Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 May 9: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion | Log Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 13:18, 9 May 2007 editBrownHairedGirl (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers2,942,733 edits →Category:Isms: comments← Previous edit		Revision as of 13:21, 9 May 2007 edit undoEep² (talk \| contribs)7,014 editsm →[]Next edit →
Line 38:		Line 38:
	Shows that play on the ] network. We don't usually categorize shows by the network they play on (among others because shows can play on a variety of networks, especially if they go international, hence this is ]). ] 12:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)		Shows that play on the ] network. We don't usually categorize shows by the network they play on (among others because shows can play on a variety of networks, especially if they go international, hence this is ]). ] 12:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
	*'''Delete'''. The article on the only entry in the category says that the show is "produced by Medstar Television, in association with Court TV Original Productions", so this may regarded as categorisation by producer rather than by broadcaster. However we do not appear to have other TV-show-by-producer categories, and in any case his one has only one entry. --] <small>] • (])</small> 12:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)		*'''Delete'''. The article on the only entry in the category says that the show is "produced by Medstar Television, in association with Court TV Original Productions", so this may regarded as categorisation by producer rather than by broadcaster. However we do not appear to have other TV-show-by-producer categories, and in any case his one has only one entry. --] <small>] • (])</small> 12:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
			*'''KEEP''': Um, yes, Radiant, ]... Try researching before you add a CfD next time, eh? -] 13:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

	====] and ]====		====] and ]====

Revision as of 13:21, 9 May 2007

< May 8	May 10 >

May 9

NEW NOMINATIONS

More Anglican primates

Category:Primates of the Church in Wales to Category:Archbishops of Wales

Category:Primates of the Anglican Church of the Province of West Africa to Category:Archbishops of West Africa

Category:Primates of the Anglican Church in the Province of the West Indies to Category:Archbishops of the West Indies

Category:Primates of the Anglican Church of Papua New Guinea to Category:Archbishops of Papua New Guinea

Category:Primates of the Anglican Church of the Province of South East Asia to Category:Archbishops of South East Asia

Category:Anglican Primates of the Church of Nigeria to Category:Archbishops of Nigeria

Category:Primates of the Anglican Church of Uganda to Category:Archbishops of Uganda

Category:Primates of the Anglican Church of the Province of Melanesia to Category:Bishops of Melanesia

Category:Anglican Primates of the Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui to Category:Archbishops of Hong Kong

Merge/Rename, these categories all relate to a single post of "Archbishop of X", who is the ex-officio holder of the title of "primate". The noninatoon is to merge these primate categories into an Archbishop category where that exists, otherwise to rename them. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:42, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Note So far as I am aware, these Archbishop titles are not used for other denominations. However, if editors feel that more clarity would be useful, we could name the new categories "Anglican Archbishops of ...". --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Primates of the Anglican Church of Southern Africa

Propose renaming Category:Primates of the Anglican Church of Southern Africa to Category:Archbishops of Cape Town

Nominator's Rationale: Rename, The Anglican Archbishop of Cape Town is ex-officio the Primate of the Anglican Church of Southern Africa, and is better known as the Archbishop. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Rename - The term "Archbishop of Cape Town" is much more likely to be used to describe these people. Dr. Submillimeter 12:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Court TV shows

Shows that play on the Court TV network. We don't usually categorize shows by the network they play on (among others because shows can play on a variety of networks, especially if they go international, hence this is not a defining characteristic). >Radiant< 12:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete. The article on the only entry in the category says that the show is "produced by Medstar Television, in association with Court TV Original Productions", so this may regarded as categorisation by producer rather than by broadcaster. However we do not appear to have other TV-show-by-producer categories, and in any case his one has only one entry. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
KEEP: Um, yes, Radiant, Misplaced Pages does... Try researching before you add a CfD next time, eh? -Eep² 13:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Native American people and Category:Native American people of the Indian Wars

Every category in Category:Native American people uses the term "Native Americans" rather than "Native American people", so I suggest renaming these two for consitency. >Radiant< 11:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Fictional drug users

