Misplaced Pages

:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 December 2 - 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 EEMIV (talk | contribs) at 23:03, 6 December 2009 (oops). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:03, 6 December 2009 by EEMIV (talk | contribs) (oops)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
< December 1 December 3 >

December 2

Category:Fictional Technobabble speakers

Category:Fictional Technobabble speakers - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Hardly a defining trait for anyone (fictional or otherwise). Wholly subjective inclusion criteria. --EEMIV (talk) 23:45, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Category Creator's Rationale: Hardly a defining trait for anyone? I respectfully disagree with this sentiment and nomination, for not too many people/characters (both fictional or otherwise) use technobabble. Human beings don't even hear and use technobabble on a daily basis! With that said, I find it to be worthy of at least a category list, or an article somewhere on wikipedia.(LonerXL (talk) 23:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC))
Delete. Given the definition - from the article - is "Technobabble is a form of prose using jargon, buzzwords and highly esoteric language to give an impression of plausibility through mystification, misdirection, and obfuscation", I'd say that if you think human beings don't even hear and use technobabble on a daily basis you haven't spent much time at WP:AFD! More seriously, there are a huge number of people who use some form of technobabble in their daily work, and the same is true in fiction (everyone from Sir Humphrey Appleby to Doctor Who has used technobabble). At best, this could be listified, though I doubt it would survive long before someone AfD nominated it as original research (perhaps "noted uses and users of technobabble in fiction" with citations as a section on technobabble, would be more appropriate, with a parallel list of real users/examples). As a category, though, I would hardly call it defining. Grutness...wha? 00:25, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and Grutness. Technobabble includes not only "prose intentionally made obscure through gratuitous technical terms and technical slang", but also "technical description that necessarily contains many technical terms" and that is not understandable to someone. Thus, whether someone is a technobabbler depends largely on the perspective of the person on the receiving end of the 'babble'. –BLACK FALCON 01:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Reverse the polarity of the neutron flow ehm... Delete. I agree- an article of this sort would face AfD under WP:NOR in very short order. Almost sci-fi character has used technobabble at some point or another- not only engineers and scientists like B'Elanna Torres and Rodney McKay but also characters not normally considered technical characters. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 01:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep as unoriginal research and due to objective inclusion criteria. Best, --A Nobody 22:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Locomotives

Category:Pere Marquette locomotives
Propose renaming Category:Pere Marquette locomotives to Category:Pere Marquette Railway locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match name of the railway and the main article. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:27, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Oldenburg locomotives
Propose renaming Category:Oldenburg locomotives to Category:Grand Duchy of Oldenburg State Railways locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match the name of the railway and the main article. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Nord locomotives
Propose renaming Category:Nord locomotives to Category:Chemin de Fer du Nord locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match the name of the railway and the lead article. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Mecklenburg locomotives
Propose renaming Category:Mecklenburg locomotives to Category:Grand Duchy of Mecklenburg Friedrich-Franz Railway locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match name of the company and the lead article. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Etat locomotives
Propose renaming Category:Etat locomotives to Category:Chemins de Fer de l'État locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match the name of the company, the main article and the parent category. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:13, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Baden locomotives
Propose renaming Category:Baden locomotives to Category:Grand Duchy of Baden State Railway locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename to match the name of the railway and the main article. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:10, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Category:Alsace-Lorraine locomotives
Propose renaming Category:Alsace-Lorraine locomotives to Category:Imperial Railways in Alsace-Lorraine locomotives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Alsace-Lorraine is the name of an area and not the name of a railway company. Not sure if this is the correct name, but after reading the main article I think it is the best option. This is to cleanup up the name for leaving in Category:Locomotives by railway. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Work in progress images

Category:Work in progress images - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: According to the category description, this category is for non-free images which are tagged for deletion and where the Graphic Lab is working on an improved non-free version or a free alternative. Its scope seems to be too narrow, but the category name is too broad: "work in progress images" could refer to images which convey the idea of a work in progress, which was my first thought when I saw this category, or to images (such as incomplete maps or images undergoing restoration) which are still being worked on by invidiaul editors. Category:Graphic Lab seems to include those categories used by the project, so delete unless the category still serves a function—currently it contains two talk page archive. (Category creator notified using {{cfd-notify}}.) –BLACK FALCON 23:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Featured sound nominations

