Misplaced Pages

:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 October 21: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion | Log Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:07, 24 October 2008 editDengero (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers5,637 edits added← Previous edit Revision as of 01:17, 24 October 2008 edit undoSoccer174 (talk | contribs)1,377 edits →Category:Hakka HongkongersNext edit →
Line 264: Line 264:


**Leaving me threats about bashing me up doesn't help your cause, nor does . Actually, I don't even know if he's a sockpuppet, but that's another matter. And I don't know why you are saying I'm protecting the Cantonese culture in order to sacrifice Hakka's, as the reason I stated in deletion had nothing to do with the Cantonese culture. As for now, please remain civil and await a third comment. **Leaving me threats about bashing me up doesn't help your cause, nor does . Actually, I don't even know if he's a sockpuppet, but that's another matter. And I don't know why you are saying I'm protecting the Cantonese culture in order to sacrifice Hakka's, as the reason I stated in deletion had nothing to do with the Cantonese culture. As for now, please remain civil and await a third comment.

* '''Comment''' It is your upbringing that has brought you to this stage. You are definitely an extreme Cantonese chauvinist! You are not only protecting Canontese culutre but trying to enhance it at others' expense. Look at all your postings which are Cantopop stuff. If you are in front of me, I will definitely bash you up. This is for real and not a threat.


==== Category:The School Heroes ==== ==== Category:The School Heroes ====

Revision as of 01:17, 24 October 2008

< October 20 October 22 >

October 21

OJ Simpson

Category:O. J. Simpson - Template:Lc1
Category:O. J. Simpson murder trial - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Discuss - the parent cat was recently CFDed with a result of "consensus that two categories aren't necessary, no consensus as to what to do with them. Suggest renomination." Possible outcomes that I see are: 1) Delete Category:O. J. Simpson, retain Category:O. J. Simpson murder trial; 2) Upmerge the trial category to the parent; 3) Delete the parent category, rename the murder trial category to Category:O. J. Simpson trials to capture O. J. Simpson Las Vegas robbery case; 4) Something I haven't thought of. I have a preference for deleting the parent, as merging the categories takes the murder trial category out of the parent . I have no incredibly strong opinion on the idea of renaming to "trials" to capture the robbery article, but as I said at the last CFD, I don't find it terribly necessary. Otto4711 (talk) 00:00, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • That's kind of complicated. Retaining both categories means that there would be two articles in the main "trials" category, Simpson's article and the Vegas robbery article. That seems unnecessary. Otto4711 (talk) 20:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge to Category:O. J. Simpson - this will enable articles relating to his distinguished sporting career to be included as well as ones to his subsequent (alleged) criminal one. I see no objection to this appearing in multiple categories including trial ones, despite trial not being part of the title. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:39, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Magallanes y Antártica Chilena Region categories

Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Categories are at two different forms of the name of this region, article is at a third, varying essentially according to degree of seemingly ad hoc anglicisation. I don't have a particular preference for which, as long as we end up with something consistent, for which there's reasonable evidence for common use in English. Alai (talk) 22:49, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Rename using "Magellan and Chilean Antartica Region" form as the best English translation of the Spanish name. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:42, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose until all Chilean regions uses the same form. Currently the word Región is spelled in English at all articles and at most articles (with the exception of Santiago Metropolitan Region and Magallanes) the short version of the Spanish form is used. This is the current "maintream" translation in wikipedia. If Magallanes Region got an english name then Los Ríos and Los Lagos Region should be renamed to River Region and Lake Region? The same logic should be aplied to all Chilean regions. Dentren | 11:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
    • I take it you're "opposing" the option favoured by Peterkingiron immediately above. Note, however that the nomination is for three inconsistent entities, all at different forms of the name. Presumably you're not opposing moving all of them -- right? Alai (talk) 00:53, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Songs about divorce

Category:Songs about divorce - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Overly narrow category, subject to original research. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 22:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Chrono Crusade

Category:Chrono Crusade - Template:Lc1
Category:Chrono Crusade characters - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: delete: Unnecessary category that only contains the main article and the navigation template, which is itself at TfD. Note that I am also nominating the empty subcategory Category:Chrono Crusade characters. —Dinoguy1000 21:52, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Delete for both, as per nom. -- Highwind8, the Fuko Master 07:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Reading Abbey

