Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 31

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 30 February 1 >

January 31

[edit]

Category:Burials at Forest Lawn Memorial Park Cemetery

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Burials at Forest Lawn Memorial Park Cemetery to Category:Forest Lawn Memorial-Parks & Mortuaries
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:Burials at Forest Lawn Memorial Park

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Burials at Forest Lawn Memorial Park to Category:Forest Lawn Memorial Park (Hollywood Hills)
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:Fictional characters with eating disorders

[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: yes, it's very ironic to give salt to people with eating disorders. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Fictional characters with eating disorders (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
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:Swedish regents

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Swedish regents to Category:Regents of Sweden
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:Swedish Governors-General

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Swedish Governors-General to Category:Governors-General of Sweden
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:Swedish Privy Councillors

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Swedish Privy Councillors to Category:Members of the Privy Council of Sweden
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:Italian air marshal

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Italian air marshal into Category:Marshals of the air force

I have create the category Italian air marshal and I'm agree with the idea of merging this category into Category:Marshals of the air force.Italo Balbo was the only five star general in the history of italian air firce

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:Swedish County Governors

[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: als0 rename. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Swedish County Governors to Category:County governors of Sweden
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:Members of the Cabinet of Sweden

[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: als0 als0 rename. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Members of the Cabinet of Sweden to Category:Government ministers of Sweden
Xdamrtalk 23:12, 31 January 2007 (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:Computerization

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Computerization (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Delete, one-man show. There was an article computerization, which I deleted last night through PROD. Chick Bowen 21:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete and move article Since there is apparently no longer a main article for Computerization, and there's only one article in this category, it seems safe to delete the category and move the only existing article into a different appropriate category for the company's industry. Dugwiki 22:50, 31 January 2007 (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:African Female rappers

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Created yesterday and no contains a whopping 4 entries... all of whom were curiously enough born in the United States. This simply isn't a necessary category.--Isotope23 21:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point about Female singers, Otto. Assuming Male Singers and Female singers aren't merged, I agree with your suggestion. Dugwiki 20:22, 1 February 2007 (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:New York Mets second round draft picks

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Category:New York Mets players, trivia. -- Prove It (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. TonyTheTiger 19:15, 31 January 2007 (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:Media in Scotland

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Media in Scotland to Category:Scottish media
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:Far-left Youth Organisations

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Category:Youth organizations as subjective, or at least Rename to Category:Far-left youth organisations. -- Prove It (talk) 16:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge 'Left' and 'Right' are difficult terms to define. Perhaps there is some scope for defining groups by ideology ie fascist, communist, concerned with animal rights, etc, but category is too subjective.
Xdamrtalk 23:17, 31 January 2007 (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:Fictional mutates

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Fictional mutants. The difference between "mutants" and "mutates" is that the former were mutated from birth, and the latter became mutated through something else (e.g. radioactive spider bite). This distinction is not found in biology, it is only made in the Marvel universe, and there only barely. However, many universes have their own terminology ("metahumans", "metamutates", basically everything in Category:Human-derived fictional species) and it does not follow that we should categorize Mutants by whatever they're called in that setting. >Radiant< 16:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename To "Marvel Comics mutates" or something similar. The Fictional mutants category has a sub category for Marvel Comics mutants, so why not people who are mutated? As you said there is a diffrence between people who are born mutants and those who were mutated later in life. (Animedude 23:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]
  • Oppose the rename as worded. Spider-Man is not a mutant by Marvel definition. If the distinction is indeed made only in the Marvel Universe, we must use a name consistent with Marvel's naming conventions. If they define their mutates and mutants, we can't dub Spider-Man a mutant. "Marvel Comics mutates" makes some sense, although to be honest, it seems unnecessary. Doczilla 07:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a very clear definition and merging would only lead to further confusion. User:Dimadick
  • Keep since a definition is given. If keep fails, rename Category:Fictional characters who have been mutated although I LOATHE the excessive wording.~ZytheTalk to me! 14:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This term only exists in Marvel, and we should not use Marvel's terminology as the basis for categorization. In theory, for example, Aquaman is a mutate, but he's not in Marvel, and thus would never gain this term. (In DC, Aquaman's a metahuman, which in theory Spider-Man would be, except Marvel doesn't use that term either.)--Mike Selinker 03:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wasnt Aquaman born with his powers? He gets his powers from being a hybrid atlantian/human. This would make him Mutant, not a mutate. (Animedude 01:47, 8 February 2007 (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:Super Bowl champions