Propose renaming Category:Featured sound nominations to Category:Misplaced Pages featured sound nominations
Nominator's rationale: Pages related to the featured content processes currently seem to be categorized in two category trees: Category:Misplaced Pages featured content, which contains project pages related to administration of the featured content process, and Category:Featured content, which contains actual featured articles, lists, sounds, et cetera. A category of nomination pages clearly falls in the scope of the former (the parent category is Category:Misplaced Pages featured sound candidates). (Category creator notified using {{cfd-notify}}.) –BLACK FALCON 23:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Non-free sounds

Propose renaming Category:Non-free sounds to Category:Misplaced Pages non-free sounds
Nominator's rationale: Per category naming conventions, "ategories used for Misplaced Pages administration prefixed with the word "Misplaced Pages" (no colon)" as needed for clarity. From the perspective of a reader, not an experienced editor, "non-free sounds" can be somewhat unclear. Also, for consistency with the parent categories, Category:Misplaced Pages non-free content and Category:Misplaced Pages sounds. (Category creator not notified because: bot-created). –BLACK FALCON 22:57, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Albinistic artists and entertainers

Category:Albinistic artists and entertainers - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete? I created this category, back when. Was just about to create Category:Albinistic politicians since so many of the entries remaining in Category:People with albinism are/were politicians, when it occurred to me that both of these ideas might be overcategorization. Creating subcats. like these appeals to my sense of keeping the main "people with" category uncluttered, but the intersection of phenotype and occupation may be too trivial. I'll leave it up to CfD to decide, rather than just create another subcat. that might also need to be removed. Also, there is no general Category:Artists and entertainers parent cat. to put the nominated category into. If it is kept in some form, it may need renaming or forking or something. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 19:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • For almost any other intersection of "albino" and "profession" I'd say right away to delete it as trivial, but this one just might be notable, like when the artists attracts people by being an albino. In our times this is hardly likely though, so delete. Debresser (talk) 22:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • If deleting, please upmerge to Category:People with albinism so as not to take the articles out of the category tree entirely. Also, if kept, I would prefer the formulation Category:{Profession} with albinism rather than Category:Albinistic {profession} for consistency with the parent category. –BLACK FALCON 22:27, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Recipient of Vautrin Lud International Geography Prize

Propose renaming Category:Recipient of Vautrin Lud International Geography Prize to Category:Recipients of Vautrin Lud International Geography Prize
Nominator's rationale: Rename. This is a list category, and therefore its name should be plural. Axolotl Nr.733 (talk) 18:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Speedily rename: That's just an obvious typo fix. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 20:33, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Concur with SMcCandlish. Obvious typo. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 22:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Distributed data sharing

Propose renaming Category:Distributed data sharing to Category:Distributed data storage
Nominator's rationale: See Distributed data store. 4th-otaku (talk) 14:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Number-one singles in Japan

Propose renaming Category:Number-one singles in Japan to Category:Oricon Weekly number-one singles
Nominator's rationale: In compliance with Category:Billboard Hot 100 number-one singles and Category:Dutch Top 40 number-one singles. The two mentioned charts are published by a separate outlet as is the charts in Japan. While others such as Category:Number-one singles in Australia and Category:Number-one singles in New Zealand are issued by their Recording Industry Association. MS (Talk|Contributions) 15:29, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Country Origin players

Propose renaming Category:Country Origin players to Category:New South Wales Country Origin team players
Nominator's rationale: There is a QLD County Origin team. Mattlore (talk) 12:35, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment/request for clarification: There seem to be three jargon terms at play here, none of which mean anything to anyone outside of the field of inquiry of the categories and articles in question. These are "Country Origin" and "County Origin", as mentioned above (why are these capitalized?), and "state of origin" (not capitalized, and looks to actually be grammatical) in the parent category. I don't think anyone's going to be able to !vote on this without more information on what this stuff means, why it's being named so inconsistently (including why the proposed name perpetuates the inconsistency), and what the nature of the dispute is. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 20:04, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment. Ah, well first of all County is a typo - it should be Country. The New South Wales Country team plays against a City team each year in what is basically a "Sydney" vs "Rest of New South Wales" match. The concept of "State of Origin" is an Australian-originated concept where players play from the State/region they grew up in rather than the region they are currently in, so Sydney based players from the bush still represent the Country team - as opposed to a Residents team. I'm not so sure there is a dispute, because no one has yet objected, but I listed it here because I didn't think it fell under the speedy rational. Mattlore (talk) 23:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Hong Kong football templates

