| Revision as of 23:43, 19 December 2009 editGrutness (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators316,631 edits →People by school in New Zealand← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:18, 20 December 2009 edit undoDjln (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users279,350 edits →Category:Celtic sports clubsNext edit → | ||
| Line 100: | Line 100: | ||
| *'''Listify and delete''' converting it to a disambiguation page: there seem to be quite enough to warrnat that. Or is there one already? ] (]) 17:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC) | *'''Listify and delete''' converting it to a disambiguation page: there seem to be quite enough to warrnat that. Or is there one already? ] (]) 17:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Comment'''. No objections to listification, which sounds like a rather good idea. --] <small>] • (])</small> 22:43, 19 December 2009 (UTC) | *'''Comment'''. No objections to listification, which sounds like a rather good idea. --] <small>] • (])</small> 22:43, 19 December 2009 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Absolute Keep'''. Another outrageous nomination. To claim these clubs have nothing to do with Celtic culture is absolute b*ll**ks. The term has a clear definition when used in sport. It clearly denotes a club was formed by Irish emigrants or people from other Celtic nations. There are similar categories for Hakoah or Maccabi which indicate a club is of Jewish origin. Will they be nominated for deletion !! The comparison with animals is as offensive as it is ridiculous. A club with the suffix Lions was clearly not formed by a lion, however a club with Celtic in its name most likely to have been formed by people of Celtic origin. A bit obvious. PS should at least be listified if deleted. ] --] (]) 15:18, 20 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==== Category:User:Elium2 ==== | ==== Category:User:Elium2 ==== | ||
Revision as of 15:18, 20 December 2009
| < December 17 | December 19 > |
|---|
December 18
People by school in New Zealand
- Propose renaming various subcategories
- Nominator's rationale: The naming of subcategories of Category:People by school in New Zealand is a thorough mess and needs standardising before there are too many more of them. Currently, we have the following subcats:
- Personally, I think the style "Former students of..." is possibly the best. I note also that a similar mess exists with the equivalent Australia categories (see Category:People by school in Australia), but I'll leave that to someone else to sort out... Grutness...wha? 23:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Rename all to Former students of X. I agree that the style "Former students of..." is clearest, but Category:People by school in England is full of obscure titles of the format "old somethings", but attempts to move to a plain English format have generated strong resistance. See for example Misplaced Pages:Categories for_discussion/Log/2006 December 19#Category:Old_Citizens and my nomination at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 June 23#Category:Old_Citizens. (The latter nomination at least resulted in the addition of a parenthesised clarifier).
If we rename these categories, then we should also rename all the English categories so that they make sense to those readers not versed in the social intricacies of the English "public" school system. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:52, 19 December 2009 (UTC) - Rename all per nom and BHG above. (The "Old Citizens" one actually sounds unintentionally funny...) Orderinchaos 09:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Comment -- The term alumni is standard in WP. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:44, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- For tertiary institutions, yes - but I don't know of any hard-and-fast rule here for secondary schools. If there werre such a rule, these categories wouldn't be such a mess. Grutness...wha? 20:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Rename all per nom except for Category:Old Collegians (Auckland), assuming this is the correct term. (The UK case is completely different as there is a host of schools with correctly named alumni categories, rather than just 1 out of a few. Ah yes, David Cameron, the well-known alumnus of Eton College.) Occuli (talk) 20:59, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Reply. "Old Etonian" seems to me to the exception that proves the rule. The school and its social networks are so well known that "Old Etonian" is indeed the common name, but most other uses of similar constructions are merely an internal piece of jargon used a school and its former inmates, rather than by the wider world. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Second reply Old Etonian is a term known worldwide. Old Collegian isn't even particularly widely known within New Zealand. Grutness...wha? 23:43, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Reply. "Old Etonian" seems to me to the exception that proves the rule. The school and its social networks are so well known that "Old Etonian" is indeed the common name, but most other uses of similar constructions are merely an internal piece of jargon used a school and its former inmates, rather than by the wider world. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Japanese baseball video games
- Propose renaming Category:Japanese baseball video games to Category:Video games about Japanese baseball
- Nominator's rationale: This is ambiguous: are these video games about baseball that is played in Japan or are these video games about baseball in general that were created in Japan? I'm pretty sure it's the former, but it's not clear from the title. Any suggestions? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:37, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- Comment from the contents, it's pretty clear it is not Japanese baseball, since several entries are about generic, cartoon, or North American baseball. I suppose they could be removed from the renamed category. 76.66.194.154 (talk) 07:21, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Are there any major differences between baseball in the U.S. and in Japan? (Example, we don't consider the National and American leagues different games because of the Designated Hitter.) Are they different games, or somewhat different ways of playing the same game (I believe they are the latter.) Bradjamesbrown (talk) 07:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