On April 25th, the Category:Fictional drug addicts was nominated for deletion. Arguments in the debate include that it's subjective, not a defining characteristic, very much a defining characteristic according to other people, excessively broad, explicitly covered, not permanent, and/or strange. My initial thought was that renaming it from "addicts" to the better-defined "users" would solve most of the problems, but it was later pointed out to me that it doesn't necessarily help. So I'm putting it up here for wider discussion. Is this name better? Or is the previous name better? Or should we delete it altogether? >Radiant< 11:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete - Under its current name it's far too broad an inclusion standard. The current name makes no distinction between users of illegal drugs, legal drugs such as nicotine or alcohol, legal drugs used illicitly, etc. Under its previous name "Fictional drug addicts," it suffered from all the same arbitrariness as other similar categories for fictional characters by medical condition such as fictional alcoholics. Otto4711 13:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Conservation areas of South Africa

Propose renaming Category:Conservation areas of South Africa to Category:Protected areas of South Africa

Propose renaming Category:Conservation areas of Lesotho to Category:Protected areas of Lesotho

Nominator's Rationale: Rename per convention (see Category:Protected areas by country). Abberley2 10:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Rename per nom and per convention. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

University presidents

These would all change to match the conventions of category:American university and college presidents, which strongly favors "(X) presidents". There are, however, the subcategories of category: Canadian university and college chief executives to consider, as they are all "Presidents of (X)".--Mike Selinker 08:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Question is there any particular reason (other than historical accident) why we have two different naming conventions for university president categories in North America? Shouldn't we standardise on one system for both? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Isms

Delete No important commonality among these articles except that they end in "-ism". Trovatore 08:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment -- please note that categories are much more efficient than lists, and that we already have List of isms and List of philosophical isms. It might take a while to categorize all of the isms, but it'll be worth it in the end. --Wassermann 08:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Strong keep -- this category was just recently created and you already want to delete it without giving it a chance to grow? This category groups words/concepts that end with the important Greek -ism suffix. These words/concepts are important and influential in regards to ancient and modern history, the history of ideas, the history of science & the social sciences, general theories/concepts, English etymology, neologisms, and so forth. See also: -ism -- if this suffix is important enough have an article, surely it can have a category as well? All of the different "Isms" are often talked about together as a very broad unit, group, or general pool of theories/knowledge; thus it makes sense to have a broad umbrella category such as this one that yokes them all together. --Wassermann 08:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Strong delete. I can see that many isms are important to the history of ideas, but I struggle to find much connection between, for example the first two entries under the letter M: magnetism and malapropism (I could list any more such pairs, e.g. albigensianism and atlanticism). Additionally, because the category is based on a word ending rather than on similarity of concept, the category cannot include other concepts such as convection or radiation, so this doesn't even up as an all-inclusive category of ideas.
I think that this makes an interesting list, but we don't create categories out of every list or vice-versa. See Misplaced Pages:Categories, lists, and series boxes. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment -- What about the list issue that I mentioned, about categories being more efficient and clean than those? Since you vote to delete I suppose that your prepared to delete the List of isms too then? Along with the List of philosophical isms? What about the article -ism while your at it? This category is meant to be a categorical GLOSSARY of "-isms" (see Category:Glossaries), not a category of inter-related concepts/idea/theories (even though many series of "isms" are of course inter-related ). Maybe this does belong more in Wiktionary instead of Misplaced Pages...but it hasn't even had a chance to grow here yet! --Wassermann 12:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't want to delete the lists. Please do read Misplaced Pages:Categories, lists, and series boxes. Really, it'll clear up this misunderstanding for you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Strong delete I fully agree with BrownHairedGirl. This is a category based on a similarity in form (Phonetics) not in meaning (Semantics). C mon 10:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

You are correct...it is a phonetic glossary. Are phonetic glossaries not allowed here? --Wassermann 12:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Strong delete - "ism" can be added to anything (deletionism, wikipediaism, derisionism, ismism, etc.) a suffix does not a category make. the important ideas it may designate can and should be expressed through tighter categories.--Red Deathy 10:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