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Discuss -- it seems to me that all of the subcats here really ought to be articles, not categories. If this were fully implemented it could add many new categories to hundreds of football players. Clearly there's some interest in this kind of information, but I don't think categories are the best way to do it. What do people think? -- Prove It (talk) 15:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think a typical pre-millenium Super Bowl team should have about 5 or 6 players notable enough for articles. However, each post millenium team may have about 20-30 if not more wikinotable players. I think these categories are valid and useful. TonyTheTiger 19:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment P.S. each team should also have a template as opposed to a list. TonyTheTiger 19:24, 31 January 2007 (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:Films with a Best Cinematographer Academy Award nomination

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as recreated content. -- Prove It (talk) 15:28, 31 January 2007 (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:Taiwanese baseball

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:WikiProject Taiwanese Baseball to match Wikipedia:WikiProject Taiwanese Baseball. -- Prove It (talk) 14:44, 31 January 2007 (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.
The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories 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 section.

The result of the debate was mistaken nomination. The {{cfd}} tag was placed on a section of the article Brian Gilbert; I have removed the offending section. Chick Bowen 21:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Virginia Gilbert

[edit]
Category:Virginia Gilbert (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Delete, Theatre productions mentioned are mostly college theatre. Theatre company totally unknown. Second film not filmed yet - only one real film production. 81.158.202.199 14:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Chanel[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 section.

Category:Rivers named for women

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Rivers named for women (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Delete, indiscriminate category cluttering up the categories, and encouraging further categories such as rivers named after dogs, rivers named for men, boys named for rivers, dogs named for chairs, cats named for kings. Possible POVPUSH. Bards 11:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Cloachland 13:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This is categorization by name, a form of overcategorization. The rivers otherwise have little in common and should not be grouped together. Dr. Submillimeter 14:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and listify - Categorization by name, a bad idea. Where interesting and relevant lists are appropriate. (And I don't know what the POV is supposed to be (rivers named after women are better? worse? than rivers named after geographical features or men?), but honorary naming patterns are of interest--buildings for instance are largely named after men; Venusian craters after women; and so on. There's often some historical or cultural reason for naming patterns that is, actually, of use to scholars.) --lquilter 15:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Every other article in every other category only really has one thing in common. Thats the point of a category. So, I'll go with delete because of WP:OC. —mikedk9109SIGN 23:09, 31 January 2007 (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:Native fauna of Texas

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Native fauna of Texas into Category:Fauna of the United States
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.

Fauna by state subcategories

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Vertebrates of Connecticut
Category:Amphibians of Connecticut
Category:Fish of Connecticut
Category:Mammals of Connecticut
Category:Reptiles of Connecticut
Category:Invertebrates of Connecticut
Category:Frogs-Toads-Salamanders of New Mexico
Category:Fish of Utah
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:Lists of video game music

[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 per AFD. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Lists of video game music (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

All articles in this category are facing deletion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_8-bit_Atari_game_music. Shawnc 10:29, 31 January 2007 (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.

