Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 September 19

< September 18	September 20 >

September 19

Category:Speed skating venues

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: keep. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Speed skating venues to Category:Speed skating venues (ice)

Nominator's rationale: Rename or not. Prior to the adding of Category:Patinodromes this was reserved for ice skating events. Personally I think we should leave this alone and create Category:Inline speed skating venues for Category:Patinodromes or maybe rename Category:Patinodromes. While this may overlap with the nomination below this, I think this is asking a slightly different question that should be addressed in a separate discussion. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:03, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep We should follow the main articles Speed skating (ice of course) and Inline speed skating. I notice some inline articles seem to creeping in to the tree here - the two sports should be kept apart. Johnbod (talk) 02:36, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I will note that speed skating includes inline speed skating in its lead. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:32, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually I'll change that to I revised the article to focus on ice speed skating. Speed skating had a split requrest for a while and I split out the inline stuff to inline speed skating. I added hat notes to both articles to point back to the other one. So, if that fixes any concerns, then I expect that it makes clear that the rename will be opposed and we can add an introduction pointing to the speed skating article to avoid future problems. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:03, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The right move I think. Johnbod (talk) 16:36, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Winners of All-Ireland medals by count (football)

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: delete, with subcategories. Jafeluv (talk) 12:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Delete. This is an utterly ridiculous idea for a category, and a perfect example of overcategorisation. Players should not be categorised by the number of times they won a particular sporting event, and I am certainly yet to find any precedent for such categories. – Pee Jay 20:57, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If kept, it and all subcategories should be renamed to include "gaelic football". There might be merit for the higher numbered categories (I do not know), but the lower numbers may be a characteristic of limited notability. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all, including subcategories (which are tagged). I agree with nom that this is classic overcategorization. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Patinodromes

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: rename to Category:Inline speed skating venues. Jafeluv (talk) 17:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Patinodromes to Category:Speed skating venues

Nominator's rationale: Merge. Upmerge single entry to the one parent. There do not appear to be any articles on patinodromes at this time and the article only lists two. Vegaswikian (talk) 17:57, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this might be a palindrome of some sort. One can but regret the global shortage of notable patinodromes; but until there are more, upmerge. Occuli (talk) 18:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom; rename to Category:Inline speed skating venues. See above, per Vegas. This is the French term, which I doubt really exists in English, but should not be merged as this category is inline skating, the target ice-skating. Johnbod (talk) 20:19, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per Johnbod as nominator. This is probably the best solution and it makes clear the purpose of the existing category. While this category would be underpopulated, I think it needs to exist to make clear that Category:Speed skating and the subcategories are for ice related events only. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Fitzpatrick's War

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: delete. Jafeluv (talk) 13:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Single-member category. No suggestion of necessity or utility. ^Bongo_matic 17:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- single article (on a novel) with no room for expansion. The creator may have wished to provide articles on its principal characters, but such articles would need to be merged back to the article or its author. To discourage this, I have remvoed some redlinks for the article. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator. Debresser (talk) 17:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nominator as a single-member category. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 10:33, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Types of degrees offered in the United States

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: Rename Category:Types of degrees offered in the United States to Category:Academic degrees of the United States iot conform with category tree - any proposed changes to naming should properly apply to the whole tree and form the basis of a separate nomination. --Xdamr^talk 15:57, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Types of degrees offered in the United States to Category:Academic degrees of the United States

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Standard naming per Category:Academic degrees by country. Tassedethe (talk) 16:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This does not seem to read right for me with the 'of' construct. If you look at this convention, degrees would seem to be out of place in that list. However this section of the guideline would seem to be a better fit. I also have some concerns about the need for the category itself. So if we are going to rename, we should probably go with something like Category:Academic degrees in the United States. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nominator. At the moment all five subcategories of Category:Academic degrees by country use "of". So let's rename this one, and then we can always propose a second rename for all of them from "of" to "in". Debresser (talk) 17:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Degrees

