http://www.gugik.gov.pl/komisja/pliki/podzial_administracyjny_polski_2006-eng.pdf Administrative Division of Poland 2006]", an official document on a Polish government site. In English, the government site is referenced by everything from the Polish "Ministry of Transport and Construction", to "Addresses, phone numbers and WWW pages of Ministeries", to external non-Polish sites such as the "Ordnance Survey" (the national mapping agency of Great Britain), and "Intellectual Property Law".
  • #Since there are official published English names, it doesn't matter whether that differs from past translation practice, or old English traditions (or Wikipedian Google searches for them).
  • #Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)#Include alternatives states: "When the native name is written in a non-Latin alphabet this representation should be included along with Latin alphabet transliterations and English alphabet transliterations. For example, the Beijing article should mention that the city is also known as Peking, and that both names are transliterations of the name 北京."
  • #It is Original Research for Wikipedians to substitute their choices (votes) for the official translations of the Polish government. Wikipedia:No original research is policy.
  • #Just as we've recently spent some time on Serbia and Montenegro, should the Polish government decide next week that it has something else, we'll rename to match. This is an encyclopedia, not a debating society.
  • :--William Allen Simpson 02:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. The issue was debated by those familiar with the subject at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Geography of Poland, and the various uses of the term were examined on websites and in outside works of reference. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the correct spelling is "Voivodeship". --Elonka 23:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support, as Elonka. This follows long discussion of the subject by many users closely familiar with it. William Allen Simpson's claim of an "official Polish government version" is without solid evidence.  ProhibitOnions  (T) 12:01, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support, there indeed is a consensus at talk or relevant pages.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk  14:15, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Residential architecture in London]] to [[:Category:Housing in London]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename as nominated --Kbdank71 14:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

At present this category does not match :category:Housing in the United Kingdom. Olborne 21:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Rename as above. Olborne 21:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Rename per nom. Hawkestone 23:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Rename per nom. Twittenham 11:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

== Fauna by country ==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 14:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

We now have "fauna of" categories for many,if not most countries, but there are still discrepancies left over from previous attempts at similar categorization, which now needs flattening into a "Animal type of country" format:

For these 4 oddballs, a choice needs to be made. At worst, a subcat can always be added specifically for introduced fauna.

And while at it, some other "fooian extinct animals":

: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.

==[[:Category:Identified Chemical Substances]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 delete, empty --Kbdank71 14:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Much too broad to be useful, and its presence in Template:ChemicalSources means it's the first category in almost every article about a chemical. —Keenan Pepper 19:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

:I object. Until now there is no category covering only (pure, identified) chemical substances, all categories also contain pages that are not strictly chemicals, are mixtures, etc., which makes finding only chemical substances impossible. I concur that it is now the first category on every page, and that would need to be solved (can you hide a category?). I am willing to discuss other options. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:User ??-?]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 delete --Kbdank71 14:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

A userbox that states "This box is kept empty for tax purposes" places this category on user pages. It should be deleted as it is very ambiguously titled. Also, joke userboxes should not have categories. --musicpvm 18:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Useless. - EurekaLott 23:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 02:51, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't know what you are talking about at all.--Regeane Silverwolf 11:01, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Historic houses in North Carolina]] to [[:Category:Houses in North Carolina]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 merge as nominated --Kbdank71 14:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Merge. No other U.S. state has separate categories for houses and "historic houses" and it isn't a useful distinction. Only notable houses should have articles and any notable house that was built yesterday or earlier is "historic". Sumahoy 17:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Merge as nom. Sumahoy 17:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Recury 17:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Virginia got the same treatment a while back. - EurekaLott 23:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Women of Pakistan]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 keep --Kbdank71 13:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ADeletion_review%2FLog%2F2006_July_6&diff=64138482&oldid=64137492 A DRV consensus] overturned the previous deletion of this category under the umbrella of "women by nationality." Before commenting here, please consult the DRV, which contains the arguments in favor of retention, as well as a history of this category's listings on CfDs. This is a procedural relisting, so I abstain Xoloz 17:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

