Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 October 11: Difference between revisions

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

Revision as of 13:02, 12 October 2007 editProveIt (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users55,408 edits →Category:Masters of Evil Members: delete← Previous edit		Revision as of 13:07, 12 October 2007 edit undoBrownHairedGirl (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers2,942,733 edits →Category:Muslim hip hop groups: deleteNext edit →
Line 43:		Line 43:
	:Actually I just realised this was created before category:Muslim musicians was deleted. But could there still be precedence for deletion based on that Cfd? ]		:Actually I just realised this was created before category:Muslim musicians was deleted. But could there still be precedence for deletion based on that Cfd? ]
	*'''Comment'''. Given the comments above by BHG and Spellcast, I no longer think that renaming is the right course of action; outright deletion seems to be more appropriate, since this category categorises groups by the particular affiliations of their individual members. – ''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 03:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)		*'''Comment'''. Given the comments above by BHG and Spellcast, I no longer think that renaming is the right course of action; outright deletion seems to be more appropriate, since this category categorises groups by the particular affiliations of their individual members. – ''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 03:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
			*'''Delete''' (changing my !vote), as recreation (thanks to Spellcast for the research). --] <small>] • (])</small> 13:07, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

	==== ] ====		==== ] ====

Revision as of 13:07, 12 October 2007

< October 10	October 12 >

October 11

Category:Masters of Evil Members

Category:Masters of Evil Members - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete, possibly speedy. As per previous consensus and precedent, comic book characters are not categorized by team membership. As far as speedy, I'm fairly sure that this specific category existed during the previous discussions and was deleted as a result, making this a recreation. J Greb 22:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete - I saw this one earlier today but didn't have the time to nominate it. Per all of the other members categories that have been deleted. Eddie's Teddy 02:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete as recreation of deleted content. -- Prove It 13:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Fictional characters who can fly

Category:Fictional characters who can fly - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Category was deleted on 3 Jul 2006 here, recreated by a bot. Original nomination stated: "Way, way too broad; this could include thousands of superheroes in comics, film & TV, and countless mythological and folkloric characters." Consensus was nearly unanimous: Delete; seems unlikely that reasons to Keep have surfaced. I add that the definition "characters who usually travel by..." is vague and requires OR, and one of the means of travel is "technological", which would include just about anyone who uses a plane, invisible or otherwise. HalJor 20:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC) HalJor 20:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete Category is vague. Birds can fly, so most fictional birds would fit. If we limit it to humans, do Tinkerbell and Superman fit? Some superheros can fly, but only with the aid of a device. If they count, every fictional character taking an airplane counts. Some superheros need energy from the Earth's sun to fly, if they count, is that a device? Does energy from being fired out of a cannon count? Is a fictional robot a character (e.g. Johnny Socko's Flying Robot)? If so, is an aircraft with some form of intelligence a "character" as well? What level of intelligence? - Mdbrownmsw 20:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete and block recreation enough already; this is vague/non-defining, and most special powers of fictional characters have been deleted on those bases to date. Carlossuarez46 03:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Strong Keep Though it was deleted, consensus can change. I actually tried putting a very good description on this cat., it just needs to be corrected (see the nice entry at Category:Fictional characters with superhuman strength). Tinkerbell and Superman should be categorized in the appropiate flight categories, they're not humans BTW. As for device usage, I'm unsure of that at the moment. And people who fly by use of aircraft are certainly not in this category (see the explanation given at Category:Fictional characters who can move at superhuman speeds as another example). Guys, let's just work on the description eh? That's all that needs work. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep Per Sesshomaru. It's the description that needs to be touched up, not the category itself. --Piemanmoo 04:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Comment Can someone correct the current entry on Category:Fictional characters who can fly? Just follow a similar format from the two other categories I referenced. That way confusion can be avoided. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:47, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Philippines actors

Suggest merging Category:Philippines actors to Category:Filipino actors

Nominator's rationale: Category:Philippines actors duplicates the much broader Category:Filipino actors, which has a number of subcategories such as Category:Filipino child actors, Category:Filipino character actors, Category:Filipino silent film actors, etc.—Roman Spinner (talk) 19:19, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge per nom. Snocrates 20:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Oppose For discussion: Though one currently duplicates part of the other, the categories are not necessarily perfectly nested. There can certainly be actors in the Philippines who are not Filipino and Filipino actors who do not act in the Philippines. A merge of the lists would require a stance on the criteria, violating one of the lists. - Mdbrownmsw 21:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment I understand what you are saying, but do WP categories commonly make such distinctions? We don't have Category:Actors who work in the United States to supplement Category:American actors. I just don't think Category:Philippines actors is needed to classify non-Filipinos acting in the Philippines. Snocrates 21:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge per nom and Snocrates. Category:Philippines actors, as a category for actors in the Philippines, is overcategorisation of the type "people by location". Current place of residence may be a defining factor, but it's something that's virtually impossible to keep track of, especially in light of privacy concerns. – Black Falcon 03:33, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Muslim hip hop groups