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: merge. Jafeluv (talk) 13:52, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Degrees to Category:Academic degrees

Nominator's rationale: Merge. Clearer category name. Tassedethe (talk) 16:56, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Johnbod (talk) 20:23, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support since it isn't supposed to categorize Celsius, Centigrade, Kelvin or Farenheit. 76.66.196.139 (talk) 04:50, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom—obvious. Re 76.66.196.139: "Centrigrade"? Oh man, I haven't heard that since my last visit to grandma's. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Ben Elton

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: delete. Jafeluv (talk) 13:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Delete - small eponymous category, not warranted by the material. Otto4711 (talk) 16:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. He's linked on the novels cat. Johnbod (talk) 16:24, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as vanity eponymous single-member category. I oppose single-member categories on principle but don't seek out AFD/CFD !votes; however, when in Rome..... Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 10:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Auburn University professors

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: Merge Category:Auburn University professors to Category:Auburn University faculty. --Xdamr^talk 16:00, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Auburn University professors to Category:Auburn University faculty

Nominator's rationale: Merge. Standard practice for all academics and professors of a University to be classified as Faculty e.g. see Category:Faculty by university or college in California. Tassedethe (talk) 14:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nominator. Completely correct. Debresser (talk) 17:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Scholars and academics

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: Merge:
Category:Irish scholars and academics to Category:Irish academics

Category:Welsh scholars and academics to Category:Welsh academics

~~--Xdamr^talk 11:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)~~[reply]

Further to representations made from Johnbod here, the final outcome of this nomination is placed on hold pending the result of Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_September_29#Category:Academics_by_subject. On the conclusion of that debate this closure will be reconsidered for conformity of parent category with sub-categories. --Xdamr^talk 18:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the conclusion of Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_September_29#Category:Academics_by_subject has been to adopt the form Scholars and academics and in the interests of conformity between parent and child categories, the revised result of this debate is:

Merge:

--Xdamr^talk 15:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Irish academics to Category:Irish scholars and academics

Suggest merging Category:Welsh academics to Category:Welsh scholars and academics

Nominator's rationale: Merge. There don't appear to be different inclusion criteria for these 2 categories. Previous discussions agreed on Foo scholars and academics. Tassedethe (talk) 13:55, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

REverse merge in view of the neighbouring nominations, unless some one can point to scholars who are not academics (or vice versa). Peterkingiron (talk) 15:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Peterkingiron. Debresser (talk) 17:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – an earlier cfd pointed out that there are indeed Welsh scholars from antiquity who were not academics. Basset Jhones might be such a person. (Ditto Irish.) Occuli (talk) 15:06, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Chilean scholars and academics

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: Merge Category:Chilean scholars and academics to Category:Chilean academics. --Xdamr^talk 11:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further to representations made from Johnbod here, the final outcome of this nomination is placed on hold pending the result of Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_September_29#Category:Academics_by_subject. On the conclusion of that debate this closure will be reconsidered for conformity of parent category with sub-categories. --Xdamr^talk 18:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Chilean scholars and academics to Category:Chilean academics

Nominator's rationale: Merge. Small category better with the standard naming of Category:Academics by nationality. Tassedethe (talk) 13:45, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Reverse~~ merge in view of the proposal in the neighbouring discussions. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:26, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

vote changed - original one was mistaken: for reasons as Debresser. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In Wales, Ireland and Scotland the word scholar is used to refer to academics in the modern sense. It is not clear that this is true of Chile as well. Tassedethe (talk) 15:52, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per argument of Peterkingiron in Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_September_19#Scholars_and_academics. Debresser (talk) 17:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:European Professors