:Comment Here's a more readable view of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_July_6&oldid=64137492 DRV] 192.101.136.110 15:34, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Nigerian Yoruba Article]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 delete --Kbdank71 13:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

This category contains one article, which is also in :Category:Yoruba mythology, which is a subcategory of :Category:Yoruba, which is a subcatgory of :Category:Ethnic groups in Nigeria.Honbicot 16:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete as nom. Honbicot 16:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Recury 17:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete unless and until there is a useful, verifiable distinction between Nigerian Yoruba and other Yoruba. --M@rēino 19:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Avifauna of Georgia]] to [[:Category:Avifauna of Georgia (U.S. state)]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 merge as nominated --Kbdank71 13:51, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

:Georgia is both a state and a country. -- ProveIt (talk) 16:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Hood Films]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 no consensus --Kbdank71 13:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I know what they're going for here, but "hood film" is hardly an encyclopedic term. Should probably be renamed to :Category:Urban crime films or something similar. --FuriousFreddy 16:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • If not "Urban crime films", then "Gangsta films" or "Urban gangsta films" or...?  If nothing else, rename to :Category:Hood films. Regards, David Kernow 01:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC), updated 03:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Isn't it original research to invent new genres on our own? A film genre is more than just saying that some films have something in common, like they were all directed by Hitchcock, it makes a statement that the films are alike in some more complex, deeper way and that they make a group distinct from other genres. If this genre is attested to in movie criticism then I would expect the right name would be found in the same sources. --JeffW 05:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Fair enough; I forgot this category would be treated generically. Regards, David 03:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete This name is slang, and I don't think it represents an established genre. Nathan Mercer 01:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==Wikipedians who like television by series==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename all as nominated except :Category:Wikipedians interested in TV --Kbdank71 15:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

This is a group of Wikipedian categories that have no rhyme or reason to their naming and so this is a step to get things consistent. The "fans" don't even know how they want their categories named, so those who just like a television show have been more consistent. Also, this will keep from having two separate categories, those who just like a show and those who are fans. The parent category is also up for renaming to be consistant with the children. At the end are two categories to be merged.
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 13:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

::Category:Wikipedians interested in TV to :Category:Wikipedians who like television by series

::Category:Wikipedians who watch American Idol to :Category:Wikipedians who like American Idol

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Aqua Teen Hunger Force to :Category:Wikipedians who like Aqua Teen Hunger Force

::Category:Fans of CSI to :Category:Wikipedians who like CSI

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Carnivàle to :Category:Wikipedians who like Carnivàle

::Category:Cowboy Bebop Fans to :Category:Wikipedians who like Cowboy Bebop

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of DTNG to :Category:Wikipedians who like DTNG

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Drawn Together to :Category:Wikipedians who like Drawn Together

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of ECW to :Category:Wikipedians who like ECW

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of The Fairly OddParents to :Category:Wikipedians who like The Fairly OddParents

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Family Guy to :Category:Wikipedians who like Family Guy

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Firefly to :Category:Wikipedians who like Firefly

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Friends to :Category:Wikipedians who like Friends

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Futurama to :Category:Wikipedians who like Futurama

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Green Wing to :Category:Wikipedians who like Green Wing

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Jeopardy! to :Category:Wikipedians who like Jeopardy!

::Category:User LOST to :Category:Wikipedians who like LOST

::Category:M*A*S*H fans to :Category:Wikipedians who like M*A*S*H

::Category:Fans of the Mysterious Cities of Gold to :Category:Wikipedians who like The Mysterious Cities of Gold

::Category:Pokémon Fan Wikipedians to :Category:Wikipedians who like Pokémon

::Category:Wikipedian Seinfeld Fans to :Category:Wikipedians who like Seinfeld

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of The Simpsons to :Category:Wikipedians who like The Simpsons

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Smallville to :Category:Wikipedians who like Smallville