- I would think this should be Category:Japanese video games about baseball. It's the video games that are Japanese, not the baseball. Good Ol’factory 03:25, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Maybe we should give the cartoon video games the category Category:Cartoon baseball video games, the Japanese baseball video games with the category Category:Japanese video games about baseball, and put all North American baseball games with the category Category:North American video games about baseball? GVnayR (talk) 03:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Relisted from CfD November 29 to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:10, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Notifications : WikiProject Video games and WikiProject Baseball. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Seems like over-categorization to me. And as mentioned above, some are generic baseball games developed in Japan, rather than games about Japanese baseball. Which begs the question, is Japanese baseball different enough to warrant such a distinction? Not in my opinion. (Guyinblack25 22:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC))
- Japanese professional baseball is very different from American professional baseball in that the NPB is not the MLB. However, while I know a lot about the NPB, I have no idea if video games featuring NPB teams exist, how many there are, or if they are popular. --Torsodog 17:19, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Delete and populate the baseball video game category with them (if such a thing is possible, or should I add that category now in case?) I agree with Guyinblack, this is a step too far, the baseball video game category is specific enough. Someoneanother 11:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:John Most albums
- 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 delete as empty per WP:CSD#C1. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:25, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Category:John Most albums - Template:Lc1
- Nominator's rationale: Empty category, articles were deleted as non-notable Omarcheeseboro (talk) 15:06, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Speedy delete then, especially as John Most is a red-link. Occuli (talk) 15:15, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: I sent to CSD, sorry I didn't see that you could do that for Categories. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 15:16, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- 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:Cancelled things
- Propose renaming Category:Cancelled things to Category:Cancelled projects
- Nominator's rationale: The creator of the category agrees that Cancelled projects would be a more appropriate and in line with a correct category name SatuSuro 12:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Rename per nom. I'm the creator but had reservations about "things" from the beginning. Projects seems a reasonable fit to all members. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:04, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Rename per nom. Much as I like the casual tone of "things", "projects" feel rather more appropriate for an encyclopedia. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Possibility: Maybe even Category:Cancelled projects and events? Things like Olympics and elections are not really "projects", but they are "events". Anything is better than the current, though. Good Ol’factory 05:54, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Rename - no preference between "projects" and "projects and events", both would be an improvement. Orderinchaos 10:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Comment I have no problem either way - the creator agreed it can be 'improved' - and either 'projects' or 'projects and events' seems a good way to go - I'll leave it to others or the closer to resolve that SatuSuro 10:03, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Comment. 'projects and events' seems good way to me too, and probably a bit more inclusive than just 'projects'. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Rehat Maryada
- 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: Closed. This is a page move request and not a category. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Rehat Maryada to Category:Sikh Rehat Maryada
- Nominator's rationale: The article should be named Sikh Rehat Maryada and not Rehat Maryada. Rehat Maryada is a generic term and can apply to any code of conduct, whereas this article refers to the Sikh Rehat Maryada. See:
- ^ Kapoor, Sukhbir Singh; Mohinder Kaur Kapoor (2008). "Introduction". The Making of the Sikh Rehatnamas. New Delhi, India: Hemkunt Publishers. pp. 9. ISBN 9788170103707. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=6A_IX9WxnhoC&pg=PA9&dq=Sikh+rehat+maryada&as_brr=3&cd=2#v=onepage&q=Sikh%20rehat%20maryada&f=false. Retrieved 17th December 2009.
- ^ Takhar, Opinderjit Kaur (2005). "3" (in English). Sikh identity: an exploration of groups among Sikhs (Hardback ed.). England: Ashgate; illustrated edition edition (24 Aug 2005). pp. 76. ISBN 978-0-7546-5202-1. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aeKWQzesOc4C&pg=PA76&dq=Sikh+rehat+maryada&cd=2#v=onepage&q=Sikh%20rehat%20maryada&f=false. Retrieved 17th December 2009.
- ^ "Sikh Reht Maryada, The Definition of Sikh, Sikh Conduct & Conventions, Sikh Religion Living, India". www.sgpc.net. http://www.sgpc.net/sikhism/sikh-dharma-manual.html. Retrieved 2009-08-29.
- ^ "Sikh Reht Maryada, The Definition of Sikh, Sikh Conduct & Conventions, Sikh Religion Living, India". Sgpc.net. http://www.sgpc.net/rehat_maryada/section_six.html. Retrieved 2009-08-09.