Category:Reading Abbey - Template:Lc1
Category:Saint Michael's Abbey, Farnborough Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Just not big enough to warrant its own cat (and leaving on one side the unusual way in which it has been populated). HeartofaDog (talk) 21:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Comment: added another for exactly the same reason, ie, too small to warrant its own cat HeartofaDog (talk) 13:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:306 Entertainment albums

Category:306 Entertainment albums - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: There seems to be only one album released on this label, and the label itself does not have an article. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 21:05, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Americans of German descent

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, recreation. Postdlf (talk) 21:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Category:Americans of German descent - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. The category was merged to Category:German-Americans a few weeks ago (see ), somebody recreated it. Wulf Isebrand (talk) 19:52, 21 October 2008 (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:Fictional Americans by state

Category:Fictional Americans by state - Template:Lc1
Nominated categories
Category:Fictional characters from Wisconsin
Category:Fictional characters from West Virginia
Category:Fictional characters from Washington, D.C.
Category:Fictional characters from Washington
Category:Fictional characters from Virginia
Category:Fictional characters from Vermont
Category:Fictional characters from Utah
Category:Fictional characters from Texas
Category:Fictional characters from Tennessee
Category:Fictional characters from South Carolina
Category:Fictional characters from Rhode Island
Category:Fictional characters from Philadelphia
Category:Fictional characters from Pittsburgh
Category:Fictional characters from Pennsylvania
Category:Fictional characters from Oregon
Category:Fictional characters from Oklahoma
Category:Fictional characters from Ohio
Category:Fictional characters from North Dakota
Category:Fictional characters from North Carolina
Category:Fictional characters from New York City
Category:Fictional characters from New York
Category:Fictional characters from New Mexico
Category:Fictional characters from New Jersey
Category:Fictional characters from New Hampshire
Category:Fictional characters from Nevada
Category:Fictional characters from Nebraska
Category:Fictional characters from Montana
Category:Fictional characters from Missouri
Category:Fictional characters from Mississippi
Category:Fictional characters from Minnesota
Category:Fictional characters from Michigan
Category:Fictional characters from Massachusetts
Category:Fictional characters from Maryland
Category:Fictional characters from Maine
Category:Fictional characters from New Orleans
Category:Fictional characters from Louisiana
Category:Fictional characters from Kentucky
Category:Fictional characters from Kansas
Category:Fictional characters from Iowa
Category:Fictional characters from Indiana
Category:Fictional characters from Chicago
Category:Fictional characters from Illinois
Category:Fictional characters from Idaho
Category:Fictional characters from Hawaii
Category:Fictional characters from Georgia (U.S. state)
Category:Fictional characters from Florida
Category:Fictional characters from Delaware
Category:Fictional characters from Connecticut
Category:Fictional characters from Colorado
Category:Fictional characters from California
Category:Fictional characters from Arkansas
Category:Fictional characters from Arizona
Category:Fictional characters from Alaska
Category:Fictional characters from Alabama
Nominator's rationale: Parent category was deleted via CfD. The same arguments apply here: reliance on original research and mutability of fictional characters. Stepheng3 (talk) 19:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep and restore parent Category:Fictional Americans along with the other arbitrarily deleted nationality cats. Closing admin was wrong to delete those cats initially and compounding the error by deleting more categories is not the way to go. If anything, these categories are less mutable than their real-life counterparts, given the frequency with which real people move from state to state. Otto4711 (talk) 19:58, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm unclear on why it would take original research to determine that a fictional character was from a particular state or city. Postdlf (talk) 20:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
    What state is Batman from? How about the Flash? Attempting to categorise characters by whatever state we presume they live in "in-universe", is WP:OR, with very few exceptions. (Ask me, c'mon, you know you wanna ask me: Why are they WP:OR? And what are the "very few exceptions"? : ) - jc37 22:33, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't know what state Batman or Flash is from (although I seem to recall that Wally West was established as being from California but it's been a long time). Ask me what state Spider-Man is from. If we don't know what state a character is from, then don't include them in the category. DC characters from fictional cities within the United States don't need to be listed as being from a particular state. If only we had a general category for fictional characters from America... Otto4711 (talk) 00:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • That comment really causes me to wonder if you actually understand Misplaced Pages's policies on appropriate usage of primary sources... - jc37 22:33, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • The two concepts (Hobbits and Americans) aren't analogous. A Hobbit isn't a nationality, it's a type of fictional creature. - jc37 15:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I think I understand them fairly well. For example, in Flash Gordon (film) when Dale Arden tells Flash that she's a "New York City girl" that pretty clearly establishes that she's a fictional character from New York. No OR required. Other iterations from the character may be from other states. If that's so, then the character can be listed in each state category that's verifiable. Otto4711 (talk) 00:11, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Not that any character has ever been known to lie or misrepresent information (or even be misinformed or mistaken) about themself... (At least Flash Gordon doesn't have Skrulls : ) - jc37 14:15, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • We go by the best information that we have. If later information surfaces that Dale was lying about being from New York, then she can be removed from the category. Otto4711 (talk) 15:01, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep and overturn previous Cfd, per Otto & my comments below. Johnbod (talk) 00:51, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per the previous CfD (And WP:DRV is that way in regards to the rest.) Noting also that there do not seem to be any more substantial comments this time around than last time... - jc37 14:15, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