::Category:Wikipedians Into The Sopranos to :Category:Wikipedians who like The Sopranos

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of South Park to :Category:Wikipedians who like South Park

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of SpongeBob SquarePants to :Category:Wikipedians who like SpongeBob SquarePants

::Category:Trekkie Wikipedians to :Category:Wikipedians who like Star Trek

::Category:Twin Peaks Fans to :Category:Wikipedians who like Twin Peaks

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of Wheel of Fortune to :Category:Wikipedians who like Wheel of Fortune

::Category:Wikipedians who are fans of X-Files to :Category:Wikipedians who like The X-Files

::Category:Wikipedians interested in Doctor Who merge into :Category:Wikipedians who like Doctor Who

::Category:User Monty Python and :Category:Wikipedian Monty Python fans merge to :Category:Wikipedians who like Monty Python

::Category:User Veronica Mars merge into :Category:Wikipedians who like Veronica Mars

  • Support all except the first one. This category contains a couple subcategories that are not by series. Also, there are significant numbers of categories that are "Wikipedians interested in..." so I'm not sure the change is obvious. You could even argue that comparing :category:Wikipedians by musician, that the categories above should be under "Wikipedians by television series," and that should be under "Wikipedians interested in television." Regardless, everything else should change as nominated.--Mike Selinker 15:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Sounds fair enough. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 18:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Rename all for consistency and rename the first one to :Category:Wikipedians interested in television per Mike. --musicpvm 18:15, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. A little bit of consistancy is not bad here. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support, although I'm with Mike on the first one, which is a little tricky and may encompass more than just fans of specific series. Otherwise a welcome idea, both in terms of preferable terminology and consistency.  ProhibitOnions  (T) 19:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==Mecca mosques and Medina mosques==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename as nominated --Kbdank71 13:45, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Proposal is to rename:

All other sub-cats of :Category:Mosques by city use the "in city" naming, such as :Category:Mosques in Cairo, :Category:Mosques in Islamabad, :Category:Mosques in Istanbul, and :Category:Mosques in Jerusalem. At the :Category:Mosques by country level the naming convention is "in region" as well, such as :Category:Mosques in Bahrain. Kurieeto 13:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Rename both "X in Y" is the convention for buildings and structures. Chicheley 15:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Rename both per nom and above. David Kernow 03:04, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Histories of Polish cities]] to [[:Category:Histories of cities in Poland]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename. --RobertG ♬ talk 08:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

To match similarly scoped categories :Category:Histories of cities in the United States, :Category:Histories of cities in India, :Category:Histories of cities in Germany, and more. Kurieeto 13:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Indoor soccer]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 cat redirect. --RobertG ♬ talk 08:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

This is empty and the non U.S. centric category already exists at :Category:Indoor football (soccer). Twittenham 11:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete as nom. Twittenham 11:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep as redirect to :Category:Indoor football (soccer) -- ProveIt (talk) 15:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect per ProveIt. Recury 17:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect per ProveIt. No harm in keeping this around to help gently educate Americans as to the British English naming convention.--M@rēino 19:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect per ProveIt. David Kernow 03:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:English inside-forwards]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 delete --Kbdank71 15:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Too specific for a separate category. Punkmorten 11:37, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete Overspecific and rather old-fashioned. There are too many categories on the average leading footballer's article already. Twittenham 11:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Sounds painful. David Kernow 03:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Killer7 characters]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 delete --Kbdank71 15:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

empty category Melaen 11:12, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. --musicpvm 18:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