Suggest merging Category:Hong Kong football manager history templates to Category:Hong Kong football templates
Suggest merging Category:Hong Kong football squad templates to Category:Hong Kong football templates
Nominator's rationale: There are currently two categories for football squads and managers; this seems excessive to me. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:47, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Disambiguation containing homophones

Category:Disambiguation containing homophones - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Little-used and questionable use category. No response to question (from 2008) on talk page about its intended utility. JHunterJ (talk) 02:05, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete per WP:DIC. Category is underused. List of dialect-independent homophones and List of dialect-dependent homophones are more useful. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 02:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Various categories of "National Park areas" by state

I notice, within Category:United States National Park Service, various state-level categories that all seem misnamed. These are Category:National Park areas in Arkansas, etc. However, the term "National Park area in State" would refer only to National Parks within a given State, and not to other areas like National Historic Sites, National Monuments, etc. that are under National Park Service control. I think the creator/users must have intended for the broader definition to apply.

Propose 30 or so renames:

doncram (talk) 02:04, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually maybe they should all be renamed to "National Park System" areas rather than "National Park Service areas. These seem to be addressing the units within the nation-wide List of areas in the United States National Park System. And the categories correspond somewhat to entries in lists like:

etc. doncram (talk) 02:25, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Support move to Service. I think these System lists should be moved to Service. Reywas92 03:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Support rename to "...National Park System," which makes the most sense to me. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 05:53, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Support the idea of renaming. Although, National Park System may be more appropriate. While the National Park Serivce manages all these areas, the literature about the Service and the various areas, refers to them as the National Park System. I was confused when I tried to bring the listings together in a Category for the National Park Service/System and found only the titled "National Parks" in these state categories. Most authors separate the titled National Parks from other units, so they can concentrate on the 'highlights' and have fewer places to gather information from. Therefore, I support renaming these categories to simplify the links in Misplaced Pages and to connect the public to the wider system. (Chris Light (talk) 14:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC))
  • Support rename; prefer "system" to "service" on the basis of the logic already given, but am okay with either. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 19:55, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Support Renames to match title of parent article. Alansohn (talk) 02:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • As nominator, Support renaming, and prefer renaming to use System. Using "System" is consistent with the several years-old Featured List List of areas in the United States National Park System and with several newer state-level list-articles, perhaps one or two being FLs too. All these list-articles are newer than these categories, I believe. All editors here support renaming to some consistent scheme and I think all but Reywas92 are indifferent or prefer "System". It would be much a bigger change, beyond our ability to accomplish here, to change all the list-articles to use "Service". So I suggest making this change to achieve consistency, now, without attempting here to determine whether "System" or "Service" is better for the list-articles. doncram (talk) 20:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Rename all per National Park Service. Debresser (talk) 22:02, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Why do you prefer that? I thot I stated good reasons to make the category change to "System" not to "Service". If you do not explain your reasoning I tend to think you did not consider all that has been discussed and then this !vote and perhaps other !votes should be disregarded. doncram (talk) 01:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Update/problems User:Hmains has been changing categories of items in the categories under discussion, while this CFD has been going on, before and after I notified him of the CFD. I am concerned that I may not have started the CFD properly, like if there is some way I should put a notice on each category under discussion. But, given one is aware of a CFD in process, shouldn't it be obvious that the category items under discussion should not be changed until a decision is made? doncram (talk) 01:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Besides continuing further to edit more of the items under discussion, Hmains indicates at his talk page that he sees that this "...CfD is not properly formed and will be thrown out as soon as reviewed by an administrator. You are not following any of the Cfd rules which are well established. I will not write anything there." I don't participate often at CFD and I don't know what CFD rules would rule out the validity of this CFD. Can anyone else explain? doncram (talk) 07:14, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Bioclimatics

Category:Bioclimatics - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: *Delete. Although this is not a reason for deletion the most of the current contents does not reflect the common usage of the word. The title is open to misinterpretation. A more apt title may be bioclimatology but such a category is not likely to be populated. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 00:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)