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: Delete. --Xdamr^talk 16:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Academics is preferred to Professors (see below) but this category is not needed as the members it has will be categorised under Category:Academics by nationality. Tassedethe (talk) 13:40, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nor do we want a category (of academics) for europe; although Category:European people does exist. Twiceuponatime (talk) 13:57, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- This should be a parent category without articles. "Professor" in most European countries is a category of senior academic. Ordinary lecturers are not "professors" (unlike in USA), and have Professor as an honorific in front of their name. However the category needs populating much better. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:04, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is far to complicated to distinguish between senior and less senior academics, even where the title "professor" marks this distinction. Johnbod (talk) 15:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – concur with Prof Johnbod. Occuli (talk) 17:47, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Category:Professorships. In Europe, many professors hold a post with a regular succession. However there are also "personal chairs" awarded to distinguished academics. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those categories are for the jobs, though they mostly contain a list. I think there are precedents for not categorizing people by a particular chair they have had. Johnbod (talk) 20:07, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. Debresser (talk) 17:43, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Professors

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: Merge:

--Xdamr^talk 16:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Professors of Vietnamese descent to Category:Academics of Vietnamese descent

Suggest merging Category:Norwegian professors to Category:Norwegian academics

Propose renaming Category:Mexican American professors to Category:Mexican American academics

Suggest merging Category:Swedish professors to Category:Swedish scholars and academics

Nominator's rationale: Category:Professors redirects to Category:Academics. The definition of professor varies from country to country so academics is preferred. Tassedethe (talk) 13:37, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for European categories. Professors are a class of senior academic in Europe (unlike in USA where all lecturers are professors). Peterkingiron (talk) 15:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked further, I am surprised at the lack of succession boxes for professorships, and the lack of categorisation other than by college/university and discipline. Perhaps we need a project to rectify this deficientcy. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:14, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support all It is far to complicated to distinguish between senior and less senior academics, even where the title "professor" marks this distinction. Johnbod (talk) 15:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support all – concur with Johnbod. Occuli (talk) 17:48, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Tech Chinization

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: delete. Jafeluv (talk) 13:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: This is nonsense. I have never heard of the phrase and the category has been added to a number of articles where China is not even mentioned in the body of the article. Simple Bob (talk) 13:14, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have also not heard of Chinization, and I see that there is no article on it yet. Unless an main article for the category is created within the CFD period, we cannot create this category. If we do get one, then keep but prune. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bob - The 'Tech Chinization' category reflects a societal and business phenomenon that is currently taking global innovation and entrepreneurship by storm and that is supported by major players in this industry. Therefore it should be represented in an encyclopedic source such as Wikipedia - which is at the forefront of classical and new knowledge of universal significance and reach. Hopefully these explanation will clarify potential doubts on this issue. All the best,

Franckn55 (talk) 21:11, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is likely a made up term or a street slang. Not sure this is appropriate for category name. Benjwong (talk) 00:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator as imaginary term and as category applied without discerning. Debresser (talk) 17:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable neologism. - Dravecky (talk) 21:14, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:College soccer players

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: merge. Jafeluv (talk) 17:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:College soccer players to Category:NCAA soccer players

Nominator's rationale: Merge. It's unclear how these 2 categories differ, do not all college soccer teams fall under the NCAA? Tassedethe (talk) 13:10, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. If not, add "American" before. Johnbod (talk) 15:22, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Either merge as nom or REname to Category:United States College soccer players. However, how many college soccer players are notable? We would certainly delete articles on UK college soccer players as NN. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Is there a need here to split out college and university players? I see that there are a lot of college categories in this area, but I wonder if they are really needed. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:39, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Christian Democratic Party politicians

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: Rename Category:Christian Democratic Party politicians to Category:Christian Democratic Party (Australia) politicians. --Xdamr^talk 16:01, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Christian Democratic Party politicians to Category:Christian Democratic Party (Australia) politicians

Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match article Christian Democratic Party (Australia) and to disambiguate from Category:Christian Democratic Party of Norway politicians and other similarly named political parties. Tassedethe (talk) 12:59, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nominator. Debresser (talk) 17:38, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Chicago Maroons players