Fauna of the United States by state

[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 the lot of them. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Fauna of the United States by state
Category:Fauna of Alabama
Category:Fauna of Alaska
Category:Fauna of Arizona
Category:Fauna of Arkansas
Category:Fauna of California
Category:Fauna of the San Francisco Bay Area
Category:Fauna of Colorado
Category:Fauna of Connecticut
Category:Fauna of Delaware
Category:Fauna of Florida
Category:Fauna of Georgia (U.S. state)
Category:Fauna of Idaho
Category:Fauna of Illinois
Category:Fauna of Indiana
Category:Fauna of Iowa
Category:Fauna of Kansas
Category:Fauna of Kentucky
Category:Fauna of Louisiana
Category:Fauna of Maine
Category:Fauna of Maryland
Category:Fauna of Massachusetts
Category:Fauna of Michigan
Category:Fauna of Minnesota
Category:Fauna of Mississippi
Category:Fauna of Missouri
Category:Fauna of Montana
Category:Fauna of Nebraska
Category:Fauna of Nevada
Category:Fauna of New Hampshire
Category:Fauna of New Jersey
Category:Fauna of New Mexico
Category:Fauna of New York
Category:Fauna of North Carolina
Category:Fauna of North Dakota
Category:Fauna of Ohio
Category:Fauna of Oklahoma
Category:Fauna of Oregon
Category:Fauna of Pennsylvania
Category:Fauna of Rhode Island
Category:Fauna of South Carolina
Category:Fauna of South Dakota
Category:Fauna of Tennessee
Category:Fauna of Texas
Category:Fauna of Eastern Texas
Category:Fauna of Western Texas
Category:Fauna of Utah
Category:Fauna of Vermont
Category:Fauna of Virginia
Category:Fauna of Washington
Category:Fauna of West Virginia
Category:Fauna of Wisconsin
Category:Fauna of Wyoming
  • Strongly oppose. Although some state animal lists are more complete than others (i.e. Minnesota). State lists can be valuable information to those state residents wishing to see what wildlife occurs in their respective states or regions. I live in New England, where the states are small. Someone in NH, ME,etc. may want to take a peek at the wildlife occurring in their own state, despite the duplicative nature of the lists. The State Fauna category allows for a further breakdown into more manageable categories, again see Minnesota. I do agree that listing each species across all animal Classes could get burdensome if listed in this manner under Fauna, but there is value in the Fauna List linking the Animal Classes or regions together, and this far outweighs the bursensome nature of people linking each species to the Faunal lists (any way to limit the Faunal lists to only include regional lists without confusing people?) The American Society of Mammalogists are devising their own state mammal lists for each state, and many organizations have their own state bird, butterfly, herp, fish which shows the interest in these types of lists. Wikipedia is in a unique position since we have the state wikis to link any verifiable state animal lists together to each state. It is a nice learning tool. My strong vote is to keep.Pmeleski 00:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Horrible category clutter. If it is important (which is doubtful) write an article for each state instead. Piccadilly 01:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - See Category:Fauna of Europe. This seems like a fairly reasonable way to organize animals. On the other hand, some of the national subcategories (e.g. Category:Mammals of Estonia) appear to replicate many of the animals in a "Europe" parent category. Dr. Submillimeter 18:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for pointing this out -- It looks good at a continent & type-of-animal level. But I wouldn't put too much weight on the lack of subdivisions, though; the fact that Fauna of Europe is not divided beyond continent is probably at least as much due to English/North American bias as it is to any decisions based on the best category structure. --lquilter 18:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    On the other hand, how many categories are needed to indicate the range of something like the Eurasian Badger? Shouldn't two (Category:Mammals of Asia and Category:Mammals of Europe) be sufficient? This and other animals do not need categories saying that they live in virtually every country between France and Sakhalin. Similarly, we do not need a category system that indicates that the coyote lives in every state and province between California and New Brunswick. Dr. Submillimeter 18:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, the Eurasian Badger should only be placed in two (or one--Eurasia) categories, because those would be the most specific categories for that particular critter. But the category system needs to also accommodate critters that live in smaller and more specific regions. Fauna should be placed in the most specific category appropriate to that creature, per Wikipedia:Categorization; in some instances the most specific appropriate category is continent-sized; in other instances it might be as small as a particular bay, lake, forest, or mountain. --lquilter 03:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge This system has some use top down, but not enough to justify the damage it does bottom up (ie. from the articles). It also sets an alarming precedent as if these are categories are kept they will promote use of similar local categories in other countries. Some animals might end up in a thousand categories. Sumahoy 02:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose we just had this discussion 4 months ago. Trying to delete things without first having useful alternatives is of no value to WP. The problem I saw then and still see is that the contents of the articles do not generally have sufficient information to categorize them by bioregion or really in any other way. Is anyone going to fix these articles so they have sufficient facts? Where are the biologists to do this. I think categories should always based on article facts. Hmains 04:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all These categories are unrelated to habitat conditions. AshbyJnr 16:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment - If we upmerge to Category:Fauna of the United States (or better yet, Category:Fauna of North America), could we include the category name information within the text of the article, in a section called "Regions found"; and note on the Talk: page that this is a temporary fix until there is a full bio solution? Would that satisfy the other folks who are concerned about losing any informational content contained by the state-based categorization, as a temporary solution? --lquilter 23:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all State boundaries are irrelevant to science. Carina22 14:02, 6 February 2007 (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:High schools in Orange County, Florida

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Category:High schools in Florida, convention of Category:High schools in the United States. -- Prove It (talk) 07:34, 31 January 2007 (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.