Propose renaming Category:Muslim hip hop groups to Category:Islamic hip hop groups

Nominator's rationale: Per the title of the parent category (Category:Islamic music) and the main article (Islamic music). Also, the groups themselves are not Muslim; the proper adjective is 'Islamic'. See also the 2007 Sep 27 CFD that renamed Category:Muslim music to Category:Islamic music. – Black Falcon 04:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Rename per nom and precedent. "Muslim" is a person; "Islamic" is the adjective. Snocrates 05:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Oppose. Snocrates' helpful observation that "Muslim" is a person and "Islamic" is the adjective doesn't actually to resolve the issue. If these groups are producing Islamic music (defined in the article as religious), then the correct adjective is "Islamic", but from reading the article in this category it seems that none of these groups are producing religious music: they are bands of muslim musicians, producing music for both muslim and non-muslim audiemces, but their themes are social, political and cultural rather than religious. The adjective therefore applies to the band members rather than to the music, so "muslim" is appropriate here. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- In that case, shouldn't the category simply be deleted as overcategorisation? After all, it amounts to categorising groups by the particular affiliations (in this case, religion) of their individual members. – Black Falcon 22:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep as is per BrownHairedGirl, and remove articles that don't fit the description. This one was kind of tricky -- almost went the other way. There are four groups whose members are Muslims, but only three of them (Mecca2Medina, Native Deen, Soldiers of Allah) appear to perform "Islamic music"; the fourth (The Brothahood) appears to perform music about social issues facing Muslims. The group DAM is Palestinian, with one Muslim member and two members whose religion is not mentioned. Outlandish has two Muslims and a Catholic; Closer Than Veins is merely one of their albums. Cgingold 13:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kbdank71 17:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment Can this qualify as recreation of deleted content? See Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_May_29#Category:Muslim_musicians, which was created by the same user. Spellcast 21:19, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually I just realised this was created before category:Muslim musicians was deleted. But could there still be precedence for deletion based on that Cfd? Spellcast

Comment. Given the comments above by BHG and Spellcast, I no longer think that renaming is the right course of action; outright deletion seems to be more appropriate, since this category categorises groups by the particular affiliations of their individual members. – Black Falcon 03:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete (changing my !vote), as recreation (thanks to Spellcast for the research). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:07, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Orthodox Jewish Anti-Zionism

Category:Orthodox Jewish Anti-Zionism to Category:Haredi anti-Zionism

Nominator's rationale: This category was created by a banned user known for his use of sockpuppets and for creating POV magnets for disputes (Eidah (talk · contribs) a sockpuppet of Daniel575 (talk · contribs)) openly violating WP:POVFORK. This category is only about some Haredi groups and individuals who do not "self-identify" as "Orthodox" nor do the vast majority of Orthodox and Haredi Jews agree with the positions of those extremely fanatical Haredim who are vocally "anti-Zionists" so that the "Orthodox Jewish" is totally inappropriate and redundant as well. Indeed this category has to rely on another article Haredim and Zionism as its lead article, that is much less controversial. During a recent vote Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 August 22#Category:Orthodox Jewish Anti-Zionism a number of editors suggested that the category be renamed to a more specific name. If this cannot be done then the category should be deleted so as not to benefit Troll (Internet), see WP:TROLL. IZAK 15:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

The user was not blocked for sockpupetry in of itself. nor was he a Troll (Internet), nor was he opening POV magnets for disputes and nor was he openly violating WP:POVFORK. He is blocked because when he was attacked by the Wiki-Project Jews he could not handle it cool and lost his temper, and consensus was never that he wasn't right to be hurt, fact is other users have protested at the time, that he should not be blocked at all. Izak tried to delete already once this cat, now that the creator is blocked he impunged motives to persuade this second attempt. This article does not rely at all on Haredim and Zionism this isn't its lead article.--יודל 09:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Propose renaming Category:Orthodox Jewish Anti-Zionism to Category:Haredi anti-Zionism

~~:Nominator's rationale: Rename, adding template for discussion (I was not the nominator.) Yossiea 15:39, 11 October 2007 (UTC)~~

