Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 May 20: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
(BOT) Fix page header. Errors? User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/CFDClerk |
The Nth User (talk | contribs) →NEW NOMINATIONS: Proposed Category:Transition metal oxyanions for revival |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
==== NEW NOMINATIONS ==== |
==== NEW NOMINATIONS ==== |
||
<!-- Please add the newest nominations below this line --> |
<!-- Please add the newest nominations below this line --> |
||
====Category:Transition metal oxyanions==== |
|||
:* '''Propose reviving''' {{lc|Transition metal oxyanions}}<br /> |
|||
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' The category used to have nineteen members, but [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/JWBE&offset=20190414093856&limit=19&target=JWBE they were removed by JWBE], the category was tagged as being empty soon after, and it was eventually deleted under [[Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#C1._Unpopulated_categories]]. In this way, JWBE effectively bypassed [[WP:Categories for discussion]] and consensus to delete a category that he disagreed with because it didn't adhere to German Wikipedia categorization standards. This motivation can be shown from comments he made on [[User_talk:JWBE#Your_edits_to_oxyanion_categories|the relevant section of his talk page]], like "The categorisation in chemistry in en:wp is in general very split up, looks more like an chaotic net und has a poor systematisation. We found in de:wp a more systematic way" and "All subcategories as oxyanions, Transition metal oxoacids, Transition metal compounds, (Transition metal dichalcogenides, Dichalcogenides in other branches), etc. could be deleted.". JWBE's tendency to enforce German Wikipedia conventions, especially regarding categorization, is also found in other conversation's in JWBE's talk page, including [[User_talk:JWBE#Vanillin|Sorry, there will be no change and there is nothing to reconsider, … Please watch the German version: de:Kategorie:Phenol and de:Kategorie:Phenolether and the substances therein.]] and [[User_talk:JWBE#RuO4|In de:wp we came to the conclusion to use tho oxdiation state in general, except alkali oxides, erdalkali oxides, 3d-oxides and i.e. Aluminiumoxide instead of Aluminium(III) oxide. Best practice would be, that you would completely follow to the de.wp-solution.]] (about how JWBE had moved Ruthenium tetroxide to Ruthenium(VIII) oxide with the edit summary Standard). Given that it seems that the category had members but was emptied by a user from the German Wikipedia as part of an imposition of German Wikipedia conventions upon the English Wikipedia, I think that we should bring the category back. [[User talk:The_Nth_User|Care to differ or discuss with me?]] [[User:The_Nth_User|The N<sup>th</sup> User]] 00:41, 20 May 2019 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- Please add the newest nominations to the top --> |
<!-- Please add the newest nominations to the top --> |
||
Revision as of 00:41, 20 May 2019
May 20
NEW NOMINATIONS
Category:Transition metal oxyanions
- Nominator's rationale: The category used to have nineteen members, but they were removed by JWBE, the category was tagged as being empty soon after, and it was eventually deleted under Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#C1._Unpopulated_categories. In this way, JWBE effectively bypassed WP:Categories for discussion and consensus to delete a category that he disagreed with because it didn't adhere to German Wikipedia categorization standards. This motivation can be shown from comments he made on the relevant section of his talk page, like "The categorisation in chemistry in en:wp is in general very split up, looks more like an chaotic net und has a poor systematisation. We found in de:wp a more systematic way" and "All subcategories as oxyanions, Transition metal oxoacids, Transition metal compounds, (Transition metal dichalcogenides, Dichalcogenides in other branches), etc. could be deleted.". JWBE's tendency to enforce German Wikipedia conventions, especially regarding categorization, is also found in other conversation's in JWBE's talk page, including Sorry, there will be no change and there is nothing to reconsider, … Please watch the German version: de:Kategorie:Phenol and de:Kategorie:Phenolether and the substances therein. and In de:wp we came to the conclusion to use tho oxdiation state in general, except alkali oxides, erdalkali oxides, 3d-oxides and i.e. Aluminiumoxide instead of Aluminium(III) oxide. Best practice would be, that you would completely follow to the de.wp-solution. (about how JWBE had moved Ruthenium tetroxide to Ruthenium(VIII) oxide with the edit summary Standard). Given that it seems that the category had members but was emptied by a user from the German Wikipedia as part of an imposition of German Wikipedia conventions upon the English Wikipedia, I think that we should bring the category back. Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 00:41, 20 May 2019 (UTC)