México (state)

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:State of México to Category:México (state)
Propose renaming Category:Cities in México State to Category:Cities in México (state)
Propose renaming Category:Governors of the State of México to Category:Governors of México (state)
Propose renaming Category:Municipalities in State of México to Category:Municipalities of México (state)
  • Rename all, so that all categories relating to México (state) (Estado de México) use the same term in their titles to refer to the political entity (ie the Mexican state which also happens to be called México). Presently they refer to it in several different ways, which is confusing as well as inconsistent. The proposed renames reflect the nomimal form of the article on the state itself. The rename of the municipalities subcat is also consistent with the way other municipalities by Mexican state cats are formed, ie uses the of not in construction. Note also that the use of the accented char in the titles is entirely consistent with usage employed when naming other Mexican states' articles and categories (eg Yucatán, San Luis Potosí, etc. cjllw | TALK 05:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy rename - The categories should automatically be renamed to match the parent article, especially when the name of the parent article is generally accepted by consensus or is otherwise non-controversial. I had proposed a speedy rename criteria like this on the talk page for this page, but I received no comments, and so I never pushed it forward. Dr. Submillimeter 09:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy rename per Dr. Submillimeter. —mikedk9109SIGN 22:58, 31 January 2007 (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:African American criminals

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, whats the need to create Criminals by ethnicity? See also discussion of July 19th. -- Prove It (talk) 04:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Wikipedia:Overcategorization#Intersection_by_ethnicity.2C_religion.2C_or_sexual_preference. Doczilla 05:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's well-known I support many occupation/identity categories, but that doesn't mean I want them to proliferate without reason. The existence of this would seem to necessitate a bunch of "Blank-American criminals" and I don't think that's helpful. Lastly the only name in it seems to be a rapper and that makes me think some kind of agenda is intended.--T. Anthony 06:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - although criminality & ethnicity is an important & studied topic, categories of criminals by ethnicity are definitively not going to be helpful in studying it. The study of criminality & ethnicity/gender/nationality/religion/etc is statistical and quantitative, and the use of categories in wikipedia lends nothing to that. Moreover, while other identity & occupation categories are useful because they serve as barometers of notable persons in those professions, and can reflect social barriers to success based on race/gender/etc; that reasoning completely breaks down for the "occupation: criminals" category -- because what is a "notable" or successful criminal? More crimes? More punishment for fewer crimes? Less punishment per crime? Criminals are notable for all sorts of reasons; often because they are notable for non-criminal activities. So this category is not only not helpful, it is actually, actively, confusing. Delete all "Criminals by ethnicity" categories. --lquilter 17:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I can't put it any better than T. Anthony... this is completely useless.--Isotope23 20:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per WP:OV by ethnicity. —mikedk9109SIGN 22:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Not only is this over-categorization, it's wildly offensive that African-Americans are the only people categorized like this. --Colage 23:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Obviously some crimes are racially motivated, but articles about those crimes already can be categorized under, for example, Category:Racially motivated violence in the United States. Likewise, for cases where a criminal's ethnicity led to unfair treatment by the judicial system or by vigilante groups, there exist racism related categories you can use to sort those articles. And obviously for criminals where ethnicity played no notable role in either the crime or the aftermath, there is no need to categorize those people by race. Thus it seems unlikely this particular category is actually needed and there is sufficient overlap with existing racism-related categories to cover the articles where ethnicity made a difference. Dugwiki 23:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep unless all other African American categories are deleted. Singling this out for deletion is an obvious breach of Wikipedia:Neutrality. Piccadilly 01:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How so? You have to handle categories one at a time, and we frequently delete African American categories as being a random intersection of ethnicity and occupation/status. If you have other similar categories that you think should be considered for deletion, I'm sure we'll consider them equally. Dugwiki 20:26, 1 February 2007 (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:Mayors of places in Sweden

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Mayors of places in Sweden to Category:Municipal commissioners of Sweden
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:Australian Gaming conventions

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Australian Gaming conventions to Category:Role playing conventions
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:Conflicts

[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: do not merge. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Conflicts into Category:Conflict
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:American English-language writers

[edit]

Category:Canadian writers in English

[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. >Radiant< 15:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Category:American English-language writers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Canadian writers in English (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Pure time-wasting category clutter. There are something like ten thousand plus articles about American writers, of which this contains one. A vast amount of effort has been put into subcategorizing category:American writers, but it is a huge task and there is still a long way to go. All this would do is recreate that category. It is far more rational to make this category, and others for mainly English speaking countries, subcategories of category:English-language writers and add a qualifying note that those subcategories may contain a few non-English language writers. Sumahoy 00:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily; are there no American writers who write in Spanish? Native American languages? Bearcat 23:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They are rare exceptions. What do we gain by adding this category to thousands and thousands of categories. Pinoakcourt 21:35, 1 February 2007 (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/2007_January_31&oldid=1138388149"