| Revision as of 19:56, 7 November 2005 editCalJW (talk | contribs)29,222 edits →November 7← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:38, 7 November 2005 edit undoFastfission (talk | contribs)17,173 edits →November 7Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| === November 7 === | === November 7 === | ||
| <!-- Please add the newest nominations to the top --> | <!-- Please add the newest nominations to the top --> | ||
| ====] to ]==== | |||
| This category is too misleading and POV for many of the cases included inside it. Additionally, a number of the people listed are still alive, and allegations of espionage, however qualified, can easily be grounds for touchy defamation suits. Adding the "alleged" on there makes it clear that this is a category created by others, not Misplaced Pages. I also propose creating as a compliment category ], which is where we can separate out those who actually were labeled as such by a court of law. ] 21:38, 7 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ====American television people==== | ====American television people==== | ||
| Let's keep up the recent progress towards standardising the American people categories in line with normal English usage, the parent category, and the great majority of the like categories by renaming: | Let's keep up the recent progress towards standardising the American people categories in line with normal English usage, the parent category, and the great majority of the like categories by renaming: | ||
Revision as of 21:38, 7 November 2005
November 7
====Category:Soviet spies to Category:Alleged Soviet spies====
This category is too misleading and POV for many of the cases included inside it. Additionally, a number of the people listed are still alive, and allegations of espionage, however qualified, can easily be grounds for touchy defamation suits. Adding the "alleged" on there makes it clear that this is a category created by others, not Misplaced Pages. I also propose creating as a compliment category Category:Convicted Soviet spies, which is where we can separate out those who actually were labeled as such by a court of law. Fastfission 21:38, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
American television people
Let's keep up the recent progress towards standardising the American people categories in line with normal English usage, the parent category, and the great majority of the like categories by renaming:
- Category:U.S. television directors --> Category:American television directors
- Category:U.S. television producers --> Category:American television producers
The American television executives and personalities are already in the prevalent form, so it would be good to remove the inconsistency. Standardising the American people categories will encourage thorough categorisation by removing the hassle of needing to check which form is in use for each occupation. CalJW 19:56, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Category:Writers by state to Category:American writers by state
Another example of the American habit of overlooking the existence of the other six billion of us. Rename Category:American writers by state because that's what it is being used for. CalJW 19:36, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: University of Maryland
Category is part of attempt to receate MySpace on Misplaced Pages. -James Howard (talk/web) 18:43, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. No reason to single out just the University of Maryland category. Are you trying to argue that the entire Misplaced Pages:User categorisation system should go? Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 19:07, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- I cannot say I would mind seeing the system go. It is a backdoor mechanism to get editors into the general namespace. If there were a non-general category schema, I wouldn't care. But I cannot see a good reason to have any path from the general namespace into User:, unless it is a link to a user page from an article on that user. -James Howard (talk/web) 19:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Category:University of Maryland, College Park Faculty
Cat is empty and served by Category:University of Maryland, College Park faculty -James Howard (talk/web) 18:32, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Category:LGBT mythology
I'm not sure if this should be renamed or deleted outright, but the contemporary term "LGBT" is entirely meaningless when applied to Ancient Greek culture and myths. Radiant_>|< 16:45, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Delete There is no need to drag sex into every subject area in this way. It is not npov. CalJW 19:03, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Category:LGBT computer and video games
A rather strange name, as it's not the games that are LGBT. In fact many contemporary games (especially from Japan) contain one or more LGBT people, but it seems meaningless to list all of those as 'LGBT games' unless sexual preference actually has a bearing on the game's gameplay. I think this is better represented as a list with some annotation. Listify, but if kept please rename to "Computer and video games with LGBT characters" or thereabouts. Radiant_>|< 16:45, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Delete There is no need to drag sex into every subject area in this way. It is not npov. CalJW 19:04, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Category:U.S. philosophers to Category:American philosophers
Following the trend to name American people cats using the descriptor 'American' as opposed to 'U.S.'. (Note: at present, the proposed cat exists as a "redirect") -Mayumashu 16:25, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support Let's get them all done. Categorisasing American people will be much easier then, so more of it will get done accurately. CalJW 19:01, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Category:Jewish film directors
There is such a thing as over-categorization, especially as there will be inevitable arguments over who gets included. JW 16:05, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Category:Admin abuse problem
This seems to be an "anti-admin" category, and is not even properly labeled as a "wikipedia" category. The items in this category seem to be loosely connected. -Willmcw 07:56, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- I'd rather see this renamed properly than deleted outright. Friday (talk) 13:53, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, this is used for attacking some admins that have done something that some users disagree with. Whichver way you put it, this is not a useful way of handling the disputes. Radiant_>|< 16:34, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as per Radiant!. --cesarb 19:13, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Category:Secretaries of State for Defence (UK)
Can't help thinking that this was once full or had the intention of being so but is currently empty. Any ideas? Not sure if needs deleting, more of a discussion point on what to do with it doktorb 04:04, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Good question - it's not the only category like this either: Category:Secretaries of State for Education (UK) is the same. They're not new categories either. They are easily fillable, though, if anyone has the inclination, from the names in the parent Category:British Secretaries of State. These shopuld be kept, and if there a UK parliamentary WikiProject around, it should be told that these need filling. Perhaps uputting {{popcat}} templates on them all will help, too. Grutness...wha? 07:37, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Keep I'll mark them with popcat. There are hundreds of articles in the parent category, which isn't really a very useful location for articles imo, and they should all be allocated to the subcategories. CalJW 12:26, 7 November 2005 (UTC)