    There is no evidence that a single character has been placed into any of these categories on the basis of original research, just like there was no evidence the last time. Any category that characterizes either real people or fictional characters may fall prey to OR. That someone might put a fictional character in the wrong state or make an assumption about the state the character is from is no excuse to continue the hack job that's being done on fictional character categories. Otto4711 (talk) 15:07, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
    The problem is that the location of these fictional characters (comics in particular) is almost entirely presumed. Often such things are intentionally left vague in order for appeal to an audience regardless of locale. It allows the reader to see the home city of the character as a location in their country. I realise that Misplaced Pages has an American bias (among other things), but I believe we're supposed to look at these thiings from an international viewpoint? - jc37 15:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep all and restore the parent category. --JAYMEDINC (talk) 15:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
    Any particular reason? - jc37 15:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
    Yes, just because I really like all the Minnesota related categories about fictional things. I find it to be entertaining trivia.
  • Keep all and restore the parent category. Children who like Batman may want to know the state of Batman. When I was a child, I used to watch RoboCop. He was a Detroit police officer. These categories are useful for children who are interested in their favorite fictional characters. AdjustShift (talk) 15:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
    I'm just guessing, but it looks like you haven't read any of the discussion above. Note that "state" of Gotham City (Batman's home) is and has been intentionally vague (or contradicting) for at least 68 years...) - jc37 15:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep all and restore parent A rather meaningful association for fictional characters that is provided by the creator / author as a defining characteristic. As with all categories, inclusion should be based on reliable and verifiable sources to support the claim. The New York Times (see "F.Y.I.") had no trouble establishing New York City residency, down to the address, for Spiderman, the members of the Fantastic Four, Daredevil (Marvel Comics) and Doctor Strange. As there are reliable and verifiable sources to support the claim that this is a defining characteristic, as there are sources for the individual characters and as there is no policy justification offered in the nomination as justification for deletion, there is no reason to delete this category structure. To address User:Good Olfactory's in the close of the previous CfD, I will provide a reminder that the comic book world is not even a small fraction of the world of fiction, let alone a reason to drive the fictional character structure. The overwhelming majority of characters in the largest part of fiction -- books -- have very stable stories and characteristics, including well-defined states of residence. Movies and television are also unlikely to tinker at whim with a character's story and backstory. The argument from retroactive continuity is trotted out ad nauseum (emphasis on the nauseum) as a sorry excuse to delete entire categories when its relevance, if it has any whatsoever, is only to the inclusion of particular entries in some categories in which the decision to include a borderline case should be based on how the character is identified in reliable and verifiable sources. The fact that Batman or George Jetson don;t live in a state is a sorry excuse to use as a rationalization to delete a category. Alansohn (talk) 21:39, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Though I largely agree with your comments above regarding these categories (particularly that the residences of most fictional characters is not going to be that hard to ascertain, and for those it is they simply won't go in any of these categories), it should still be noted that comic book characters represent a sizeable portion of Misplaced Pages articles on fictional characters, for two reasons: 1) most of our fictional character articles are characters featured in serialized fiction or media franchises, because characters that only appear in one book are not likely to be given standalone articles apart from the book's article; and 2) Misplaced Pages is largely written by American nerds such as myself, so there is a cultural systemic bias as to what gets the most voluminous coverage. So in practice, most fictional character categories primarily group Misplaced Pages articles on comic book characters, video game characters, television series characters, film series characters, etc., and categories only have value as organizing/classifying tools for Misplaced Pages articles. Postdlf (talk) 21:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
      • There's the old story about the drunk looking for his keys at night under a lamp post, even though he lost his keys many yards away. Asked why, he replies "because the light is better here". In many cases, we have to be careful about countering systemic bias in issues that are not reported in the English-language press. I have always been surprised by the egregiously disproportionate percentage of active participants at CfD who are participants at WP:Comics, and at least I am finally hearing a reason that sort of answers the question. We have to be careful to avoid systemic bias whatever its source, and reminding ourselves that all fiction does not come printed on newsprint with flexible covers and that there is lots more fiction in hardcover form at places like bookstores and libraries. These categories are for fictional characters, not just comic book characters. Alansohn (talk) 22:31, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Fictional Americans by ethnicity