- ^ "Sikh Reht Maryada, The Definition of Sikh, Sikh Conduct & Conventions, Sikh Religion Living, India". www.sgpc.net. http://www.sgpc.net/sikhism/sikh-dharma-manual.html. Retrieved 2009-08-29.
- ^ "Sikh Reht Maryada, The Definition of Sikh, Sikh Conduct & Conventions, Sikh Religion Living, India". www.sgpc.net. http://www.sgpc.net/sikhism/sikh-dharma-manual.html. Retrieved 2009-08-29.
- ^ Haynes, Jeffrey ((30 Jun 2008)). "19" (in English). Routledge handbook of religion and politics (1 edition ed.). Routledge;. pp. 316. ISBN 0415414555. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ULWtjZxscpIC&pg=PT328&dq=Sikh+rehat+maryada&as_brr=3&cd=5#v=onepage&q=Sikh%20rehat%20maryada&f=false. Retrieved 17th December 2009. Sikh-History 09:30, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- 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.
Organisations based in the United Kingdom
- Propose renaming Category:Non-profit organizations based in the United Kingdom to Category:Non-profit organisations based in the United Kingdom
- Propose renaming Category:Non-profit organizations based in Wales to Category:Non-profit organisations based in Wales
- Propose renaming Category:British Islamic organizations to Category:British Islamic organisations
- Propose renaming Category:University organizations of the British Armed Forces to Category:University organisations of the British Armed Forces
- Propose renaming Category:British veterans' organizations to Category:British veterans' organisations
- Nominator's rationale: The predominant spelling the UK is "organisation" and this is the dominant form in Category:Organisations based in the United Kingdom. Per also this previous CFD. Timrollpickering (talk) 08:05, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Rename per persuasive nom. Occuli (talk) 14:58, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Rename all per nom. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:10, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Rename all per nom. Orderinchaos 10:01, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Rename all per nominator. Debresser (talk) 22:22, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Celtic sports clubs
- Category:Celtic sports clubs - Template:Lc1
- Nominator's rationale: Delete. Aside from being misnamed (a possibly fixable problem; logically it should be something like Category:Sports clubs, teams and squads with "Celtic" in their names, but that's horrendous), the raison d'etre of the category is unsupportable. This is blatant overcategorization, namely of the "trivial intersection" variety. This is amply demonstrated by the categories this is a subcategory of: Category:Sports clubs and Category:Celtic culture. None of these teams actually have anything at all to do with Celtic culture any more than any other team. This would be exactly like creating a Category:Feline sports clubs as a subcategory of Category:Sports clubs and Category:Felines, for teams with "Lions", "Tigers", "Bengals", etc. in their names. The clincher, basically, is that no main article could be written about this (nor about feline-named clubs). Even a list article would get AfD'd as trivia (technically "collection of indiscriminate information", per WP:NOT.) If there were multiple reliable sources for "Celtic" having a particular actual meaning in the sports context, some kind of Celtic (sports) article could be written, but this would not engender a category, it would simply be an article in Category:Sports terminology. And in fact, there are no such sources, because it doesn't actually have any particular meaning. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 06:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Delete as categorisation by name. Timrollpickering (talk) 08:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Delete as categorisation by name, indeed. Occuli (talk) 15:00, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Delete as categorisation by name, indeed, indeed. (It's snowing outside, and this discussion looks snowy too). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)
- Listify and delete converting it to a disambiguation page: there seem to be quite enough to warrnat that. Or is there one already? Peterkingiron (talk) 17:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Comment. No objections to listification, which sounds like a rather good idea. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:43, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Absolute Keep. Another outrageous nomination. To claim these clubs have nothing to do with Celtic culture is absolute b*ll**ks. The term has a clear definition when used in sport. It clearly denotes a club was formed by Irish emigrants or people from other Celtic nations. There are similar categories for Hakoah or Maccabi which indicate a club is of Jewish origin. Will they be nominated for deletion !! The comparison with animals is as offensive as it is ridiculous. A club with the suffix Lions was clearly not formed by a lion, however a club with Celtic in its name most likely to have been formed by people of Celtic origin. A bit obvious. PS should at least be listified if deleted. Djln --Djln (talk) 15:18, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:User:Elium2
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more user 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 delete, G7. –BLACK FALCON 05:56, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Category:User:Elium2 - Template:Lc1
- Nominator's rationale: Per WP:USERCAT, the purpose of user categories is to "aid in facilitating coordination and collaboration between users for the improvement and development of the encyclopedia". This category simply collects the user's subpages and is not necessary. — ξ 01:45, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Elium2's statement I get the point. In the future, if I create any more categories, I'll make sure they're useful! Elium2 (talk) 01:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- 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.