This is obviously a broad category, not a tight one. Again, I would think of it more like a full-blown glossary of Isms rather than a category. Like I asked BHG above, do you also support deleting the two -ism lists I talked about above? --Wassermann 12:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete Category clutter that implies a close connection that just isn't there. AshbyJnr 10:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

The close connection is the "-ism" suffix...this would be more of a glossary rather than a category, or a glossary posing as a category. --Wassermann 12:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete - This is categorization by name, a form of overcategorization. The subjects have little in common aside from their names and should not be categorized together. Dr. Submillimeter 11:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

It's a glossary of Isms -- please see Category:Glossaries. --Wassermann 12:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment Wasserman, you seem to misunderstand what Category:Glossaries is for. It is a category of articles or lists which are in them selves glossaries, and not an invitation to use the category system to construct a glossary. Also, please please read Misplaced Pages:Categories, lists, and series boxes. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Clubs formed by a merger

Propose renaming Category:Clubs formed by a merger to Category:Football (soccer) clubs formed by a merger

Nominator's Rationale: Rename. Category name too obtuse. Needs to have the qualification by sport. Dale Arnett 06:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete In the early stages of many fields of activity, many organisations are created which subsequently collapse or merge wit others, and in some sectors (e.g. business), ongoing merger activity is the norm rather than an exception. In this case, the first article I looked at was Blackburn Olympic F.C., formed by a merger in 1877, the very early days of the sport; that small deatil of the club's foundation 130 years ago does not appear to be a defining difference from, e.g. Millwall F.C.. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:59, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Delete This would apply to many, many English clubs, and most likely to many more in the rest of the world, but it isn't a meaningful connection. AshbyJnr 10:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Boroughs of New York City

Not many potential articles here - even counting talk pages, only 10. Od Mishehu 05:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Keep. Number is irrelevant (and 10's plenty). This is all the members of an important category.--Mike Selinker 08:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Keep obviously. --Wassermann 08:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Keep, a very important aspect of the city. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Keep The size of a category is irrelevant if it serves a legitimate purpose. AshbyJnr 10:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Drive (TV series)

Delete - small category for a cancelled show. Little to no chance of any possible expansion. There are not one but two navtemplates for the series along with the easy linkage of the articles through the main article. The category is unnecessary for navigational purposes. Otto4711 05:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Mr. Show

Delete - minus the improperly categorized articles on cast and crew, there are two articles in the category which are easily interlinked. The subcats are in the appropriate episodes and characters category trees. This category is not needed. Otto4711 04:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Lucky Louie

Propose renaming Category:Lucky Louie to Category:Lucky Louie images

Nominator's Rationale: Rename and repurpose - all of the articles in the category are for cast and crew, which is improper categorization. The category should be renamed and repurposed to specify that it is for images and the articles should be removed. Otto4711 04:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Jimmy Kimmel Live

Delete - category is being used to capture cast, crew and guests, which is completely improper per innumerable precedents. Otto4711 04:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Primates of the Assyrian Church of the East

Category:Primates of the Assyrian Church of the East to Category:Bishops of the Assyrian Church of the East

Merge, Another underpopulated primates category which would be better handled by a list. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Eastern Rite Catholic primates

Category:Primates of the Armenian Catholic Patriarchial Catholicosate of Cilicia

Category:Primates of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Patriarchate of Kyiv and Halych

Category:Primates of the Syro Malabar Major Archiepiscopal Catholic Church

Category:Primates of the Syriac Catholic Patriarchate of Antioch and all the East of the Syrians

Category:Primates of the Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarchate of Antioch and All the East, and Alexandria and Jerusalem

Category:Primates of the Coptic Catholic Patriarchate of Alexandria

Category:Chaldean Catholic Patriarchs of Babylon

Category:Maronite Patriarchs of Antioch (see note)

