Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 March 14

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 13 March 15 >

March 14

[edit]

Category:Woodstock Festival

[edit]
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 and purge. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:03, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The connection to one of three Festivals called "Woodstock" is hardly defining for an artist who performed once there. Wouldn't want to encourage categories by concert hall would we? BTW There is a very nice and useful template, Template:Woodstock, that does the same job as this category, only much better. Richhoncho (talk) 22:01, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PERFCAT means the following articles should be purged in my opinion: Joan Baez, The Band, Blood, Sweat & Tears, Paul Butterfield, Canned Heat, Joe Cocker, Country Joe and the Fish, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, The "Fish" Cheer/I-Feel-Like-I'm-Fixin'-to-Die Rag, Grateful Dead, The Grease Band, Arlo Guthrie, Tim Hardin, Keef Hartley, Richie Havens, Jimi Hendrix, Hog Farm, The Incredible String Band, Jefferson Airplane, Janis Joplin, Artie Kornfeld, Michael Lang (producer) (probably), Lay Down (Candles in the Rain), Country Joe McDonald, Mountain (band), Quill (band), John P. Roberts, Joel Rosenman, Melanie Safka, Santana (band), Satchidananda Saraswati, John Sebastian, Sha Na Na, Ravi Shankar, Sly and the Family Stone, Bert Sommer, Sweetwater (band), Ten Years After, Wavy Gravy, The Who, Edgar Winter, Johnny Winter, & Max Yasgur. That still leaves a viable category specific to the festival.RevelationDirect (talk) 12:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • At best heavily purge -- This is being used as a Performacne by performer category, which we do not allow. However, I suspect that by the time all the performers are purged there will be little left. This was certainly an important event, but unless there is more than one article on the festival, there should be little but a main article. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:35, 21 March 2015 (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: Churches in

[edit]
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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:42, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To distinguish between the many sui juris churches (i.e. congregations or parishes) and the buildings of those churches. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:13, 14 March 2015 (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:Rhodian colonies

[edit]
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: upmerge (NAC). DexDor (talk) 04:54, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only one article. No need to upmerge because the one article remains in the Greek colonies tree anyway (in Category:Dorian colonies in Magna Graecia). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:33, 14 March 2015 (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:Theran colonies

[edit]
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 to Category:Dorian colonies and Category:Ancient Thera. --slakr\ talk / 04:11, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only one article. No need to upmerge because the one article remains in the Greek colonies tree anyway (in Category:Greek colonies in Libya). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:33, 14 March 2015 (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:Troezenian colonies

[edit]
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 to Category:Ancient Troezen. --slakr\ talk / 04:12, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only one article. No need to upmerge because the one article remains in the Greek colonies tree anyway (in Category:Achaean colonies of Magna Graecia). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:33, 14 March 2015 (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:George Spanos

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: speedy delete. I will merge the page history. – Fayenatic London 10:54, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Wrong namespace. Category page written as an article. Subject does not appear to be notable. RacerX11 Talk to meStalk me 17:24, 14 March 2015 (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.

States established in the 3rd millennium BC

[edit]
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: Upmerge both. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:38, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per this discussion. Note: after this merge a couple of parent categories will become empty and can be deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:25, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rather do not "also upmerge"! The general "establishments" by year, within the 3rd millennium, only contain these same two articles. Next to that, populated places by establishment are all nicely in one millennium category, not by year, decade or century. When we don't do this second upmerge, the general "establishments" categories by year, decade and century will become empty, which is perfectly fine. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:29, 19 March 2015 (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:American religious leaders