Category:Fictional Americans by ethnicity - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional African-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Arab-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Asian Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Cajuns - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Danish-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Dutch-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional English Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional European Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional French-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional German-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Greek-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Indian Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Irish-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Italian-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Polish-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Russian-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Scots-Irish Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Scottish-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Swedish-Americans - Template:Lc1
Category:Fictional Black Irish-Americans - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Parent category was deleted via CfD. The same arguments apply here: reliance on original research and mutability of fictional characters. Stepheng3 (talk) 17:52, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep All - This is a terribly misbegotten nomination. I agree entirely with Occuli's comment with regard to the CFD that resulted in the deletion of Category:Fictional Americans (and all of the other nationalities) . However, I most certainly would not support upmerging these categories by ethnicity. Removing them would be a travesty of the first order. A huge part of American literature is populated precisely by characters of particular ethnicities. It is patently absurd to suggest that these characters are "mutable", or that "original research" is required in order to ascribe ethnicity. In most cases, the information is right there in the text of the story; where it isn't, the article can be removed from the category -- just as is done with any other category. Why should these categories be treated any differently?? Cgingold (talk) 19:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
    Just because something may be worthy of writing an article, doesn't mean that we should be categorising individual characters based upon presumed ethnicity. (Especially in cases such as comics where, especially often in the Golden Age, ethnicity was merely what shade or tint of colour happened to be used by a colourist.) - jc37 22:33, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - I definitely agree with Occuli that the Fictional Americans category should be restored. The ethnic subcats may be less urgent, but I would argue that they help to illustrate how various groups have been depicted in literature, television, film, etc.Bjones (talk) 23:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep all and restored fictional Americans & all the rest - the nomination was to rename, an issue I for one had no strong views over. If it had been a Delete nom, I would certainly have opposed - did it go to review? I hope the closer here will overturn the previous decision. Johnbod (talk) 00:49, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment. I closed that nom but no, it never did go to review and I only had one inquiry about it, from Otto. I wouldn't oppose such a move for review; I expected that it would happen. You may have a hard time demonstrating that I "misinterpreted" the discussion :) (or not), but it may nevertheless be worthwhile if you think there's a consensus for re-creation. Good Ol’factory 07:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes, like Johnbod I would have opposed a blanket delete vehemently. I do not even recall that cfd - if the nom is rename and the extent of the nom is hidden in default view then perhaps one can get all manner of things deleted surreptitiously (this was evidently not the intention of this particular nom as the nominator - otto - has protested at some length to the closer). James Bond for instance is now in no nationality cat (he was in an English one although he is patently Scottish) ... surely it cannot be OR to say he is/was British, that this is defining and should be categorised as such? Occuli (talk) 09:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Hm; I'm not sure I would agree it was in any way "surreptitious". It was opened, relisted, stayed open for over 1 month ... We can only do so much to let people know. No one has the magical power to know who "would be" interested and who is just ignoring it because they don't care. Also, the original intent of the nominator is irrelevant if consensus points a different way. Once the nomination is made all options are on the table. Good Ol’factory 21:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep all except Category:Fictional Black Irish-Americans: I don't think that people (fictional or not) should be categorized by physical appearance. The article Black Irish describes a "dark brown or black hair phenotype appearing in Caucasian persons of Irish descent. This can be distinguished in contrast to the (lighter) brown, blond or red hair color variant, the latter stereotypically perceived to personify the look of typical Irish folk." --Wulf Isebrand (talk) 08:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Ok, but that's very specific. Categories like "German-Irish Americans" were deleted, we could have hundreds of intersections for people with multiple ethnic backgrounds. --Wulf Isebrand (talk) 22:38, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Well, we are certainly seeing none from the deleters .... Johnbod (talk) 22:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep all except Black Irish - there has been nothing presented here, just like there was nothing presented in the poorly-closed previous CFD, that indicates that even a single entry in any of these categories is based on original research. If any such examples are found, then remove them from the category. Certainly someone may indulge in OR when deciding to add a character but that is true of any category. The buzz saw that's being taken to the fictional character categories recently is a solution in search of a problem. Otto4711 (talk) 15:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • No comment on merits, but the related ethnicities should have all been changed to the form "Americans of Fooian descent" and should be renamed accordingly. I fail to see how one can have a Black Irishman, except by inter-racial marriage; this and German-Irish are triple intersections and should be deleted in any event. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:56, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Americans favoring drug legalization

