Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 September 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Categories for deletion | Log
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Splash (talk | contribs) at 23:02, 14 September 2005 (→September 13: +my comments). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

September 13

Category:Minor Topics

empty and uncategorized cat, and I'm not sure if it would have a use.

Category:Monster trucks

empty and Category:Monster Trucks exists

Category:Mountaines of Saudi Arabia

empty and misspelling of existing Category:Mountains of Saudi Arabia Salsb 23:24, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Towns in Belgium

So far as I can establish from the relevant article no distinction is made between cities and towns in Belgium. This category includes everything from Brussels down. In this situation it is standard to use the form category:Cities and towns in Belgium. CalJW 23:22, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum

Empty category

Category:UK Comics stubs

Created cat, largely because it was a red link on the corrosponding stub template. I wasn't aware there already was one. Redirecting didn't work.

Category:Cleanup from July 2004

Redundant - now empty, and no more will be added.

Category:Cleanup from June 2004

Redundant - now empty, and no more will be added.

Category:Hospitals by nationality to Category:Hospitals by country

For consistency with category:Categories by country Kappa 10:17, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:French horn players

Redundant; Category:Horn players exists and covers the variations on the French Horn as well. Delete Hathawayc 06:29, September 13, 2005 (UTC)

Delete, more so that Category:Horn players has only about 10 articles in it. Karol 21:13, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Filipino Authors

Redundant; there's already a Category:Philippine writers. Delete Hathawayc 06:21, September 13, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Farm animals

Empty, uncategorized category. I think Category:Domesticated animals covers the need quite well. Delete. Hathawayc 05:55, September 13, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Livestock has all the farm animals we need. Karol 21:16, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Villages in Canada

Created eight days ago and empty. The practice seems to be that all settlments in Canada go in the relevant provincial category in category:Communities in Canada. Those that are officially designated as cities or towns also go in Category:Cities in Canada or category:Towns in Canada. Delete CalJW 04:36, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Category:Communities in Canada is currently far too broad and confusing, as it includes both incorporated municipalities and neighbourhoods within incorporated municipalities. The different types of "communities" have to be separated more clearly. Ultimately, "communities" should only include named communities within larger municipalities, and the municipalities themselves should all be in more specific categories like "cities", "towns", "villages" or "townships". The answer to the category's current emptiness is to populate it, not to kill it. Keep and populate. Bearcat 19:08, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per above. Category:Subdivisions of Canada shows the subcategories, which I guess should be present for each region (Ontario, Manitoba, etc.). Karol 21:24, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment But is the term village actually used in Canada? Given Canada's size, level of internet access and majority language, it seemed a fair assumption that it isn't if not one place in the country has been categorised as such by now. If it isn't populated by the end of the seven days, I believe it can be deleted for being empty, even if it has a theoretical use. So perhaps you could start populating it to prove it can be done - even if with just one article. CalJW 06:55, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • The term certainly is used. As for why "not one place in the country has been categorised as such by now", try looking at the page history: the category was only just created less than two weeks ago, and none of the Canadian contingent have any particular responsibility to psychically know that the category exists if nobody brings it to our attention. I'll do what I can to populate the category, but since Canadian geography isn't normally my main project you'll have to excuse me if I don't immediately deem it my top editing priority. Bearcat 19:52, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question shouldn't this be something like Category:Towns and villages in Canda per several others we've had through here lately? -Splashtalk 23:02, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Characters in the Law & Order franchise

To be proposed to be renamed as Category:Law & Order spinoff characters; The main section (Category:Law & Order characters) list the characters from the original series, Law & Order, but the afore mentioned one, has the characters from its later spinoffs. Making it why I wan to rename this page. 'Nuff said!

Category:Images of United States

My first thought was simply that the word "the" is missing, but looking at the other categories in category:images by country it seems that category:United States images is the most consistent option. Rename CalJW 04:27, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can anybody fill us in on the current state of the policy debate on the naming format for national subject categories? The proper naming format for this category is defined by that policy, not by "consistency within the Images parent category superseding consistency within the United States parent". If the debate is resolved, then rename to whatever format was decided on by that discussion; if it's still open, then suspend this vote pending the result. Bearcat 19:17, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest that these categories are better standardised to images of (country), since the parent is category:images by country. Only people are categorised by nationality as policy stands at the moment. Therefore, propose renaming to category:Images of the United States Steve block talk 21:49, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please reconsider. I generally favour using "American" but IMO that debate isn't relevant here. Looking at it again, This is a special case and there is an unusual but clearly established format. The other categories are in the form "name of country [noun]... images". This is very unusual, but it hasn't been chosen on a whim. The format that is being used for the other countries makes sense. "American images" would include paintings done by American artists on holiday in Europe and the like. The images are not images of X but images of things and places in X. Only a few satellite images are literally "Images of the United States". We must go with category:United States images or come up with a good reason to breach a clearly established standard format. CalJW 06:45, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I have no problem understanding that images of the Statue of Liberty or the White House are images of the United States. Isn't that the common way to refer to groups of images of objects within a country, they are images of that country. I suggest that the format is unusual and not perhaps common usage. I would rather all sub cats of category:images by country were renamed images of country. Steve block talk 13:44, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please leave that discussion for another time and approve renaming to category:United States images as an interim measure? At the moment there is an obvious error in the name of one of the top-tier categories in what is doubtless the most viewed national menu. This makes Wikipedia look shoddy. It wouldn't be allowed to stand in Britannica or Encarta. CalJW 18:02, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, it probably matters little enough anyway, and either name is as descriptive. Rename per nom. Steve block talk 19:06, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that there isn't an established standard format in this matter; there are competing ideas on what should be the established format ("nation-name subject", "national-adjective subject", "subject by/of/in nation", etc.) Parent categories don't get to each have their own preferred format which has to be upheld regardless of what format is used in other parents; the only real issue at play here is inconsistency in the naming format across Wikipedia as a whole. Furthermore, if you're going to insist on respecting the standard in place within the parent category, why is "Images by country" privileged over "United States" as the parent category which gets to define the standard that should be used here? The category needs to be consistent with other categories in Category:Images by country only in the sense that they all need to be consistent with Wikipedia policy on the naming of national subject subcategories; parent categories do not each set their own individual standard. Bearcat 20:07, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: You are looking at the wrong "parent" category. This category was created under Category:Images of North America, with the topmost parent being Category:Images of places. If you look at the nominated Category you'll see it contains the Wikipedia:List of images notice. (SEWilco 20:59, 14 September 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Category:Wario platform games

Aren't enough Wario games to warrant splitting Category:Wario games into this and the CfD below. Delete. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:27, September 13, 2005 (UTC)

Category:WarioWare games

Aren't enough Wario games to warrant splitting Category:Wario games into this and the above CfD. Delete. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:27, September 13, 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_September_13&oldid=23245833"