Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 October 24

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 24[edit]

Category:Fictional characters from Cairo[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. MER-C 10:30, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article in the category. Clearly not needed, at least right now. JDDJS (talk to mesee what I've done) 23:41, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Only one article does not deserve a separate category. JIP | Talk 08:56, 29 October 2019 (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.

Xxx of the University of California, Los Angeles[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: do not rename. MER-C 10:33, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming:

  • As I mentioned above, all (direct) subcategories in Category:University of Montana are in the proposed format. Not Alumni of though (which is a subcat to the People of subcat). HandsomeFella (talk) 19:07, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - we have a working system with University of Foo stuff that is working well and pretty universal, although it is not entirely standardized, mostly due to the resistence of United Kingdom categories which follow their own conventions. I agree its a bit awkward with the coma in the middle, but the various campuses of UC are so universally known that nobody's surprised. Plus if we renamed these categories, they would be eligible to speedy renaming the other way per WP:C2C. And we have Category:University of Montana faculty and Category:University of Montana alumni. We also have Category:University of the People people, which is quite nice. Place Clichy (talk) 19:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: None of those you are mentioning are two-part names. Keep is not an option, because the current names violate WP:Copyediting#Punctuation. Either we insert the comma – an alternative suggested by Oculi above – or we recast the category names. Regarding C2C, remember WP:CONSENSUSCANCHANGE. Even if something was agreed upon way back when because it seemed to be a good idea at the time, if it's later found to be not such a good idea, or that there are cases that people did not think of then, and that do not fit the pattern that was agreed upon, a new consensus can emerge. HandsomeFella (talk) 06:45, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I do a lot of alumni related categorization. The overwhelming majority of American schools are using the Alumni of xyz titles. There is no reason why it should change, especially for just one university. There is no compelling reason to change. Seems like the reason boils down to someone’s preference for one away over the other. If it is changes, to be consistent, change the hundreds of other alumni categories for all other schools from high school up. MensanDeltiologist (talk) 14:37, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: Well ok, then I guess we'll have to insert the comma. HandsomeFella (talk) 21:50, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. We currently have largely standardized on "Alumni of ..." for the UK and some former colonies, and "... alumni" for the US and most other places, just as we have "Academics of ..." and "... faculty" with roughly the same geographic distribution. If we're going to deal with this dichotomy, doing it piecemeal on an institution-by-institution basis is not the way. And in general it's probably much less painful to cite WP:ENGVAR and leave well enough alone. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:46, 29 October 2019 (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:Health blogs[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. MER-C 10:31, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No actual articles apart from the eponymous one. Rathfelder (talk) 20:00, 24 October 2019 (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:Maharashtra MLAs 2014–[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 November 2#Category:Maharashtra MLAs 2014–

Category:Dinobots[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. MER-C 10:31, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is almost empty now, only consisting of the main article Dinobots and one article about an individual Dinobot, Grimlock. Therefore it's pretty much useless to keep this category around any more. Delete this. JIP | Talk 13:19, 24 October 2019 (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:Language-oriented digital libraries[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. MER-C 10:32, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful intermediate category. Most libraries, digital or not, are "Language-oriented". This category did not include very much, and in particular nothing oriented towards English. I've now established categories for digital libraries by country, and, unsurprisingly, the libraries are all focused on the native language of their country, apart from the ancient languages. And Cuneiform, which isnt a language. All the articles are in at least one other digital library category. Rathfelder (talk) 09:30, 24 October 2019 (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:High tech recruitment companies[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. MER-C 10:32, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We don't have a "high tech" tree. This should be just upmerged back to its parent (Category:Employment agencies which is its sole parent category). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:38, 24 October 2019 (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.