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: Rename Category:Chicago Maroons players to Category:Chicago Maroons soccer players. --Xdamr^talk 16:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Chicago Maroons players to Category:Chicago Maroons soccer players

Nominator's rationale: Rename. To distinguish from Category:Chicago Maroons football players. Tassedethe (talk) 12:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. (There is also Category:Chicago Maroons basketball.) Occuli (talk) 13:56, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:IT Industry in Durg district

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: Delete. --Xdamr^talk 16:22, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Convert to article Category:IT Industry in Durg district to article Information technology industry in Durg

Nominator's rationale: Convert. Although I've put convert to an article this should really be added as a section in the Durg article, or deleted as unreferenced. Tassedethe (talk) 12:15, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articlise - This is a misuse of category space by some one who does not know what a category is. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:22, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I moved the text to Information technology industry in Chhattisgarh since that was what the intro said it was about. Durg is apparently within Chhattisgarh. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:16, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as too small. Nowhere to upmerge to? Debresser (talk) 17:37, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:IT parks in Kerala

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: Merge Category:IT parks in Kerala to Category:Science parks in India. --Xdamr^talk 16:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:IT parks in Kerala to Category:Science parks in India

Nominator's rationale: Merge. Upmerge small cat to parent. If kept it should be renamed to Category:Information technology parks in Kerala. Tassedethe (talk) 12:10, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree completely with both points of nominator. Upmerge, or at least rename per guideline to avoid abbreviations. Debresser (talk) 17:34, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:IT Software Services companies

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: Merge Category:IT Software Services companies to Category:Software companies. --Xdamr^talk 16:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:IT Software Services companies to Category:Software companies

Nominator's rationale: Merge. No definition of IT Software Services so recommend upmerging to Category:Software companies and also Category:Information technology companies. Tassedethe (talk) 12:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

IT

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: Rename:

--Xdamr^talk 16:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:IT qualifications to Category:Information technology qualifications

Propose renaming Category:IT companies of Israel to Category:Information technology companies of Israel

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Expand abbreviation to match article Information technology and general naming conventions at WP:NCCAT. Tassedethe (talk) 12:05, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename all. "IT" is too ambiguous. Expand for clarity. — ξ ^xplicit 17:48, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Abbreviations should be avoided in category names unless the subject is almost exclusively known by the abbreviation. Jafeluv (talk) 11:33, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Sociological Research Companies of Ukraine

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: No Consensus. --Xdamr^talk 16:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Sociological Research Companies of Ukraine to Category:Research institutes in Ukraine

Nominator's rationale: Merge. Upmerge small category per WP:OCAT. Tassedethe (talk) 11:51, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree These are companies, not institutes. At present the only two articles in this category are also in Category:Research institutes in Ukraine, but according to this argument they should be removed from there. As to Category:Sociological Research Companies of Ukraine, I would just delete it, as too small. Debresser (talk) 17:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Inductees of the Brazilian Order of Scientific Merit

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: rename. Jafeluv (talk) 11:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Inductees of the Brazilian Order of Scientific Merit to Category:Brazilian Order of Scientific Merit recipients

Nominator's rationale: Rename. This doesn't seem to involve induction into an Academy or Hall of Fame etc. so naming should follow Category:Science award winners. Tassedethe (talk) 10:59, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per sharp observation of nominator. Debresser (talk) 17:28, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:National Lacrosse League Hall of Fame

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: Rename Category:National Lacrosse League Hall of Fame to Category:National Lacrosse League Hall of Fame inductees. --Xdamr^talk 16:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:National Lacrosse League Hall of Fame to Category:National Lacrosse League Hall of Fame inductees

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Standard naming in Category:Halls of fame inductees. Tassedethe (talk) 10:52, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename and remove National Lacrosse League Hall of Fame from the category. All other members are inductees, and that article is already in Category:National Lacrosse League. Also, to match sister categories in Category:Halls of fame inductees. Jafeluv (talk) 11:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Inductees of the Australian Rugby League Hall of Fame