Rename or Delete for above reasons. IZAK 15:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep and No rename when it will have 5 subjects (without the list article and the biography article) we should recreate with this same very good name--יודל 15:52, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. IZAK 15:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
delete a category is not needed here. The article referenced is enough. Yossiea 15:59, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep & Rename to Category:Orthodox Jewish groups opposed to Zionism per Cgingold, supported by several others, in the previous debate. This was the clear favourite choice of those wanting a rename then. Johnbod 16:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Johnbod: The name you suggest is precisely the wrong one. Simply because the groups involved do call themselves "Orthodox" and they are shunned by the rest of the "Orthodox" and indeed it would be offensive to them and to the Orthodox to call them "Orthodox" and therefore Haredi is the correct name, if at all, simply because that it is what they are referred to by themselves and others. IZAK 16:37, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
  - So you said last time (plus much else); I & many other editors did not find it persuasive then either (no more abusive messages to my talk page please - I am well aware of your position). Johnbod 17:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
    - Most Orthodox do only shun one subject the Neturei karta. Satmar is respected by most Orthodox Jewish people. But i do share Izak's concern that since we don't have yet enough subjects in this cat it should not be renamed yet.--יודל 16:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
      - Yidisheryid: Do not mix up what I have said. I am saying that it should be renamed to Category:Haredi anti-Zionism, and if that cannot be done then it should be deleted because the name "Orthodox" does not describe the people in it, since 99% of Orthodox Jews are not such fanatics as to call themselves "anti-Zionists" the way some radical Neturei Karta elements do in the media especially. IZAK 05:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
        Thanks for clarifying your stand on this, i disagree that this opposition has anything to with Hareidi more then orthodox, 99 percent of hareidim are in your eyes just as repulsed by Neturie karta then 99 percent of orthodox, I see now that you are very open in this POV against neture karta which is unfortunate, we should not change names to prove personal hate here. I will now clarify my position more accurately to keep and not rename, the name is a good name it is only that the cat is not to populated with subjects to have a separate cat. But the name is perfect.--יודל 09:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Novelty Items

Rename to Category:Novelties, to match Novelties. -- Prove It 14:00, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Rename to Category:Novelty items to fix capitalisation. "Novelties" can also refer to intangible things, and it including the word "items" reduces the ambiguity. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:09, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kbdank71 14:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete inclusion is entirely subjective, the list of what might constitute novelties at our wonderfully unsourced article there show the difficulties with the category: antiques are novelties, so generally anything over 100 years old is considered antique (or so I've been led to believe). It's also not defining. If something is notable, presumably it's got something other than being a novelty (as defined in our article) to say that it's important and such should be sufficient for categorization purposes. Carlossuarez46 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 03:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete per Carlossuarez46. – Black Falcon 03:36, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Turkish volleyball teams

Merge into Category:Turkish volleyball clubs, or the reverse. -- Prove It 14:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge into Category:Turkish volleyball clubs, convention of Category:Volleyball clubs. – Black Falcon 03:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Kid Frost albums

Rename to Category:Frost albums, to match Frost (rapper). -- Prove It 13:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Rename - per nom. Onnaghar talk.review 15:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Voodoo science

Category:Voodoo science Template:Lc1

Delete - Does it get any worse than this? I believe I will simply let the name of this category speak for itself. And, no -- it's not a category for articles about the scientific study of Voodoo or Vodou, nor is it a subcat of Category:Vodou. Cgingold 13:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep—nominator has given no rationale for deletion. (This category is intended to group together various types of bad science discussed by Robert L. Park in his book Voodoo Science.) Spacepotato 16:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete Term is ambiguous due to its relative obscurity. Do we really need a category for topics discussed by one author in one (not-so-famous) book? If kept to categorize the articles, surely a less ambiguous and better descriptive term can be concocted. Snocrates 20:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete we don't categorize things based on what one person's thoughts are about them generally. Carlossuarez46 03:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Rename to the less provocative Category:Bad science. The category contains only articles on concepts:Junk science & the old & proposed titles etc, so Carlos's objection is not applicable here. These articles would otherwise have to be added to 3 or more categories each. Johnbod 03:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:North Carolina election results

Category:North Carolina election results - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: It's empty and its contents have been moved to Category:North Carolina elections. —Markles 12:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete - per empty. Onnaghar talk.review 15:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:North Carolina General Assembly election results

Category:North Carolina General Assembly election results - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: it's empty and its contents have been moved to Category:North Carolina elections. —Markles 12:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete - per empty. Onnaghar talk.review 15:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Murdered hip hop musicians