== Wikipedian supporters of Western Sahara ==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename both as nominated --Kbdank71 15:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Sister cities]] to [[:Category:Twin towns]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 merge both to :Category:Sister cities and twin towns --Kbdank71 15:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Singer-lyricists]] to [[:Category:Singer-songwriters]]==

and

==[[:Category:American singer-lyricists]] to [[:Category:American singer-songwriters]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 merge as nominated --Kbdank71 15:01, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Both terms mean the same thing. The singer-lyrcist categories were created much later and are much less populated. They should be merged into the singer-songwriter categories as that is the more common term. --musicpvm 06:06, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Merge both per nom. Twittenham 11:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge both per nom. Hawkestone 23:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Sport WikiProjects]] to [[:Category:WikiProject Sports]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 merge as nominated --Kbdank71 14:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:People of African descent]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 no consensus --Kbdank71 14:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete or merge to :Category:African emigrants. Every human in the world is of African descent, and we do not categorize people by "descent". --William Allen Simpson 04:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Not the same thing as "emigrant" at all. An emigrant has to have lived in Africa personally. Twittenham 11:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Almost completely useless. Chicheley 15:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Rename to :Category:People of sub-Saharan African descent. Againt, it's obvious what the intention of the category is, and it seems a decent one, but it just needs renaming, not deletion.--FuriousFreddy 16:12, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Rename per FuriousFreddy. The biological fact that the "out of Africa" theory of human evolution is almost certainly true is no reason to deny the sociological fact that people whose families left Africa in the last 500 years (the group that this cat covers) are often treated differently than people who left Africa 1 million years ago. --M@rēino 19:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete What does this have to do with making an encyclopedia? Nothing in my view. Olborne 21:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. This is a useless category when we already have e.g. :Category:African Americans or :Category:British Africans. What does "descent" mean anyway? Race is a social construct. As for "emigrants", we already have "People from ..." categories. --Dhartung | Talk 07:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
  • 99% of Wikipedia categories are social constructs! What is "Irish American" if not a social construct? What is "politician" if not a social construct? --M@rēino 12:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete no objective criteria for inclusion. If ones subscribes to the Out of Africa theory, we all belong to this category, making it useless. Carlossuarez46 22:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is perfectly fine as a top category for Category:African Americans, :Category:People of South African descent, :Category:Afro-Trinidadians, etc. Your argument that everyone is of African descent because of the "out of Africa" theory is a non sequitur as it means we should call everyone Africans. When you say someone is of "African descent" or of "african ancestry," no one will understand you to mean all people.--Ezeu 06:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep -- Look at this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AAllpages&from=People+of&namespace=14 list of similar categories]. How can we NOT have it when we have all these others? (Does this mean that anything listed here should be cross-listed under its other nationality -- e.g. :Category:Afro-Brazilians should also be listed under :Category:People of Brazilian descent -- right? Bookgrrl 16:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - Concur w/ William Allen Simpson. No doubt it would be the largest category in wikipedia. -- Szvest 22:02, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

:*It is useful as a top-level category. There is no need to add individual people to this category, but to the sub-categories. This category will not be large at all. --Ezeu 23:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep as per User:Ezeu's argument and that it refers to the (modern) continent (ie. the countries that make up the continent which did not exist when 'out of Africa' happened) not any "race" and should include Arab, White or any kind of Africans as well Mayumashu 03:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Apparently we do categorise people by descent,[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AAllpages&from=People+of&namespace=14] and as Ezeu says, this is a perfectly decent top category for the existing sub-cats. Btw, what's with the "out of Africa" red herring: sure, humanity descended millenia ago from Africans, but does African American refer to all Americans? JackyR | Talk 10:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Roman Catholic Canadians]] to [[:Category:Canadian Roman Catholics]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 merge as nominated --Kbdank71 14:51, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

== Category:Sea_and_river_deities_to_Category:Water_deities ==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename as nominated --Kbdank71 14:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I propose renaming :Category:Sea and river deities to :Category:Water deities (it could be :Category:Aquatic deities, which is used in the Greek deities info-box -- see Harpina -- but IMHO more people are likely to think of "water" than "aquatic"). Doesn't seem appropriate to limit H2O gods and goddesses to just seas and rivers. What about lakes, ponds, springs, streams, rain, etc? For example, Wuluwaid (rain god), Underwater panthers (which include lakes and streams), Oceanids (springs, clouds, rain), Jengu (which include streams and estuaries), Wentshukumishiteu (waterfalls as well as rivers]], Varuna (god of rain as well as of sea), and many more. I also notice that the :Category:Sea and river deities page has a "see also :Category:Rain deities, which doesn't exist, so this would solve that problem as well...)

