Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 March 17

< March 16	March 18 >

March 17[edit]

Category:Van Gogh albums[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:00, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Van Gogh albums to Category:Van Gogh (band) albums

as well as Category:Van Gogh live albums to Category:Van Gogh (band) live albums

Nominator's rationale: Rename to match parent article and to avoid any confusion that Vincent Van Gogh may have actually released some albums. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 22:57, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename both per nominator to avoid confusion and to match head article Van Gogh (band). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:37, 24 March 2011 (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:Prime Television Limited[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Prime Television Limited to Category:Prime Media Group Limited

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Name of company changed. azumanga (talk) 15:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to reflect current company name. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:58, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to reflect current company name, but recreate original as a {{category redirect}}. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:38, 24 March 2011 (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:United States boundary cases[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: Delete & upmerge. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:18, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion, essentially the same thing as Category:Internal territorial disputes of the United States. Brandmeister t 13:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete & Upmerge ~~(or fix)~~: There are quite a few Supreme Court cases in Category:Internal territorial disputes of the United States that could form a potential sub-category but this one is misnamed and not populated. RevelationDirect (talk) 18:20, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Category:United States Supreme Court original jurisdiction cases already better covers the grouping I was envisioning. RevelationDirect (talk) 18:22, 19 March 2011 (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:Locomotives of the Republic of China[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 Taiwan. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:16, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Locomotives of the Republic of China to Category:Locomotives of Taiwan

Nominator's rationale: Merge and Delete. The prime distinction in this area is between mainland and island, not by government. See earlier discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 March 1#Category:Locomotives of Taiwan --Bejnar (talk) 13:33, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support The present contents (such as they are) should be moved (merged) to the target and Category:Locomotives of the Republic of China deleted. "Republic of China" is ambiguous referring to the mainland before 1948 and Taiwan since. It is undesirable that it should be used at all. As far as there was a consensus in the previuous discussion, I think it was along these lines, but the closing Admin did not recognise that. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:36, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the present contents, such as they are, do not appear to be in Taiwan at all, but in the People's Republic of China. The locomotives in question seem to have been acquired by the Republic of China before its evacuation to Taiwan... 184.144.166.85 (talk) 05:11, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The EMD G22CU was not built until 1967 and was used in Taiwan, so that entry should be under Taiwan. The sub-category Category:Diesel locomotives of the Republic of China should be eliminated as over categorization. The entry China Railways ST1 is from a redirect page to Russian locomotive class Ye, and is a reference to the ST1 which apparently was used on the Chinese Eastern Railway in Manchuria, as such it wasn't a locomotive of the ROC, but Russian. The Russian locomotive class Ye article does not provide any citation or additional information. A quick search of Google Books fails to turn up a mention of the ST1 in China. --Bejnar (talk) 17:11, 21 March 2011 (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:People with multiple doctoral degrees[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: Delete. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:34, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Delete. We do not categorize people by what academic degree they hold or any permutation or combination thereof. There are many precedents from past discussions for this. I'm not sure if the one for fictional characters — Category:Fictional people with multiple doctoral degrees — should be deleted or not, but I may as well add it to the mix for discussion. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 08:44, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. I note that at least several of these people have honorary doctorates, not even doctorates they've earned. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:38, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. Occuli (talk) 12:17, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. Even if we did categorize people by what degree they had, we'd still have to delete this - after all, we categorize people by occupation, and we never use "people with multiple occupations," we just apply all the relevant categories. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Except for the much-maligned Category:Actor-politicians tree. :) Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - That one's a bit different. ;) Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:58, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All Including Actor-Politicians per Good Olfactory's inadvertant broadening of the nomination. RevelationDirect (talk) 18:25, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Doh. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:05, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:48, 21 March 2011 (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:Ventilation air methane thermal oxidizer[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: delete. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:36, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Small with no potential for growth (WP:SMALLCAT). Melchoir (talk) 01:50, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now: There are actually a number of sections to the article that could potentially be broken out into stand-alone articles. Until that happens, I see no use for this category however. RevelationDirect (talk) 18:29, 19 March 2011 (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:Current members of the National Council of Switzerland[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 00:55, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Current members of the National Council of Switzerland to Category:Members of the National Council of Switzerland

Nominator's rationale: Merge. Since we don't typically have "current" and "former" categories for occupations, this could simply be upmerged to the parent category. Alternatively, if it would be helpful to subdivide these members by session, this could be renamed to Category:Members of the National Council of Switzerland (2007–2011). Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:39, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I agree that merger would be best. If the category becomes unwieldy then it can be broken down by century. As to the suggestion by Good Ol’factory about sessions, that is already taken care of by the existing session lists, such as List of members of the National Council of Switzerland (2007–2011). --Bejnar (talk) 17:17, 21 March 2011 (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:Northern Line stations[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. Several of the opposes note that the other Underground line categories use upper case; a new joint nomination of all 11 would allow consistency to be maintained either way. Timrollpickering (talk) 15:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category: Northern Line stations to Category: Northern line stations (with a lower case "l")

Nominator's rationale: Rename to conform to the naming style used in other related Wikipedia articles about the London Underground.Headhitter (talk) 00:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:13, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose where there is an entity called "Northern Line" the lower case policy does not apply, otherwise we would have the parent category (misleadingly) as "London underground stations". But they are stations on the Northern Line of the London Underground. Not just any underground station in London or stations on a northern line. And the other lines in Category:London Underground stations have a capital "L" eg Category:Circle Line stations not "Circle line stations". PS: was no notice of proposal on category being discussed; have added. Hugo999 (talk) 09:49, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on which of Northern Line and Northern line is correct. (I thought 'line' would be capitalised but at present it isn't: the article has been at Northern line since 2007.) Occuli (talk) 14:40, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment See Talk:Victoria line#Requested move. It comes down to stylistic preference, and TfL prefers "line." Interestingly, TfL capitalises "Tube" yet WP is rife with reference to "tube" stations and services (e.g. Wanstead tube station). Various systems have varying conventions: London Paddington station not London Paddington railway station, London Paddington (station) or London Paddington Station, yet Sylvia Park Train Station, Southern Cross railway station, Melbourne, Orange (train station), Köln Hansaring station, Glòries (Barcelona Metro), and various other forms. - choster (talk) 18:33, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - the discussion demonstrates that there is no consensus to move the articles from the established 'XXX line' to 'XXX Line' and that London transport use 'line' so I support the nom. Occuli (talk) 20:19, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename Unless the Article Changes While a capital "L" seems appropriate to me, I generally favor deferring to the lead article unless there is a compelling reason to deviate.RevelationDirect (talk) 18:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. In Category:Stations by London Underground line the entries all use a capital for Line. The capitalisation makes it clear that it relates to stations on the Northern line (or Line) rather than "line stations" on the Northern. Cjc13 (talk) 13:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cjc13; while claiming to improve consistency, the nom would in fact do the opposite. Johnbod (talk) 14:28, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Northern Line (London) stations "Northern Line" is ambiguous. (see Northern Line (disambiguation)) 184.144.166.85 (talk) 06:47, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Several of the entries in Northern Line (disambiguation) do not use the exact phrase. Also some foreign entries use translations of the term, eg "Kuzey Hattı" for Northern Line (İZBAN). Thus the London line appears to be primary as similarly for Category:Central Line stations. Cjc13 (talk) 14:04, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter if it is primary, it is overly ambiguous, per other discussions at CfD, overly ambiguous names get disambiguated. The article Northern railway line, Sydney also seems to be misnamed, since in the article it is called "Northern Line", exact same name as the line for this category, but that's not in London. And if Northern Line (Merseyrail) isn't English, I don't know what is. 184.144.166.85 (talk) 02:09, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The current name is consistent with other entries in Category:Stations by London Underground line. The Sydney line is named in accordance with the other Sydney lines such as the Western railway line, Sydney. The Merseyside line is little known outside Merseyside. The other northern lines are local services little known outside their local area. Cjc13 (talk) 12:52, 22 March 2011 (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:Canadian House of Commons[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 00:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Canadian House of Commons to Category:House of Commons of Canada

Nominator's rationale: Rename. I suggest that this should match the name of the main article, which is House of Commons of Canada. Canadian House of Commons redirects there. (If this rename goes through, there are a bunch of subcategories which could be speedily renamed to match the new format.) Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:17, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support to match main article. RevelationDirect (talk) 18:32, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom to match main article. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:48, 21 March 2011 (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.