Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 August 21

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< August 20 August 22 >

August 21[edit]

Category:Nature parks in Portugal[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was no consensus --Kbdank71 14:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Nature parks in Portugal to Category:Natural parks of Portugal
Nominator's rationale: They're called "natural parks", not "nature parks". Húsönd 19:10, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "Natural parks" is an over-literal direct & unidiomatic translation from the Portuguese, which does not belong in WP. "Nature parks" is not much better, but better until a more suitable term is found. Johnbod 21:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

Russian and Soviet military equipment[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 14:34, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split children of Category:Military equipment of Russia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and Category:Military equipment of the Soviet Union (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), where the two countries are combined. All items in the categories clearly originate in one or the other, and many of their child categories already are separate. The new category names should conform to the standard form "...of Russia" and "...of the Soviet Union". This was proposed without objection or comment at WT:WEAPON#Military equipment of the Soviet Union, Russia, and Ukraine. —Michael Z. 2007-08-21 16:00 Z
Oops. I only posted notices on the category pages today. —Michael Z. 2007-08-22 17:53 Z
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:West Point graduates[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated and leave as a category redirect. There is already Category:Non-graduate alumni of West Point to deal with the alumni who have not graduated. --Kbdank71 14:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:West Point graduates to Category:United States Military Academy alumni
Nominator's rationale: Merge, The proper name of the college is "United States Military Academy" not West Point. It is commonly refered to as "West Point" because it is located at West Point, New York, but this is a nickname for the school, not its proper name. Category:United States Military Academy alumni also falls within the generally accepted convention of using the word "alumni" instead of "graduates." Nobunaga24 15:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: "West Point graduate" is such common parlance that it's probably best to turn this into a category redirect. That will prevent an otherwise-inevitable series of recreations. Xtifr tälk 12:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • About a year ago, I omitted this cat — along with Category:United States Air Force Academy graduates, Category:United States Naval Academy graduates, and Category:Non-graduate alumni of West Point — from a mass graduates->alumni nomination because someone had argued that gradation from the service academies is particularly significant because graduates automatically become officers. This is quite nice because it allows us to put the graduates cats into Category:United States Air Force officers, and similar. Obviously, all of the graduates cats should share the same fate, but I have a slight preference towards keeping all three. I'm not terribly concerned about setting a bad precedent; graduates cats do not seem to be popping up these days. ×Meegs 13:01, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Orders of magnitude (energy)[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 14:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Orders of magnitude (energy) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: This category has only one article in it (Heating value, which I'm not sure belongs anyway) and its main article Orders of magnitude (energy) is sufficient. –Sarregouset (Talk) 14:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:British video game companies[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 14:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:British video game companies to Category:Video game companies of the United Kingdom
Nominator's rationale: Rename, per convention for categories of companies. Carina22 13:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - seems fine as it is. Onnaghar tl | co 13:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to match other "[Industry] companies of [country]" categories. -Sean Curtin 02:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per convention. Alex Middleton 13:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:List of ships of Russia by project number[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 14:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:List of ships of Russia by project number (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. This cat is an unnecessary companion to List of ships of Russia by project number. In any case, as the ships' project numbers are not part of their article titles, they can not be displayed in the category. Each of the three member articles are classified elsewhere within Category:Naval ships of Russia. ×Meegs 06:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:List of military dictatorships in Latin America films[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was no consensus to delete, rename to Category:Military dictatorships in Latin America films to remove the word "list" and to match the main article --Kbdank71 14:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:List of military dictatorships in Latin America films (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. This cat is an unnecessary companion to List of military dictatorships in Latin America films. That these films all depict Latin American dictatorships in one capacity or another does not seem to me to be significant enough to warrant categorization. ×Meegs 06:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that its best to keep both. Also i feel if one was to be deleted, we should keep the category method. It is superior, as it links dynamically into a hierarchy tree of Wikipedia articles. Chendy 14:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Its looks like it is the dictatorships, not the films, that need to be Latin American, so Category:Films depicting Latin American dictatorships would probably be the right name for this set. I still prefer deletion, though. We need to be far more conservative with categories than with lists and avoid overcategorization. I hesitate to categorize films any more finely than by genre based on themes, setting, or plot elements, for fear that articles will be included in too many categories. It will also be difficult to determine the degree to which a film must depicts dictatorships (in this case) in order to warrant inclusion in the category. ×Meegs 15:01, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. - I'm