Category:Americans favoring drug legalization - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete, overcategorization by opinion on a single issue. Whether someone wants to create a different category for drug legalization activists is a separate issue that shouldn't hold up getting rid of this category. Postdlf (talk) 16:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Cultural economics

Propose renaming Category:Cultural economics to Category:Cultural economics; economic sociology; economic anthropology
Nominator's rationale: Rename. A couple of years ago, the JEL classification codes for JEL: Z1 { http://www.aeaweb.org/journal/jel_class_system.html#Z ) was renamed from "Cultural economics" to "Cultural economics, economic sociology, economic anthropology". This Category page needs renaming to reflect the change. Thomasmeeks (talk) 15:33, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - No offense intended, Thomasmeeks, but it simply doesn't make any sense for Misplaced Pages to slavishly follow the JEL classification codes for our Category names. I've come across these JEL-derived categories before -- many times they make sense, but sometimes they don't. In any event, what's needed are categories/names which make good sense in terms of the Misplaced Pages category structure and naming conventions, etc. I can see how these three sub-fields are closely related to one another, but we can't just throw three terms together and call it a Category name. In short, the suggested rename is a complete non-starter that doesn't come anywhere near being a suitable name for a Category. In addition, we already have Category:Economic anthropology as a separate category (though we don't have Category:Economic sociology). If you feel that the existing categories are unsuitable, my suggestion is, please explain why and make the case for a better alternative. (One obvious possibility is merging the two existing categories, though we would have to settle on a name.) Cgingold (talk) 18:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Good points. The proposal above was to match JEL: Z1 with the current name of that category per above. Agreed, though, no reason to dump existing cats together. The easier solution might be to unlink JEL: Z1 at JEL classification codes#Other special topics (economics) JEL: Z Subcategories from its currently anachrobnistic link. Perhaps a JEL note (like that at Category:Cultural economics) for Category:Economic sociology (to be proposed)) and Category:Economic anthropology would be in order (without any grand triad). How does that sound? --Thomasmeeks (talk) 21:54, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Sounds fine to me. Of course, you're free to create & populate Category:Economic sociology any time you like -- there's no need to get approval for that. If you want to withdraw your renaming proposal, we can just close out this CFD. Cgingold (talk) 21:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Brand name potato chips, potato crisps, and other potato-based snack foods

Propose renaming Category:Brand name potato chips, potato crisps, and other potato-based snack foods to Category:UNKNOWN
Nominator's rationale: Rename. I have no idea, but anything but this. Perhaps Category:Brand name potato snack foods, or Category:Brand name potato-based snack foods. I don't know, they're all too wordy... Katr67 (talk) 18:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kbdank71 15:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Educational institutions in Mobile, Alabama

Propose renaming Category:Educational institutions in Mobile, Alabama to Category:Education in Mobile, Alabama
Nominator's rationale: Rename to follow naming convention of parent category and its subcategories. Altairisfartalk 15:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Hakka Hongkongers

Category:Hakka Hongkongers - Template:Lc1
Category:Hakka Malaysians - Template:Lc1
Category:Hakka Singaporeans - Template:Lc1
Category:Hakka Taiwanese - Template:Lc1
Category:Chaoshanese Hongkongers - Template:Lc1
Category:Hakka Indonesians - Template:Lc1