Category:Murdered rappers

Nominator's rationale: move both to share one complete title, Category:Deceased hip hop musicians. A "murdered rappers" category appears incomplete. Likewise, anyone could claim to be a rapper and there are about two to three non-rappers in Category:Murdered hip hop musicians. In this proposed category I would like all dead hip hop musicians and rappers who not only were murdered, but also died from natural causes, freak accidents, intoxication, and any other incidents. (*Note: If this proposal is granted, please have the bots sort out the musicians who are categorized in both murdered hip hop musicians and rappers categories respectively) Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 10:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge category:murdered rappers to category:murdered hip hop musicians at the very least. I'm not sure about merging them all in category:deceased hip hop musicians, but the murdered rappers should be merged into murdered hip hop musicians. There's only about 3 non-rappers in deceased hip hop musicians. Spellcast 12:22, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Merge per Spellcast. We do not do Dead people by occupation, see discussion of

December 24th. -- Prove It 13:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge - per above. Onnaghar talk.review 15:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Merge per nom & ProveIt. Carlossuarez46 03:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Battle of the Isle of May

Category:Battle of the Isle of May - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete: Redundant category has only two articles in over two years. Name of category is inappropriate (better would be Battle of May Island, see Talk:Battle of May Island) but it is not worth renaming it. Thincat 10:24, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Johnbod 12:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Landing craft repair ships of the United States

Category:Landing craft repair ships of the United States - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: This cat is a duplicate of Category:Achelous class repair ships but uses a non-standard naming convention (all other cats in the parent cats of Category:World War II auxiliary ships of the United States and Category:World War II amphibious warfare ships of the United States are listed by class except one, and that one because it contains several different classes instead of just one like all the others). Also, the Achelous class is the only class of "landing craft repair ship" ever built so this cat has no other possible purpose than to list Achelous class ships. "Landing craft repair ship" is also an informal and inaccurate title, the official name for this class was "Auxiliary Repair Light" (ARL) and the ships were used to repair all kinds of small craft, not just landing craft. Gatoclass 06:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge to Category:Achelous class repair ships which is presumably what nom intends. Johnbod 19:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Presidents of the United States who died in office

Delete, not every list needs to be a category, see list of United States Presidents who died in office. -- Prove It 03:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete this is an instance where a short list is clearly better for dealing with a fixed number of entries. Ephebi 12:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete - as list already exists. Onnaghar talk.review 15:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete list is sufficient. Carlossuarez46 03:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete listcruft. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete a listcruft category? Well no. But redundant. Bulldog123 06:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Madripoori

delete - This article lacks a topic of notability. In addition, charcters are inaccurately listed as being "from" Mandipoor. All but three characters (Aardwolf, Baran, and Corrigan) have either their real place of origin listed in their respective article, and/or explictly state that the characters were traveling to Mandipoor, not that it was their home. This problems rests most heavily on the Wolverine, Karma and Spider-Woman characters, who are explictly stated not from Mandipoor and are the most notable characters to populate the category. The category does not deserve to exist in whatever name or conception. 66.109.248.114 02:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:American shows rated TV-14

Delete, as both non-defining, and lacking global scope. -- Prove It 00:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Keep, it would be nice to having a categorized listings of all the shows that have this rating. It's just easy access to all these shows in the same page. WIKIVUE Detroit (talk) WED OCT 10 2007 8:30 PM EDT
Delete as non defining. This is also a management nightmare since it is based on the assumption that all shows in a series will only have this rating. Since the rating can vary by eposode, classification by series is not advisable. Vegaswikian 00:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - We'll just have to apply the shows to multiple categories, and we can also put an asterisk next to each title. WIKIVUE Detroit (talk) WED OCT 10 2007 8:38 PM EDT
  - You are allowed to 'vote' once. Please remove one of your two votes to this point. Vegaswikian 02:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
  - If I understand your proposal with the asterisk, this is not something supported by the software. Vegaswikian 02:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete per ProveIt and Vegaswikian, as non-defining potentially misleding. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:26, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per myself. There are all kinds of categories, why can't this one exist??? It's not fair!!! WIKIVUE Detroit (talk) WED OCT 10 2007 10:23 PM EDT
  - You are allowed to 'vote' once. Please remove two of your three votes to this point. Vegaswikian 02:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete per Vegas et al, and WP:NOT. Johnbod 12:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete per Vegas. Onnaghar talk.review 15:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete not defining, per nom and per Vegaswikian. Carlossuarez46 03:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC)