Misplaced Pages

:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 June 7 - 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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Otto4711 (talk | contribs) at 05:05, 11 June 2009 (→Category:Railway engineers). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 05:05, 11 June 2009 by Otto4711 (talk | contribs) (→Category:Railway engineers)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
< June 6 June 8 >

June 7

Category:Cast Iron and its alloys

Category:Cast Iron and its alloys - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Category would only have a handful of articles. All of those current articles are adequately categorized into category:ferrous alloys. Wizard191 (talk) 23:58, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep because the category contained at least 5 materials, and more can be created. The nominator had already deleted the category, then added it back. Mfields1 (talk) 01:45, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
The nominator Wizard191 already deleted this category without discussion or nomination for deletion on May 30. The category at that time contained 7 cast irons which I had added to it:

All are distinct cast irons. Unfortunately, the article Cast Iron should not be named as such. The article attempts to cover the entire family of cast irons. The opening statement "Cast iron usually refers to grey cast iron..." is itself a bit unencyclopedic. The article needs work. For example, the third paragraph states "Cast iron tends to be brittle, except for malleable cast irons" which is patently false. The family of ductile irons is by definition of its name ductile and not brittle. The article promotes a stereotype of cast iron that people often associate with the oldest type, gray iron (or greay iron).

Perhaps the title of this category, "Cast iron and its alloys" is not a perfect description but the category should not be deleted as it may be one way for persons refering to Misplaced Pages to understand the interelationships for this group of alloys or metals.

In addition there are other cast iron types that would be added to this category to complete the category, for articles yet to be written for Misplaced Pages.

To add the category back, as Wizard191 has done, and put only one article in it potrays the category as originally created incorrectly. Mfields1 (talk) 02:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Note - You are correct that the articles listed above were in the category, however I didn't "delete" the category. Rather, I removed the category from the pages. Wizard191 (talk) 13:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. The alloys of cast iron are all by definition ferrous alloys, and can easily be housed in there. Note - if the decision is to keep, the category will need renaming, as iron is not a proper noun and should have a lower case "i". Grutness...wha? 02:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Steels are also ferrous alloys, yet the category Category:Steels exists in Misplaced Pages. Steels are not cast irons, and cast irons are not steels yet both are ferrous alloys. Mfields1 (talk) 23:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep. No harm done with keeping the category as far as I can see, and its presence makes it obvious that the term "cast iron" covers several different materials. "Ferrous alloys" is certainly a very broad category--too broad in my estimation. Paul D. Anderson (talk) 02:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Legal occupations

Propose renaming Category:Legal occupations to Category:unknown
Nominator's rationale: Rename. This name is rather misleading when a few categories above you find Category:Illegal occupations in Category:Occupations. That paring creates some ambiguity. The question is, is there a better name for this category having to do with law related occupations? Vegaswikian (talk) 23:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Rename to something, per nom. How about: Law-related occupations, Occupations in law, Law and law enforcement occupations (since they are in there too)? Johnbod (talk) 13:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Tritium contamination in the US

Category:Tritium contamination in the US - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Seems to me to be overcategorization because it's categorizing places in the United States by their "contamination" status. Could perhaps make an article, but not a viable category. If kept, would need to be renamed to something like Category:Places in the United States with tritium contamination. Good Ol’factory 23:08, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Recipients of the Conrad Schlumberger Award of the European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers

Category:Recipients of the Conrad Schlumberger Award of the European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Overcategorization by award. There is no article about the Conrad Schlumberger Award of the European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers (nor even for the European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers), so I'm not even sure if it's "notable". Typically we convert award categories to lists, but right now there is only one article in this one. Good Ol’factory 22:37, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Pimps and madams

Suggest merging Category:Australian pimps and madams to Category:Pimps and madams and Category:Australian sex workers
Category:Chinese pimps and madams to Category:Pimps and madams and Category:Chinese sex workers
Category:French pimps and madams to Category:Pimps and madams and Category:French sex workers
Category:South African pimps and madams to Category:Pimps and madams and Category:South African sex workers
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Upmerge a series of one and two article categories. Given the small number of these in total, we probably could upmerge the British one as well. The American one has 28 articles and one subcategory, so maybe that one should remain. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Tiwana clans

Category:Tiwana clans - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. It looks like this category is so specific that I don't think it will ever have more than the title article in it ! thisisace (talk) 21:42, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Deductive theories

Propose renaming Category:Deductive theories to Category:Theories of deduction
Nominator's rationale: Rename. This category is not for deductive theories as described in the article theory (mathematical logic). These are theories about deduction in general, not theories whose theorems can be derived deductively from other theorems in the theory. This proposal is part of a larger effort to organize theories and concepts in general. Pontiff Greg Bard (talk) 20:58, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Coastal settlements of the East Riding of Yorkshire

Propose renaming Category:Coastal settlements of the East Riding of Yorkshire to Category:Coastal settlements in East Riding of Yorkshire
Nominator's rationale: The following was left on the talk page: "I propose that this category be renamed 'Coastal settlements in East Riding of Yorkshire' for naming consistency and future navigation. 82.38.63.64 (talk) 19:16, 6 June 2009 (UTC)"

This is merely a procedural nomination; I have no opinion on the matter. NW (Talk) 19:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Brothel-keepers

Propose renaming Category:American brothel-keepers to Category:American brothel-owners
Propose Upmerging Category:Turkish brothel-keepers to Category:Brothel owners and Category:Turkish sex workers
Propose Upmerging Category:Mexican brothel-keepers to Category:Brothel owners and Category:Mexican sex workers
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the name in the parent category. I'm not nominating all of these for rename, since it appears that in some parts of the work, keeper is the more common use. Also since there are only a handful of these, the single entry ones should be upmerged to the appropriate parents. I'll consider adding Category:Australian brothel-keepers as an upmerge since it only has two members unless someone is aware of a reason to keep it. As to Category:British brothel-keepers, I'm leaving this alone since that may be the correct name. Of the 6 articles 3 are silent on the issue of owner vs, keeper. However the other 3 use keeper. I'll let someone else decide on keeping or not keeping the '-'. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Locomotive designer and railway engineer categories

Propose renaming Category:Locomotive designers/builders to Category:Locomotive builders and designers
Category:Austrian railway engineers to Category:Austrian locomotive designers
Category:British railway engineers to Category:British locomotive designers
Category:German railway engineers to Category:German locomotive designers
Category:Swiss railway engineers to Category:Swiss locomotive designers
Nominator's rationale: Rename for the sake of accuracy and clarity. In most English dialects, railway engineer denotes a person who drives and operates the train, not designs it. Also, I think the main category should be "Locomotive builders and designers", rather than having a slash in it. Eastlaw  ⁄ contribs 05:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I would say rename the category as Category:Locomotive designers (and seperated into Fooland locomotive designers, ie entries by nationality). Also incorporate Category:Locomotive superintendents, which seems to be an old British term for Chief Mechanical Engineer. And call it locomotive designers not locomotive builders and designers (the builder is either a railway workshop or a separate company, or going down to the shop floor is the machinist!).

Railway engineers (category) in practice seem to be mechanical engineers, which ignores the contributions of railway civil engineers in surveying and locating and laying track and bridges/tunnels. There does not even seem to be an article on A M Wellington the great railway location engineer!

Re Rail Transport categories, I have recently made various nationality categories for Category:People in rail transport; so that “German people in rail transport” can also link into “Rail transport in Germany” and “German people by occupation”. How about categorising all the entries in “People in rail transport” by nationality so that they link into these country categories also? Hugo999 (talk) 09:32, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, see OED "Engineer" 5 b: in England only those in charge of engines of war and ship engines, in the US train drivers. Johnbod (talk) 19:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
The first two might be ok, but 2engineers" is clearer and more usual than "designers" for civil engineers. Johnbod (talk) 00:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
  • I must admit to being a little confused by the initial comments that "In most English dialects, railway engineer denotes a person who drives and operates the train, not designs it." That may be true in the US with railroad engineers, but in my experience the terms locomotive driver or locomotive operator are far more widely used for, erm, locomotive drivers in UK English-speaking countries (including places like Australia, South Africa, and New Zealand), whereas railway engineer tends to be used for the actual engineers. Sir Nigel Gresley was a railway engineer, but that doesn't mean he drove the trains. Given that we tend to use UK English for non-English speaking countries in Europe on Misplaced Pages, the above categories are correctly named. I suspect some work is needed both on the title of this category and on an article on railway engineers (which should at least be a disambiguation page rather than a redirect). But even if it was a redirect, this category would still be confusingly named, so the split Vegaswikian suggests is probably a good one. Grutness...wha? 00:43, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
    • Railway engineer is now a dab page. Grutness...wha? 00:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
    • Railroad engineer is the one who operates trains. Confusion is from the similar names and the different usage of the term engineer. 71.55.122.199 (talk) 18:05, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
      • While it's true that in the US and Canada, a railroad engineer is an engine driver, as far as I know the term railway engineer is never used there - and that term has a different meaning in the places where it is used. I agree that the category should be renamed and split per Vegaswikian's suggestion, I'm just pointing out that you're arguing under a misapprehension if you think that the term "railway engineer" is widely used for a locomotive operator "in most English dialects" - as far as I know, it's rarely used in any dialects that way. It's not used that way in the US or Canada (where the word "railroad" is used), and it's not used that way in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, or just about anywhere else which uses UK English. Grutness...wha? 00:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
True. Johnbod (talk) 00:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The category:Rail transport designers will have as subcategories “Fooland locomotive designers” ie by nationality and as well as Austrian, British German & Swiss there should be American, Canadian, French and Italian locomotive designers; I suppose there would be someone from each of those countries. Are there engineers to justify a separate category by country for civil/construction/surveying and location engineers? The categories for Railway entrepreneurs and perhaps Railway pioneers have only Austrian, German & Swiss subcategories at present; if they are useful categories there should be subcategories for the other countries as well. Hugo999 (talk) 23:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aervanath (talk) 17:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Railway engineers

Category:Railway engineers - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete, redundant with Category:Locomotive designers/builders; see also above nomination. Eastlaw  ⁄ contribs 05:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
  • They are responsible to operate all of the locomotives that are a part of the train. They also need to manage the dynamics of the train so that when they climb hills or descend hills the they don't snap couplings or run cars into each other and cause derailments. Much more then a driver and the license to operate one of these is more difficult to obtain. So, does a pilot drive a plane? Vegaswikian (talk) 19:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Rename/split per discussion in the next section up. Alansohn, these are a completely different thing to railroad engineers, who are engine drivers - these are the actual railway engineers, i.e., the civil engineers and designers who make the railways. Grutness...wha? 01:02, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Keep. "Railway engineers" are not necessarily "locomotive designers". For example, in Category:German railway engineers Johann Culemeyer designed heavy trailers, Rudolf Diesel designed engines, Paul Camille von Denis built railway lines and others like Friedrich Wilhelm Eckhardt designed parts of locomotives. There aren't enough entries to split it up in this case (and that may well apply to other countries). HTH. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:57, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aervanath (talk) 17:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I think that from the above discussion, consensus is:
Is my summary reasonable? If it is, I think the discussion needs to focus on the above nomination and this will kind of follow along. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Jewish surnames

Category:Jewish surnames - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Missed in yesterday's nomination as it's missing from the regular part of the tree. Because of the diaspora, almost all are derived from non-Hebrew language countries, and not categorized under Category:Hebrew names below.
Please note: even though surnames such as Harris, Lewis, Green, Black, Miller, Brooks, Gordon, and others are common Jewish surnames in some Western countries, they are also quite common amongst non-Jews as well. Also many names that are common in the Jewish community are really just ordinary German or Slavic surnames. Just as Smith, Thompson, Jones, Evans, Jackson, and Washington are common names in the African American community, one would not just assume they are exclusive to that culture. Most people named Schwartz, Klein, Roth, Hoffman, Schneider, Meyer, etc., are non-Jews despite common use of the names in the Jewish community.
Therefore, not notable, not verifiable, nor useful for navigation. Moreover, existing policy states:
Heritage categories should not be used to record people based on deduction, inference, residence, surname, nor any partial derivation from one or more ancestors.
--William Allen Simpson (talk) 15:29, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete - names are not and cannot be bounded by religion or ethnicity in any meaningful sense. As soon as one Fooian person is given or adopts a name it becomes a "Fooian name". Otto4711 (talk) 15:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
A Venn diagram showing the overlap of three sets. This happens not only with circles, but happens with categories in Misplaced Pages
  • Keep Anyone who has ever seen a Venn diagram (pictured on right) will recognize that two groups or categories can overlap (sometimes it can even be three, as shown, or more), and the complaint that a name must be bounded so that it (or any other article) can fit into one and only one category is so utterly ludicrous as to be barely worth rebutting. The fact that my Jewish surname is also a common Korean surname in no way diminishes the fact that the name is Jewish in origin; It's not Jewish or Korean, it's both. We don't delete Category:LGBT-related television episodes simply because these TV episodes fit into other categories that have no connection whatsoever to anything LGBT-related. I had no trouble finding Jewish individuals with almost every one of the surnames listed and this is clearly part of rather well-defined Category:Surnames by culture that deserves retention. I also enjoy the nominator's baseless original research under which he has decided that the non-Hebrew derivation of some Jewish names invalidates any Jewish connection. Alansohn (talk) 19:46, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • It must have been the happiest day of your life when I made that LGBT TV episodes category. I would tend to agree that the notion that "a name must be bounded so that it...can fit into one and only one category" is a pretty silly argument, so it's a darn good thing that no one here has made it. My argument is not that names must be bounded to a single category. My argument is that names cannot be bounded by such characteristics as nationality or religion or ethnicity or descent. My surname (which happens to be of Hebrew derivation) is borne by people of dozens if not hundreds of different races, religions, nationalities, ethnicities, ad infinitum. There is nothing preventing any surname from ending up in every single "Fooian surnames" category based on there being a handful of Fooian people or even a single Fooian person that's named it. What does this categorization scheme tell us about a name, when the same name can potentially be categorized in all of them? Nothing. Otto4711 (talk) 21:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • The day I was married and the birth of my children rank a bit higher, but I do mark both LGBT-related CfD days on my calendar though I don't celebrate the day the category as created, yet. It still surprises me that Hallmark does not make cards to mark the occasion. The clear and compelling community decisions at CfD regarding Category:LGBT-related television episodes demonstrate several different precedents that I strongly agree with and that should be applied in all cases, not just for one narrow category that you support, and it provides a wonderful example that I will always think of in the unlikely event that we are not on the same side of an argument as we were with the Category:LGBT-related television episodes. A television episode can possibly belong to hundreds of different categories, and the fact that a single episode could be LGBT-related and also fit into to dozens of other categories provides no basis for eliminating the Category:LGBT-related television episodes on that basis. There are thousands of awards and honors that we categorize and it is possible that one individual can win dozens or hundreds of them, a possibility that also does not bother me and that would be a poor justification for elimination of all award categories. Names are used in different societies and cultures, and showing that through categories is exactly what we want to do. I don't believe that every surname should be categorized based on a single individual with the name in any one society, religion, culture or nation. As always, the standard is reliable and verifiable sources showing that a surname is connected with a given society, religion, culture or nation. My surname is used in both Jewish and Korean cultures, but I would be far better able to show the name as Korean and would categorize it there, and would be unable to show reliable and verifiable sources documenting the surname as Jewish and would not categorize it there, as is the case already. One person (or even two) does not make it worth a category, but reliable sources do. That's how Misplaced Pages works. Alansohn (talk) 17:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
  • It is highly unlikely that an episode of a television series could reasonably belong to hundreds of valid categories; I would be surprised if we even had hundreds of episode categories (other than by series). The awards analogy is not valid, because an award does not become another award on the basis of another person winning it. A name associated with one nationality/culture/whatever does become a name of another nationality/culture/whatever on the basis of another person having it. "Connected to" is a very vague inclusion standard. Otto4711 (talk) 18:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
  • "'Connected to' is a very vague inclusion standard." And "-related" is more definitive in a category that includes "episodes of television series that are not generally about LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender)-related issues that substantially cover such issues"? Has anyone ever defined the "substantially cover such issues" standard? Let's tighten the criteria for inclusion and make it based on reliable sources rather than delete a far-better-defined category. I don't now how likely any of these overlaps are, but I am not bothered by them at all. Alansohn (talk) 20:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Seeing as how a "connection" between a name and a culture can be established by documenting with reliable sources people within that culture who have the name, yes, "connected to" is an incredibly vague standard for inclusion. Otto4711 (talk) 20:58, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
  • My goodness, it would be helpful for you to read what I've written, and actually note that the category itself says the same thing, in a longer form. Copied here for the lazy. And a reminder of a few of the relevant policy and guidelines, although many more are applicable.
    --William Allen Simpson (talk) 05:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Finnish people of Vietnamese descent

Category:Finnish people of Vietnamese descent - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. categories are used to find similar articles, it is pointless having a category for 1 article. LibStar (talk) 14:18, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep, part of an established tree and the convention with cat pages as it has been is not to delete because a page is, for the time being, populated with just one article Mayumashu (talk) 14:31, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete -- How many more of these do we expect to add? We frequently delete categories that have no likelihood of expansion. The single article was {{BLP unsourced}}. There were no references indicating Vietnamese descent, and the article actually claims he was born in Thailand. The "official" website is down. In short, specious heritage.
    --William Allen Simpson (talk) 15:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep and repopulate. Part of an established tree. Someone born in Thailand can easily be Vietnamese, especially if born in a Vietnamese refugee camp there. (John McEnroe and many other Americans were born in Germany.) Occuli (talk) 17:12, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep as part of the overall structure of Finnish and Vietnamese origins, within the overall national origin structure. Even the biggest and strongest tree will have a branch that's a small twig. The approach of trying to "improve" Misplaced Pages by trimming every twig creates a useless stump. These categories exist so that they can be populated and expanded. Alansohn (talk) 19:32, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who like Shiny

Category:Wikipedians who like Shiny (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete - Non-collaborative category. Linked to a userboxes stating "This user knows shiny is a color" and "This user likes the color shiny". Does not improve Misplaced Pages in any way to group such users. VegaDark (talk) 13:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep. While I agree with the nominator that Misplaced Pages is not myspace, users are generally permitted to keep material of purely social, or purely humorous, value in their userspace.—S Marshall /Cont 17:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
    • There's no such thing as a category in the userspace. There are no userspace categories, only category space categories, so that isn't accurate at all when it comes to categories. Now, they can have a redlinked category in their userspace if it isn't disruptive, but that's a different issue. This category violates the Misplaced Pages:User categories guideline - "considering the principle that Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, and not a social networking site or personal webhost, the purpose of user categories is to aid in facilitating coordination and collaboration between users for the improvement and development of the encyclopedia" (emphasis mine, which this clearly does not do) and additionally a keep result flies in the face of virtually every past discussion we have had with similar categories (see here). VegaDark (talk) 18:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-defining characteristic. In no way, shape or form is it helpful to categorize users who think that shiny is a color and who like the "color" shiny. — Σxplicit 06:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians with access to Who's Who in the Theatre (17th ed)

Category:Wikipedians with access to Who's Who in the Theatre (17th ed) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete - Maintaining such a categorization scheme would be a shockingly bad idea. Do we want one one of these "by access" categories for every single book? As this category is titled, it is for an individual book (hell, individual edition of a book, in fact). Keeping sets precedent to do so. It's great this user is willing to help via use of this source, but we definitely shouldn't have this sort of system for individual books, else we set the stage for tens of thousands of sparsely populated categories. VegaDark (talk) 13:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Might I recommend doing something like what WP:ANIME does at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Anime and manga/Reference Library. -- Ned Scott 05:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Hebrew names

Category:Hebrew names - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Administrative nomination. This category was in the group nomination for names from various cultures that resulted in deletion of all of them in a previous discussion. However, this category wasn't tagged for deletion, probably because the nominator proposed keeping it in the original nomination. (I'm not sure why it was listed if the nominator wanted it kept.) No one else in the discussion singled this one out for any special comment. Anyway, I'm reopening the discussion on this particular category to find out what we should do with this one—delete it like the others or keep? Good Ol’factory 10:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete -- Most of my siblings and nieces names are in this part of the tree. This could easily be called "Christian names", as they are Biblically derived. Gosh and golly gee, that's what "given names" are traditionally called in the Western world: Christian names. Hopelessly tangled.
    --William Allen Simpson (talk) 15:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • The bible was written in Hebrew. Old Testament biblical names are mostly Hebrew in origin, which is the topic matter of bucketsful of scholarship and RS. You're tangling two things, religion and linguistic origin. These names are Hebrew in origin, regardless of who 'wears' them today. And the term "Christian names" is another red herring - these are Christian names that are Hebrew in origin, as you mean "Christian" to equal "first". Finally, please note this is not about Jewish first names, but Hebrew ones. The CfD for Jewish first names is up there ↑ --Dweller (talk) 08:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
  • When names are not written in Hebrew, and are taken from the translation (often transliteration) of a source, they are no longer "Hebrew". This category is not "Names derived from ancient Hebrew literature". These names could (and should) be listed under every country, language, and many religions and religious sects of the world. This category is useless for navigation. (And I'm familiar with the nomination above, please don't be so condescending.)
    --William Allen Simpson (talk) 12:03, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't trying to be condescending, I was trying to understand your opinion for delete, which is bemusing. If I am called Jean-Pierre and live in China, regardless of which alphabet my name is written in, and no matter how badly the locals might mangle my name, it's still a French name. If you have difficulty with the name of the Cat, that's not a reason for deletion, it's a reason to propose a name change. I struggle to understand on what grounds you're proposing deletion, as it's clear that a defined group of names can be said, using RS, to originate in a specific language, that being Hebrew. Incidentally, many Hebrew names do not derive from the bible, or even any other form of Hebrew literature. --Dweller (talk) 12:31, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
  • No, not yet. The "names by country" were deleted. The "surnames by country" are nominated for deletion; some few of them seem to have been cross-categorized with "surnames by culture", but that's not the part of the tree up for deletion.
    --William Allen Simpson (talk) 04:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I stay with my keep, but would like to reply to a few commetns above. Since "D'Alembert" is a name in French, it is a "French" name (where the word "French" is refering to the language, not the country, just as "Hebrew" is a language). Denying this is illogical. Likewise, there is no reason to call these name "Christian" instead of "Hebrew", because these two things are not mutually exclusive. They are Hebrew names. Whatever may happen or may have happened later, they will always stay such. Debresser (talk) 23:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I don't know that I bother replying, but according to at least one biographical source, "D'Alembert" is a self-name made up by a famous Frenchman, previously known as "Jean-Baptiste Daremberg" (a Dutch name?), prior to that known as "Jean Le Rond" (given at the orphanage). It is similar to a variety of Spanish-derived names, so perhaps he read it in a book. Does that make it French? Originally Spanish? What about the Floridian Creole variant of the same era? Obviously, a bad example that is inapposite your intended argument.
    --William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Hebrew-language names might be interesting, but only with a strong definition and strict conformance. And what about the separate Category:Hebrew given names and Category:Hebrew feminine given names?
    1. Yael is a good example, but in the wrong category.
    2. Michael is a bad example: a King James Version (English) spelling. In Hebrew, it should only be Mikha'el, and never a surname. But there are non-Hebrew sound-alike variants of Michael in many languages, not related to Hebrew in any way: Greek, Russian, other slavic languages, and even Arabic.
It will be difficult and time-consuming to police this category for junk.
--William Allen Simpson (talk) 04:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