Nominator's rationale: Do we really need this? I think it's getting a bit trivial. Dengero (talk) 13:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Hong Kong is a city. Are we going to have Hakka Macauer's, Hakka Parisians, Hakka Berliners, etc etc etc? Or if it's by country, are we going to have Hakka Canadians, Hakka Australians, Hakka Germans? Dengero (talk) 13:29, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment We don't need Cantonese chauvinism here. ~~Soccer174 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soccer174 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Do we need Cantopop in Misplaced Pages? It is only followed by a small group of world's population in HK. It is definitely more trivial. Shall we remove Cantopop from Misplaced Pages? ~~Soccer174 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soccer174 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Rename -- Hakka is a significant Chinese ethnicity. We have a lot of dual-national categories for expatriates. Most of these were changed a month or two back to the form, "Fooian of Hakka descent"; these were evidently missed. The same should apply to these ones and any others of the same nature. It is possible that so many Hong Kong people have this descent that it is not notable (I do not know), but the others certainly should be kept in some form. Peterkingiron (talk) 00:05, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Hakkas and People of Hakka descent are different. Many overseas Hakka Chinese take pride of their Hakka culture. Having a Cantonese Cantopop contributer trying to belittle the Hakka culture is a great insult to us. It is like the English trying to belittle the Scottish. This is war. ~~ Soccer174
    • I feel like you're being a little POV pushing here. Cantopop is a genre of music approximately influencing millions of people, as it expands over not just Hong Kong, but also the general Canton area, and large overseas communities. As for your Hakka Hongkongers, which is just a section of specific 1st generations, represent only very tiny, literally hundreds of people in an area confined by your title. Like Peter said, perhaps nearly everyone have some sort of Hakka blood in them its hard to determine. So I support either delete or some serious renaming is required. Also, while this discussion is in place, please don't create more sub categories. Thankyou. Dengero (talk) 12:34, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Perhaps you have too high a regard for Cantopop. It is not even worth mentioning from the place I come from, where the majority of the population are Chinese. I question your impartiality. I believe you are a young person, perhaps a student, who indulged in Canto/Cantonese culture, but have little knowledge or regard for the larger Chinese culture, of which Hakka is one of them. Stating "perhaps nearly everyone have some sort of Hakka blood in them its hard to determine" show how immature and narrow-minded you are. I will not allow the deletion or renaming of the category. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soccer174 (talk • contribs) 13:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment The mere thought of even suggesting for the Category to be removed is already alarming. For a Cantonese chauvinist who has been contributing greatly to Cantonese culture in Misplaced Pages but who cannot tolerate a little non-Cantonese Chinese culture show how the Cantonese culture in Hong Kong has nutured its people. Calling it trivial show the Cantonese chauvinism mindset. So much for progress in the 21st century! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soccer174 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Leaving me threats about bashing me up here doesn't help your cause, nor does canvassing. Actually, I don't even know if he's a sockpuppet, but that's another matter. And I don't know why you are saying I'm protecting the Cantonese culture in order to sacrifice Hakka's, as the reason I stated in deletion had nothing to do with the Cantonese culture. As for now, please remain civil and await a third comment.
  • Comment It is your upbringing that has brought you to this stage. You are definitely an extreme Cantonese chauvinist! You are not only protecting Canontese culutre but trying to enhance it at others' expense. Look at all your postings which are Cantopop stuff. If you are in front of me, I will definitely bash you up. This is for real and not a threat.

Category:The School Heroes

Category:The School Heroes - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Category related to AfD discussion Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Albert Appleton. Not notable. Deadly∀ssassin 12:40, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Windows PET icons

Propose renaming Category:Windows PET icons to Category:Microsoft Office icons
Nominator's rationale: Google returns no relevant results for 'PET icon'. ffm 12:30, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Blues-rock ensembles

Category:Blues-rock ensembles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Category:Former Bahá'ís

Category:Former Bahá'ís - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale - this category has nothing useful with only one person in the category. It has been here for almost two months, but still only has one person listed. What use is a category with only one person?--Parthian Scribe 04:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Penn & Teller

Category:Penn & Teller - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete - the bulk of the category is improper person by project categorization. Removing those articles would leave nothing in the category but the articles for the two men and the joint article. The joint article contains a complete linked listing of all projects. Category not needed for navigational purposes. Otto4711 (talk) 03:03, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Note this discussion from 2007. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • As only two of the ten included articles are for the individual articles on Penn and Teller, I'm not seeing how the "bulk" of its contents categorize people by project. Furthermore, is person by project really inappropriate categorization? That's different than person by performance, and I don't see how categorizing Penn and Teller by their ongoing partnership, which has largely defined their careers, is overcategorization here. Postdlf (talk) 16:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I see, you meant that this categorizes projects by people, not the other way around. But I'm not sure your film by actor analogy is on point, as the included articles are not just for otherwise unrelated series, films, etc., in which Penn & Teller appeared whether as stars or guest stars (such as a certain West Wing episode in which they played themselves), but rather for projects also produced, written, and/or named after Penn & Teller, reasonably definable as Penn & Teller projects. I'd consider this more analogous to a band category than an actor category. Postdlf (talk) 20:42, 21 October 2008 (UTC)