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: rename. Jafeluv (talk) 11:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Inductees of the Australian Rugby League Hall of Fame to Category:Australian Rugby League Hall of Fame inductees

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Standard naming in Category:Halls of fame inductees. Tassedethe (talk) 10:50, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nominator. BTW, in my opinion this should be a speedy criteria. Debresser (talk) 17:26, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:Indios de Ciudad Juarez players

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: rename. Jafeluv (talk) 11:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Indios de Ciudad Juarez players to Category:Indios de Ciudad Juárez players

Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match main article Indios de Ciudad Juárez and parent cat Category:Indios de Ciudad Juárez. Tassedethe (talk) 09:57, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nominator. But aren't we supposed to remove non-standard characters from category names as much as possible? Debresser (talk) 17:25, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Bands from

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: rename. Jafeluv (talk) 11:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Bands from Aberystwyth to Category:Musical groups from Aberystwyth

Propose renaming Category:Bands from Berlin to Category:Musical groups from Berlin

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Standard naming as recommended here. Tassedethe (talk) 09:45, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename all. For consistency purposes. — ξ ^xplicit 17:50, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rename all per correct observation of nominator. Debresser (talk) 17:24, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Playwrights

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: Merge:

--Xdamr^talk 16:30, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Playwrights from Liverpool to Category:Dramatists and playwrights from Liverpool

Propose renaming Category:Igbo playwrights to Category:Igbo dramatists and playwrights

Delete Category:Igbo playwrights -- single-member category. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 10:37, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:New Zealand playwrights to Category:New Zealand dramatists and playwrights

Propose upmerging Category:Canberra Region Playwrights to Category:Australian dramatists and playwrights

Nominator's rationale: Category:Playwrights redirects to Category:Dramatists and playwrights. The Category:Canberra Region Playwrights is small and the parent cat is not split by state. Tassedethe (talk) 08:46, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the Liverpool category should be upmerged to Category:English dramatists and playwrights. We have no category tree for Category:Dramatists and playwrights by city, only nationality. Are we sure we want to set a precedent here -- or is this overcategorization? Not even London and New York City have such categories. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments – support all but the Liverpool one (which should be upmerged to Category:English dramatists and playwrights and 'People from Liverpool') . (I suspect this follows from the recent and regrettable Category:People from Liverpool by occupation.) We will soon have Category:21st-century dramatists and playwrights from Liverpool as editors seem to find intersections irresistible. The Canberra one should also be upmerged to Category:Writers from the Australian Capital Territory if not further. Occuli (talk) 18:00, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, if the Canberra one is going to become "from the ACT", then the Liverpool one could conceivably be upscoped to Category:Writers from Merseyside. Grutness...wha? 21:46, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English writers does not seem to be otherwise subcatted by place apart from Cornwall and Manchester. Occuli (talk) 00:14, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...and Manchester seems to be for the city. Pretty messy. If Manchester had been Greater Manchester (i.e., the county), it would have made a similar Merseyside category more sensible. Grutness...wha? 02:06, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - support upmerging Liverpool D.&P. to England, might be a meaningful category if the writers lived and worked in the city, but for the most part that isn't the case; difficult to establish real connections in many places other than birth
Rename all per precedent. If they are too small, they could also be upmerged. I have not looked into that. But the rename has ample precedent. Debresser (talk) 17:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Authors

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: merge. Jafeluv (talk) 11:17, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Burkinabé authors to Category:Burkinabé writers

Suggest merging Category:Bangladeshi authors to Category:Bangladeshi writers

Nominator's rationale: Merge. Category:Authors redirects to Category:Writers. Writer categories have subcategories such as Category:Poets or Category:Novelists, not authors. Tassedethe (talk) 07:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per first part of nomination. Just as previous nomination (see yesterday). Debresser (talk) 17:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.