Upmerge all to Category:Eastern Rite Catholic primates as overcategorisation. This is a series of tautological and nearly incomprehensibly-named categories for simply-named positions such as the Patriarch of Cilicia, whose category is Category:Primates of the Armenian Catholic Patriarchial Catholicosate of Cilicia. I was going to suggest renaming, but most contain less only ten entries, and they appear to have no other articles ready for inclusion. This is part of one of User:Pastorwayne's unwieldy and inconsidered category hierarchies, so better deleted. There are already lists which do the job well enough. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Note that Category:Maronite Patriarchs of Antioch was renamed at CfD on May 1.
  See also Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 May 3#Category:Primates of the Syriac Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch and All the East and Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 May 1#Category:Primates of the Chaldean Catholic Patriarchate_of_Babylon --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Complex comment/vote:
Rename:
Category:Primates of the Armenian Catholic Patriarchial Catholicosate of Cilicia as Category:Armenian Catholic Patriarchs of Cilicia

Category:Primates of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Patriarchate of Kyiv and Halych as Category:Greek Catholic Patriarchs of Kyiv and Halych

Category:Primates of the Syriac Catholic Patriarchate of Antioch and all the East of the Syrians as Category:Syriac Catholic Patriarchs of Antioch

Category:Primates of the Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarchate of Antioch and All the East, and Alexandria and Jerusalem as Category:Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarchs of Antioch

Category:Primates of the Coptic Catholic Patriarchate of Alexandria as Category:Coptic Catholic Patriarchs of Alexandria

Merge:
Category:Primates of the Syro Malabar Major Archiepiscopal Catholic Church into Category:Syro-Malabar Catholic Archbishops of Ernakulam-Angamaly

Keep:
Category:Chaldean Catholic Patriarchs of Babylon

Category:Maronite Patriarchs of Antioch

Mixing the patriarchs for these various denominations together does not seem appropriate. Moreover, some of these categories already contain six or more articles, and many of these categories have the strong potential for growth (see, for example, List of Chaldean Catholic Patriarchs of Babylon). Hence, I oppose merging all of these categories into Category:Eastern Rite Catholic primates. However, I also dislike the overly-complicated names that have been devised for these categories, especially since "Primate of the Patriarchate" is used much less frequently than "Patriarch" or "Archbishop" to refer to these individuals. Therefore, I suggest renaming where appropriate. Dr. Submillimeter 07:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment but (to take your example) only two articles actually exist for the Patriarchs of Babylon, and the whole of Category:Chaldean Catholics contains only 8 articles. Likewise, there are only 4 articles on the maronite patriarchs. If and when the articles are created, there may be a case for creating sub-categories which can be populated, but in the meantime wouldn't it just be better to categorise all the 27 articles on these patriarchs together, rather than dividing them between 8 sparsely-populated sub-categories?
  BTW, if we are going to rename, it dosn't appear that we need to include the denomination in most cases; e.g. the only patriarchs of Babylon appear to be the Chaldean Catholic one, so we could just call the categoy Category:Patriarchs of Babylon. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
  - Comment - Sparcely-populated categories are probably more appropriate. The various churches described here just do not seem closely related enough to warrant grouping the articles together. This is not the same as upmerging articles on Methodist bishops from various religious subdivisions of the United States; this is more like combining Episcopal and Methodist bishops. For example, in this hierarchy, a user looking at Melkite Greek patriarchs is not going to be interested in looking at Coptic Catholic patriarchs or Syro-Malabar Catholic Archbishops and will get irritated trying to sift through the articles. The various patriarchs should be kept in separate categories, even if the categories are sparsely populated. (Also note that small categories are permitted if part of a hierarchy of categories, as would be the case here.) As for the category names (if kept), that is still open to discussion, although the denomination is often used to identify the individuals both in Misplaced Pages and in external webpages. Dr. Submillimeter 11:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Upmerge all into Category:Eastern Rite Catholic primates, listifying any that are not already lists. I have some concern that Category:Eastern Rite Catholic primates might itself be flawed as its creator has a poor track record. (The List of Maronite Patriarchs is very useful - I can't see that a corresponding category would add anything.) -- roundhouse 11:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)