the one who started that Category, so here are my 2 cents. I created that category while organizing a film festival on that subject in my university. Films about Latin American dictatorship are very popular down here, since our late dictatorships are still considered to be a fresh subject in Latin American history. Some of the most famous movies from South America are set in those years. I was amazed that I couldn't find a list of films in the internet dealing with our authoritarian years, so after I accidentally stumbled upon Category:Lists of films by topic, I knew that Wikipedia would have a place for such a list. Btw, I would like to point out that Category:Films depicting Latin American dictatorships indeed seems much more apropriate.Evenfiel 04:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or at least rename to remove the word list. No category should have the word "list" in its name, as using it confuses two different navigational devices used in Wikipedia. Alex Middleton 13:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When I created the article, I decided to use the word "list" because the other articles in Category:Lists of films by topic also had it. Anyway, as I've already stated above, I do think that a name change seems appropriate.Evenfiel 18:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this suffers from the same problem nearly all "films about" cats suffer from: how much about the subject matter must the film be and what RSes tell us it's at least that much. Here we add the weasel word dictatorship so that we are not sure what that is: is Chavez's Venezuela a dictatorship? Peron's Argentina? Castro's Cuba? Somoza's Nicaragua? Sandanista Nicaragua? PRI Mexico? etc. From someone's POV most of Latin America has been ruled by dictatorships almost non-stop since 1492 (and parts before that too no doubt). Carlossuarez46 21:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the article deals with military dictatorships, more specifically, those which are closely attached to the Cold War and US' influence on the region, a clear subject to everyone who's familiar with latin american history, Operation Condor, The Generals, et cetera. The latin american movies that deal with it are 99% of the time from Chile (Pinochet 1973-90), Brazil (1964-85) and Argentina (Basically the "Dirty War" period). Maybe Category:Films depicting Latin American military dictatorships would fit it even better, as well as having a better description on the article itself.
You just cannot ignore the huge influence of that period on the cinema of / about those Latin American countries.Evenfiel 02:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:List of Southern convenience stores[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename to Category:Convenience stores of the United States --Kbdank71 14:17, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:List of Southern convenience stores to both Category:Convenience stores and Category:Retail companies of the United States
Nominator's rationale: Categories are not lists, so list should not be in the title. I don't think we need a cat specific to the southern United States, though something like Category:Convenience stores in the United States is a possibility for the future. ×Meegs 06:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Comic book terrorists[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was upmerge to Category:Fictional terrorists --Kbdank71 14:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Comic book terrorists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete per Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid#Extremist.2C_terrorist_and_freedom_fighter and for not making the fiction clear. Category has no inclusion criteria. Wryspy 04:30, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The fiction is perfectly clear, and this is part of a long-established hierarchy of terrorist categories. Postlebury 12:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete we've discussed such categories a lot on the comic project and lists like this (possibly contentious and in probably in need of policing) should be dealt with as a list (if at all). Here the inclusion criteria is tricky and I'd struggle to work out how you'd judge this. Some are actually cast (or retconned) as terrorist analogues so as to address the relevant issues but in a broader context you could define most supervillains as terrorists (often relying on kidnap, murder and blowing things up to achieve their aims) so I think the whole concept is problematic. (Emperor 12:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]
  • Keep - per Postlebury, and per not empty. Onnaghar tl | co 13:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to Category:Fictional terrorists, or at least most of the contents. As per the grandparent, Category:Terrorists, the articles on the fictional organizations shouldn't be there. There is, however, an argument for Category:Fictional terrorist organizations off of Category:Terrorism in fiction for those article.
    As for the "long-established hierarchy", I don't see it. That is, unless the argument is being put forward that Fictional be subdivided into Fictional in... for comics, television, film, novels, etc. That would generate a problem with over catting since some of the characters have been used in multiple media.
    And "per not empty" seems to be a non-starter. Most cats that are put up for CfD have content, and this one did not include "empty" as a reason for CfD. - J Greb 16:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to Category:Fictional terrorists. There's no need to distinguish between comic and other non-fictional ones.--Mike Selinker 19:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes there is, due to the size of Category:Comics characters, which has many other subcategories, yet is still huge. Alex Middleton 13:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • This doesn't solve that problem, as 99% of the entries in this category are already subcategorized by publisher. -Sean Curtin 00:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge, pointlessly specific. -Sean Curtin 02:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It is not pointless. It is an intersection of its parents. Alex Middleton 13:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge per Mike Selinker, too specific. Carlossuarez46 21:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Why does anyone want to remove 30 comics characters from Category:Comics characters? There is no conceivable justification for doing so. Perebourne 00:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nobody is suggesting that. >Radiant< 12:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge, overly specific. Would suggest covering the existence of "fictional terrorists" in a separate nom, if desired. >Radiant< 12:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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/2007_August_21&oldid=1085414846"