[edit]
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. --slakr\ talk / 03:00, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename. On a global level we make a distinction between religious leaders (clergy, abbots, prophets) and religious workers (monks and nuns, theologians, missionaries). I wouldn't be in favor of duplicating that distinction by country, but actually the American and British religious leaders categories contain all of these occupations together (clergy, monks and nuns, theologians, missionaries) so then religious workers is more appropriate. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:22, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split rather than rename. "Religious leaders" is a useful tier of categories across all religions and countries, and it would make no sense to remove these prominent nations from Category:Religious leaders by nationality. – Fayenatic London 09:34, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename it's debatable as to who leads and who merely works...I don't think we can assume that ALL nuns, monks, theologians are "leaders", where it may be less a stretch to apply "leader" to Roman Catholic bishops, for example. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:59, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose split. First, on a global level, I find a separate layer for religious leaders acceptable only for reason of easier navigation. Since on a country level the amount content is far smaller than a global level, there isn't a navigational benefit in an extra layer per country. Second, as Carlossuarez also indicated, the term "religious leader" is ambiguous in the sense as it may mean:
  1. in the broadest sense: clergy, missionaries and theologians (note that many theologians have been manually classified as religious leaders)
  2. in the current way (in the global tree): close to identical to clergy (since most abbots are usually part of clergy as well)
  3. in the narrowest sense: only bishops (or maybe even only primates) and presidents of synods
and therefore the term should be avoided for categorization if reasonably possible. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:08, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm afraid I disagree, especially with nominating a small subset of a large scheme. The point below, that we cannot fully diffuse leaders of minority religions, backs up the need to keep these. – Fayenatic London 19:59, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • For sure a diffuse template should be added here. Could you please explain why it should be containerised? I can imagine there may be non-Christian religious leaders who can't be put in any of the subcats. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:05, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support What constitutes a leader in a church is a very broad topic – a parish priest is a leader in some form, as is his bishop, and the archbishop of that bishop, as is the theologian who influenced the bishop's colleagues... Better to start with workers and divide by a more distinctive attribute (such as role). SFB 19:24, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split per Fayenatic london. There's too much infrastructure for leaders that really means people who lead within religion (it's only fuzzy if you make it fuzzy). "Workers" should apply to what we would think of as religious "employees", followers or devotees. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 12:12, 31 March 2015 (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:Greek colonies in Russia

[edit]
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. Note: the pages are already in Category:Pontic Greeks which is a sub-cat of Scythia, so I did not place them in the latter. – Fayenatic London 06:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename. Russia is an anachronistic name, it was not in use while these Greek colonies flourished. Note that with the rename the category gets a wider scope which is not a disadvantage given the small size of the category. A rename to Category:Greek colonies in Scythia might be an alternative possibility but the category is also a bit small to keep. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK am happy to go with it now. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:28, 17 March 2015 (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.

Colonies in Illyria

[edit]
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 to Category:Greek colonies in Illyria. – Fayenatic London 05:01, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge. Albania and Croatia are anachronistic names, they were not in use while these Greek colonies flourished. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:56, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're actually right, so that means the Hellenistic parenting of these categories was wrong from the beginning. I'll strike the Hellenistic upmerge and I would suggest moving some of the Albanian articles from the Illyria category to Category:Cities in ancient Epirus. That is, I would rather stick to the existing Illyria and Epirus categories than start an entirely new category. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:20, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

*Suggest Category:Greek colonies on the eastern Adriatic, so as to omit any in Italy. The main period of colonisation was (I think) archaic. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:37, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Apart from Epirus and Illyria (which already have their own category each) there weren't any regions on the eastern Adriatic with ancient Greek colonies. So I'd rather keep as is, except for the nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:56, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marcocapelle's system seems good to me. Greek colonisation on the Adriatic is continuous over time; settlements like Epidamnus were established in the Archaic, more like Issa by Dionysios in the Classical period, many by the Epirotes in the Hellenistic period. Furius (talk) 00:01, 30 May 2015 (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:Argead colonies

[edit]
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: withdrawn. – Fayenatic London 17:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: downmerge per WP:SMALLCAT, the target category is the only content of the nominated category. Prefer downmerge over upmerge because the target category is C2C to Category:Greek colonies in Macedonia and Category:Hellenistic colonies in Macedonia while nominated category doesn't have any similar sister categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:36, 14 March 2015 (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:Hindu religious figures

[edit]
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: withdrawn. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:43, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: downmerge, C2C-ish to religious leaders categories of other religions, e.g. Category:Christian religious leaders, they contain a fairly similar subcat structure as currently Category:Hindu religious figures has. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diffuse contents to more specific categories, and split what remains after that (whether articles or sub-cats) between Hindu religious workers and Hindu religious leaders, for consistency with others. – Fayenatic London 20:03, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Leaders is too vague a description as it may be applied at many levels. Figures is useful in that avoids the idea that these are workers per se. I think the relationship with the workers category is backwards. Still, we need to think what figures is doing that Category:Hindus can't do (nothing as far as I can see). SFB 19:27, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The latter seems to be a very fair point. If you don't mind I'll highlight your suggestion to facilitate discussion:
Alternative: propose upmerging Category:Hindu religious figures‎ to Category:Hindus.
Marcocapelle (talk) 20:00, 24 March 2015 (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.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_March_14&oldid=1090453443"