Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 March 22

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jeremy Hopkins (talk | contribs) at 10:44, 23 March 2012 (→Republic of China & Taiwan). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< March 21 March 23 >

March 22

Category:Trinidad and Tobago Wikipedia administration

Category:Trinidad and Tobago Wikipedia administration - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Covered by WikiProject Trinidad and Tobago. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:23, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shortened Space Shuttle missions

Category:Shortened Space Shuttle missions - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: WP:OC - this isn't significantly defining enough to merit a categorisation, I believe. The Bushranger One ping only 21:35, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Missions in the most significant space programs in history that were adjusted for safety and equipment failure reasons is sufficiently defining and well documented as well.--RadioFan (talk) 03:03, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep:I don't think this fails as over categorization. Over categorization would be "Space Shuttle missions shortened due to {problem}". This category is very generic, and maybe even could be a little more specific.--NavyBlue84 03:50, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tier One

Propose renaming Category:Tier One to Category:Scaled Composites Tier One program
Nominator's rationale: The proposed renaming here both applies consistency with the other subcategories of Category:Human spaceflight programmes, conforms more closely to the main article, and avoids ambiguity with the "Tier foo" black UAV projects that the U.S. Military has run - which was, in fact, what I expected when I clicked on the category in question - along with all the other "Tier Ones". The Bushranger One ping only 21:29, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian defamation litigants

Category:Canadian defamation litigants - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Defined as "Canadians who are party in a defamation lawsuit", and currently includes Canadian corporations. (It also includes the Church of Scientology and Gordon Ramsay—neither of which is Canadian—so presumably the category is meant to categorize "litigants in Canadian defamation lawsuits"; i.e., the lawsuits are ones that were in Canadian courts, and the litigants were not necessarily Canadian.) To me this is overcategorization by non-defining characteristic. The fact that the Toronto Star has been sued for defamation at least once seems unsurprising and far from the core of what makes it a notable newspaper. Similarly, involvement in a defamation lawsuit is not central to the notability of any of the people included int he category. I think we should generally avoid a "litigants by type of civil lawsuit" category scheme. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:07, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete anyone in the public eye is potentially named in any number of civil cases. Being a defendant is not generally defining for them; for anyone for whom their main claim to fame is being a defendant I think that WP:1E would likely apply. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:World War II rocket-powered aircraft of Germany

Propose merging Category:World War II rocket-powered aircraft of Germany to Category:World War II fighter aircraft of Germany and Category:Rocket-powered aircraft
Nominator's rationale: This is the only by-nation subcategory of Category:Rocket-powered aircraft, and the only subcategory of Category:World War II aircraft of Germany that is by propulsion, not role. While the the nation of origin is defining, the era is defining, and the propulsion is defining, the nation+propulsion+era intersection here is not defining, and this is a WP:SMALLCAT that is (a) not part of an established category tree, and (b) a Category:World War II rocket-powered aircraft tree is unlikely to be created or be sustainable. Propose upmerge to the parent RPA category, and to the fighter subcategory of the WWIIAoG parent cat, as all three articles in this category are fighter aircraft. The Bushranger One ping only 20:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Noli Me Tangere (novel)

Category:Noli Me Tangere (novel) - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. -- Alan Liefting

(talk - contribs) 19:14, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. A very small category that will never grow any larger. That it recently had a discussion that was closed as "no consensus" is not a reason to withdraw this one, as we are still trying to find consensus (this would be completely different if the last outcome had been "keep", of course). Jenks24 (talk) 00:25, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:SMALLCAT, I've improved the cats at the Maria Clara article so that it won't be affected much once this cat is deleted. The other two articles are sufficiently categorized anyways.--Lenticel (talk) 02:15, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:White dwarfs

Propose renaming Category:White dwarfs to Category:White dwarf stars
Nominator's rationale: While the article name is White dwarf, and should remain so, this is a case where I believe the category name should deviate from the article name. The article name is clear and unambiguous, but just seeing "Category:White dwarves", somebody might think it referred to Caucasians with dwarfism. More importantly, this is the only subcat of Category:Stars by luminosity class that does not have the "foo stars" format (the others proposed for renaming away from it, appear to be getting no traction). Maintaining consistency there by unifying the naming format of its subcats would be a good thing without introducing any ambiguity or confusion. The Bushranger One ping only 17:26, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of China & Taiwan

Propose splitting Category:Republic of China to Category:Taiwan and Category:Taiwan (island)
Propose splitting Category:Taiwan to Category:Taiwan and Category:Taiwan (island)
Nominator's rationale: Following this Requested Move, the Republic of China articles has been moved to Taiwan and the previous Taiwan article has been moved to Taiwan (island). The categories need to be changed accordingly and also need a general tidy because the state/island split hasn't really been followed, as shown by the entries. Once the main categories are sorted the individual subcategories can be renamed to match. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:43, 22 March 2012 (UTC)Year[reply]
  • Agree - Esc2003 (talk) 12:56, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There are many topics related to the ROC which are not related to Taiwan at all. This is exactly the mess that was anticipated in the article RM discussion. (But sadly such concerns were ignored in the RM discussion, since most editors participated don't actually edit in this area and resisted to understand it.) Jeffrey (202.189.98.142) (talk) 14:31, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Republic of China is ambiguous as it can refer to the pre-1947 mainland or the post-1945 Taiwan. This has been a long-running issue, and I am glad to see it reaching a conclusion. Following the derecognition of Taiwan by many states in favour of PRC, the common name for the polity is Taiwan. However, the closing admin cannot be expected to undertake these changes. It may be that we need to start by merging the ROC category to Taiwan, purging it of any pre-1947 mainland articles, after which appropriate articles might be moved to the island category. Category:Republic of China should be re-created as DAB category to prevent its use. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:51, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are many topics that span across the pre-Taiwan and Taiwan era of the ROC, such as the presidency, the constitution, its laws, its armed force, the flag, and therefore only a category titled "Republic of China" would be appropriate for these topics. (What'd happened in 1947, by the way? The ROC actually relocated its capital to Taipei in 1949 and lost almost all of the Chinese mainland in the mid-1950s.) Jeffrey (202.189.98.142) (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I am personally opposed to PRC content being named "China" and ROC content being named "Taiwan", but if that's where the main articles are, then everything else should follow suit. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:20, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • General oppose, without a clearer explanation of what is going to result. Clearly this is a mess in the making. I agree with Jeffrey that somewhere along the line, we will need a category to house things about the political entity called the "Republic of China" that has existed both prior to and after the 1940s. For instance, Category:People executed by the Republic of China contains people executed both by "Taiwan" and by pre-1940s "China". It would be nonsensical to rename this subcategory to Category:People executed by Taiwan, and it also doesn't make much sense to include it as a subcategory of Category:Taiwan. So what would its parent category be? Why not Category:Republic of China? Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:30, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Exactly. While it's much less difficult to rename Category:Taiwan to Category:Taiwan (island), it's going to be a big mess to rename Category:ROC as Category:Taiwan. We got a category for the presidents of the ROC. We also got many categories for the political office holders of the ROC. These categories do not belong to Cat:Taiwan. Jeffrey (202.189.98.142) (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I have to agree with you RevelationDirect, albeit very reluctantly. Since the community has decided to equate Taiwan and the Republic of China (Yes it's ridiculous and unthoughtful, but that's indeed was the decision!), we shall proceed to call Sun Yat-Sen the founding father and a former president of Taiwan, the Second Sino-Japanese War as the Taiwanese-Japanese War, the Peiyang Government of the ROC as the Peiyang Government of Taiwan, and the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty as the Taiwanese-American Mutual Defense Treaty. This is necessary to maintain consistency across different articles and categories. The same is done with President of the United States (and Category:Presidents of the United States, instead of "President of the United States of America"). These titles have to match with the name of the country article. Jeffrey (202.189.98.142) (talk) 09:16, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Palea

Propose renaming Category:Palea to Category:Palea (genus)
Nominator's rationale: Rename. This category is for the genus Palea (no article but Wattle-necked softshell turtle). Palea is about a city, so the category needs a different name. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:48, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gekkonidae

Propose merging Category:Gekkonidae to Category:Geckos
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Currently the target category is a subcategory of the nominated category, and the nominated category is a subcategory of the target category, which sets up an unhelpful category loop. Gekkonidae redirects to Gecko. I don't think we need both categories. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Georgian Azeris

Propose renaming Category:Georgian Azeris to Category:Georgian Azerbaijanis
Nominator's rationale: Need of standardization. Because, this people priority name is "Azerbaijanis". Esc2003 (talk) 06:36, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Old Houses in the Philippines

Category:Old Houses in the Philippines - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Does not have a defining characteristic and it is not an official designation by the National Historical Institute. The subcat is already categorised so there is no upmerge needed. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 03:53, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two more Old Fooians

Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: Rename both, to a standardised descriptive format (see WP:NDESC) which combines a plain English descriptive phrase with the WP:COMMONNAME title of the head article. This clarifies the purpose of the categories to the non-specialist reader for whom Wikipedia is written, by eliminating obscurity and ambiguity.
In each case, the purpose of the category is more clearly conveyed by the descriptive format. No information will be lost to the reader, because the school's own terminology is explained in a hatnote in each category.
The proposed name follows the "People educated at Foo" convention of Category:People educated by school in the United Kingdom. A total of 272 "Old Fooian" categories have now been renamed to a desriptive format, at 67 separate CfDs, and the "People educated at" format is now used by all except about 35 of the ~1000 by-school sub-categories of Cat:People educated by school in the United Kingdom. (Note that there seems to be some cacheing of toolserver queries, so the list in that link currently includes about 20 categories which have already been renamed).
Since this is now the established convention for this category tree, I will omit the general arguments for the descriptive format, and just note that:
  1. Neither the Kimbolton School nor Queen Margaret's School, York appear to have produced many notable alumni: there are only 8 articles in each category.
  2. Neither school is listed amongst the various groupings of top public schools in the UK: the Eton Group, Rugby Group, and Clarendon Group.
  3. "Old Margaretians" is highly ambiguous. There is another Queen Margaret's School in Canada, and lots of St Margaret's School/College/Academys, including 6 in the United Kingdom and a further 5 in former British colonies
  4. Neither term is in common usage, as shown by these Google News searches:
Articles Category School GNews hits
school name		 GNews hits
"Old Fooian"		 GNews hits
"Old FooianS"
8 Old Kimboltonians Kimbolton School 312 0 1
8 Old Margaretians Queen Margaret's School, York 57 0 0
I believe that these renamings meet speedy criterion C2.C: "a rename bringing a category into line with established naming conventions for that category tree", so I suggest that this should be speedied. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:06, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More constellation disambiguation

Propose renaming
nominated categories
Nominator's rationale: Rename. None of the nominated categories currently match the main article for the category. In each case, the article is at an undisambiguated name. However, I am not suggesting that the categories be renamed to match the articles. This is because for each one, I think that there are at least arguable reasons to keep the category in a disambiguated form. Some of these reasons (which I have provided above for each one) are better than others. Anyway, I am suggesting here that for each of these categories the word "constellation" be (bracketed) in the name so that they match the other disambiguated subcategories of Category:Constellations (which were recently renamed by adding parentheses to match the applicable disambiguated articles). Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:13, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_March_22&oldid=483510825"