Would also require renaming the subcats :Category:Sea and river gods and :Category:Sea and river goddesses. Bookgrrl 03:00, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==Streets and squares by city==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename as nominated --Kbdank71 18:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Streets and squares are permanently located man-made entities. As per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories)#Man-made objects, by country categories of such things are named "in country". I believe this should be applied to the following by city categories as well. There's no reason to change the naming convention in this case when going from countries to cities, as "in place" remains the most natural, precise, and appropriate wording choice possible. All other permanently located man-made entity by city categories have followed the "in country" wording of the by country model, including for example :Category:Churches by city (Ex: :Category:Churches in Toronto) and :Category:Skyscrapers by city (Ex: :Category:Skyscrapers in Phoenix). The following renamings are proposed:

--Kurieeto 02:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Romantic comedies]] and [[:Category:Miracle operas]] and [[:Category:Psychological dramas]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 delete. --RobertG ♬ talk 08:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Delete as part of clear out of superfluous opera cats. - Kleinzach 02:26, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:LDS Wikipedians]] to [[:Category:Latter Day Saint Wikipedians]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 merge as nominated --Kbdank71 18:39, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Duplicate categories. Merge. - EurekaLott 02:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Merge per nom. --musicpvm 02:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:God Wikipedians]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 delete --Kbdank71 18:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Category populated by a deleted and protected userbox. Delete. - EurekaLott 02:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete, useless. Punkmorten 11:39, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Nonsense. Chicheley 15:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete unless someone can alert me to the existence of a serious (as in, non-joke) religion in which human beings refer to themselves as literal Gods. It is my understanding that The Nation of Gods and Earths does not use the term that way (they use it figuratively), but I might be wrong.--M@rēino 20:00, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:User religion...]] to [[:Category:Wikipedians interested in religions]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename as nominated --Kbdank71 18:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

This cryptic category populated by a userbox duplicates a better-named category. - EurekaLott 02:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Rename per nom. --musicpvm 03:23, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Children's opera]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 delete --Kbdank71 18:11, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Delete. :Category:Children's operas already exists. - Kleinzach 01:26, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete since parallel category exists. Herostratus 02:00, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment :Category:Opera and :Category:Operas both exist and are not dupes, because the latter is restricted to articles about specific operas. —Blotwell 18:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

:*That is true because opera and operas have different functions. In this case both (children's) categories have identical ones. They both exist as sub-cats of 'operas by genre'. - Kleinzach 17:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Blotwell's right, but there aren't enough articles about children's opera to warrant a category. In fact, other than the operas themselves, there are zero articles. Fireplace 02:19, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:History of foreign relations of the United States]] to [[:Category:History of the foreign relations of the United States]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 rename as nominated --Kbdank71 18:11, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Missing definite article. Related nomination here.
David Kernow 00:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC), updated 04:11, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Rename as nom. David Kernow 00:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. I think that History of United States foreign relations would be best in my opinion, provided that is in line with the category naming rules (I know they're complicated, and I'm not up on them) and parallel with similar structures. But if not, then OK. Herostratus 02:12, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

:* I agree, but forgot to mention above that "History of United States foreign relations" would conflict with its parent category's format, "Foreign relations of the United States" – so thanks for prompting me to include it. I'm also reminded of a related nomination from a few days back, which I've now mentioned above. Regards, David Kernow 04:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.

==[[:Category:Folk opera]]==

:The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 delete --Kbdank71 18:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Delete. Folk opera is something of a contradiction in terms. Folk music, folksong may be written by the folk, but folk opera is not! As a descriptive term folk opera may sometimes be apposite but as a categtory it is too vague to be useful, - Kleinzach 00:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

: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.