<Country> songs by artist_songs_by_artist-June_7-2009-06-07T08:49:00.000Z">

Suggest merging Category:Australian songs by artist to Category:Songs by artist
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Suggest upmerging the only two categories that take the songs by artist to the name of country level. However, that is already taken care of when the artist's songs subcategory (e.g. Category:<artist> songs) is already being categorized as Fooian songs or a genre subcategory such as Fooian folk songs. Wolfer68 (talk) 08:49, 7 June 2009 (UTC)_songs_by_artist"> _songs_by_artist">

Category:University of Missouri–Kansas City

Propose renaming Category:University of Missouri–Kansas City to Category:University of Missouri-Kansas City

also:

Category:University of Missouri–Columbia to Category:University of Missouri-Columbia
Category:University of Missouri–St. Louis to Category:University of Missouri-St. Louis
Nominator's rationale: Rename because a regular typographical dash found on the keyboard is easier to find than an em-dash or en-dash, and thus makes this category easier to use with tools such as HotCat. Eastlaw  ⁄ contribs 01:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - HotCat is not a good example as putting in 'University of Missour' gives all the above en-dash choices (and more) and also Category:University of Missouri-Columbia alumni (with a dash; this turns out to be a category redirect). Attempts to change dashes to en-dashes in category names (per the name of the corresponding article) have generally failed but this is perhaps the first cfd to attempt the reverse rename. (University of Missouri–Kansas City has an en-dash.) Occuli (talk) 01:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Response - Just to emphasize my point, the category you cited above is a category redirect. I'm not trying to be snarky here, but you have inadvertently provided me with a very good illustration of the problem which I am seeking to resolve in this CfR. --Eastlaw  ⁄ contribs 06:02, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - Punctuation to substitute for words is illiterate. Possibly in some university names it's a copout to obviate having to choose "at" or "in" or just nothing (my preference, as in "University College London" or "Auburn University Montgomery"). But Misplaced Pages should call them whatever they want to be called, even if the name lacks the intellectual quality and knowledge of writing which some gurus think should be prerequisite for admission. Rammer (talk) 03:25, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Support I would remove all long dashes from categories and replace them by a normal dash (or remove them, sometimes). This should be a speedy admissable criteria. Debresser (talk) 05:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Rename - non-standard characters are a barrier to navigation. Otto4711 (talk) 15:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep – the category name should match the article name (so that cut-and-paste works) rather than differ in a way which is invisible in the edit window. Occuli (talk) 19:18, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Books by Barack Obama

There are only two pages in this category, and I don't see it growing much soon. Information already exists at Template:Barack Obama, which is on both articles. Both are also in Category:Books about Barack Obama. Reywas92 00:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Is the author a 'defining characteristic' of a book? Can one describe a book adequately in a few words and not mention the author? Also WP:OC#SMALL deals with this - 'part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme'. Occuli (talk) 16:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Misplaced Pages is not a WP:DIRECTORY. I see this scheme as a library. There are thousands and thousands of articles on WP about books and authors. There should not be a category for every single author that has a book. Many, many of those author cats have only one member even. Sure, author is integral into about a book, but that doesn't mean there has to be a category for it, especially when there's already templates and links. Reywas92 16:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Novels based on a film

Propose renaming Category:Novels based on a film to Category:Novels based on films
Nominator's rationale: Rename - matches the naming format of its sibling categories. Not sure if this qualifies for speedy. Otto4711 (talk) 00:02, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Support - not quite speedy not really enough of a precedent (3 other cats). :: Kevinalewis : /(Desk) 10:09, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Surnames by country

See Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 June 6#Category:Surnames by country —
The daily log page rolled over during tagging.
--William Allen Simpson (talk)