Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 April 5

< April 4	April 6 >

April 5

Category Manufacturing plants of the Netherlands, Pakistan

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: Speedy rename C2C per Category:Manufacturing plants by country. Timrollpickering (talk) 01:17, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Manufacturing plants of the Netherlands to Category:Manufacturing plants in the Netherlands, likewise Category:Manufacturing plants of Pakistan

Nominator's rationale: The other countries in Category:Manufacturing plants by country are all "in" not "of" Hugo999 (talk) 23:52, 5 April 2011 (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:European basketball players in America

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Delete not a defining intersection of categories. Pichpich (talk) 17:03, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant to existing categories, such as Category:British expatriate basketball people and Category:Expatriate basketball people in the United States. I added a few 'Expatriate...' categories to the article. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 06:38, 6 April 2011 (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:Albert Medal (Lifesaving) Recipients

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: Speedy rename C2C per convention of Category:Recipients of United Kingdom civil awards and decorations. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Albert Medal (Lifesaving) Recipients to Category:Recipients of the Albert Medal (lifesaving)

Nominator's rationale: Rename. To bring it in line with other similar categories. Should be "lifesaving", not "Lifesaving", as the official title of the medal was simply the Albert Medal and this has only been added as a disambiguator. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:00, 5 April 2011 (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:Government of the Northwest Territories

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:22, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Government of the Northwest Territories to Category:Governments in the Northwest Territories

Nominator's rationale: The phrase "Government of the Northwest Territories" means the government of the Northwest Territories; it is not used in a general sense to mean "the concept/institutions of government in the Northwezt Territories" but only in reference to the territorial government. Items included in this category by its creator include the Yellowknife City Government and various tribal councils ,which are not part of the territorial government. Skookum1 (talk) 07:35, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. "Government of" is the standard for subcategories of Category:Provincial and territorial governments of Canada. A preferable solution is to simply remove the articles that aren't part of the territorial government itself. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The intent of the category was to include all governments in the Northwest Territories (look at the items and when this category was added to them, and in which order). And I submit if those other governments were removed, there is little point in this category's existence at all. I haven't looked to see what's in the prov-and-terr-gov's category, maybe they do include things that they shouldn't e.g. municipalities and tribal councils. If it's as simple a matter as purging the category of things that don't belong, that's fine; maybe Category:First Nations tribal councils in the Northwest Territories would suffice (equivalent to Category:First Nations tribal councils in British Columbia; I think there's only Yellowknife as far as non-native community governments go, maybe I'm wrong (e.g. Aklavik ot Tuktoyaktuk); I'd hope that User:CambridgeBayWeather might drop by here, though of course I won't poll him (he's sort of our northern/Arctic resident expert).Skookum1 (talk) 06:50, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Since I created the category, it's funny that you would tell me what my intent was. My primary intent was actually to add a category for the NWT to the Category:Provincial and territorial governments of Canada to complete the scheme. For that reason, I think if you are concerned about the contents of the category, you should just remove the articles you don't agree with being in it. There's no reason to develop an anomaly in the category structure as it presently exists. (Personally, I'm not sure it's that big of a deal to include these tribal councils, since I don't think there's a mandatory assumption that "Government of the Northwest Territories" necessarily means the Govt of the NWT. It could just mean "entities that govern the NWT and its people".) But if we did strip those out there would still be 3 subcategories and at least 2 articles, and it would be part of an overall scheme, all of which seem to me to mean that it's not an unreasonable category to have at this stage. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 06:57, 6 April 2011 (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:Industrial buildings in the United States

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: Upmerge. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:21, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose upmerging Category:Industrial buildings in the United States to Category:Industrial buildings and structures in the United States

Nominator's rationale: The category has only 9 articles which can be absorbed (if not already in) subcategories of the “US buildings and structures” category. There are only four other countries (Canada, Denmark, Lithuania, United Kingdom) in Category:Industrial buildings by country which maybe could also be merged into the appropriate “buildings and structures” category by country. Hugo999 (talk) 05:33, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Sounds like a good idea. --Kumioko (talk) 20:04, 8 April 2011 (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:History Channel shows

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:20, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:History Channel shows to Category:History (TV channel) original programs

Nominator's rationale: Rename. The article for the channel is at History (TV channel) and there are other "History Channels" under various names that could cause confusion. Harley Hudson (talk) 03:58, 5 April 2011 (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:Northern Football League clubs

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:20, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Northern Football League clubs to Category:Clubs in the Northern Football League (Australia)

Nominator's rationale: "Northern Football League" is ambiguous, parent cat has already been renamed to Category:Northern Football League (Australia). Listing here rather than WP:CFDS because "Northern Football League (Australia) clubs" looks pretty foolish and I think that "Clubs in the Northern Football League (Australia)", although more wordy, makes better sense. Jenks24 (talk) 01:46, 5 April 2011 (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.