Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 January 20: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 12:44, 22 January 2019

< January 19	January 21 >

January 20

Category:Slovenian Chetniks

Propose renaming Category:Slovenian Chetniks to Category:Slovenian Chetnik personnel of World War II

Nominator's rationale: As a child category of the existing Category:Chetnik personnel of World War II. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - There are several reason for my opposition:
- Renaming is unnecessary because the child category does not necessarily have to have the same wording of the parent category. The parent category sometimes has personnel in its title because it is sometimes child category of parent category which covers more topics than personnel. Child categories of Category:Foo personnel can only be about personnel.
- Its not about ethnicity. Its about military units divided on territorial principle. Slovenian Chetniks were Chetnik subdivision separate from i.e. Montenegrin Chetniks. The nominator tries to introduce completely unrelated and irrelevant ethnic division into this category. Slovenian Chetniks category exist not to point to Chetniks of Slovenian ethnicity, but to point to Chetniks who belonged to separate group of Chetniks which more closely define them and distinguish from other groups.
- Per WP:CAT - Don't write the category structure in names. Example: "Monarchs", not "People - Monarchs".
- Per WP:CAT - Standard article naming conventions apply to categories also. Having that in mind, the existing title is more natural, concise, recognizable and equally precise. Consistent with ie Category:Slovene Partisans.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:22, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - The clearly established category structure is Chetniks of WWII→Chetnik personnel of WWII and Chetniks of WWII→Military units and formations of the Chetniks in World War II. Moving this to Slovenian Chetnik personnel of WWII does not change the meaning, they are still Slovenian Chetniks as distinct from Slovene Chetniks, which is the ethnic division in this case. The separate subdivision is maintained by moving it to Slovenian Chetnik personnel of WWII, and the category is fixed in time by "of WWII". Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:33, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Montenegrin Chetniks

Propose renaming Category:Montenegrin Chetniks to Category:Montenegrin Chetnik personnel of World War II

Nominator's rationale: As a child category of the existing Category:Chetnik personnel of World War II. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:49, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Same arguments as above presented for Slovenian Chetniks, except pointing to the Category:Montenegrin communists at the end of the text.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:24, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- - The clearly established category structure is Chetniks of WWII→Chetnik personnel of WWII and Chetniks of WWII→Military units and formations of the Chetniks in World War II. Moving this to Montenegrin Chetnik personnel of WWII does not change the meaning, as "Montenegrin" clearly can mean ethnic or territorial division equally, so the current name is no different from the proposed one in that respect. The separate subdivision is maintained by moving it to Montenegrin Chetnik personnel of WWII, and the category is fixed in time by "of WWII". Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:35, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Christian anarchists by nationality

Propose merging Category:Christian anarchists by nationality to Category:Christian anarchists

Nominator's rationale: Previously deleted at CfD and recently recreated. Agreed on the talk page to put this overcategorization back up for upmerge. The triple intersection isn't necessary, as anarchists are already sorted by nationality and sub-ideology in separate categories. And, at 50 items total, we're not looking at needing subcats by necessity. (The 50 items also can be pared down further.) "Christian anarchism" denotes followers of a specific school of anarchist thought, not all anarchists who identify as Christian or vice versa. An anarchist with Christian beliefs and a house in the United States is not necessarily an American Christian anarchist. Also no need to keep the categories as redirects. czar 22:15, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle , per nom, but I wonder, shouldn't there be a dual merge, e.g. Category:Australian Christian anarchists also to be merged to Category:Australian anarchists? Marcocapelle (talk) 19:30, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle, yes, I think that would work on the whole czar 23:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Apart from the obvious flaw of a malformed nomination (the rationale advocates merger, but the cats list includes no merge targets), I substantively oppose merger. Yes some of the subcats are small, but others are not, and nationality is en.wp's conventional way of grouping biographies. And if the categories are to be upmerged, this is a triple intersection which would require triple merge targets: Cat:Christian anarchists, Cat:Fooian anarchists, and Cat:Fooian Christians. In some cases, the Cat:Fooian Christians may not be needed because the page will already be in Cat:Fooian Christian denomination ... but even in those cases, we are still looking at replacing one category with two. Such category clutter impedes both readers and editors. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:09, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I don't nominate categories often. @BrownHairedGirl, updated. @Marcocapelle, courtesy ping, though I think the updates are what you supported.

I don't think it's fair to say that triple intersection would "create" triple merge targets. Even with the triple intersection, each article needs further diffusion by type of Christianity and type of anarchism, with some biographies belonging to multiple types. If for purposes of getting through this nomination, it needs to be written as a triple upmerge, okay, but in practice, the proposal is really just to undo the edits that created/added these new cats within the last month rather than assessing these two type trees for each cat member. czar 11:18, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: thank sfor fixing the listing.

However, this still replaces a need for one category per article with two or three, and breaks up useful sets such as the adequately-populated Category:British Christian anarchists and Category:American Christian anarchists. This seems to me to be unhelpful both to readers navigating and to edtors trying to categorise articles. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:57, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Christian anarchists by denomination

Propose deleting Category:Christian anarchists by denomination (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Category:Catholic anarchists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Eastern Orthodox anarchists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Protestant anarchists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Anabaptist anarchists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Anglican anarchists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Calvinist and Reformed Christian anarchists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Methodist anarchists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: "Christian anarchists" collects followers of a specific school of anarchist thought, not all anarchists who identify as Christian or vice versa. The subcategory Category:Christian anarchists by denomination defeats the purpose of the original categorization, as the intersection of "Catholic"/"Methodist" and "anarchist" is not a defining trait. That intersection is already handled by separate categories and it is best to not lose the "Christian anarchist" ideological category through further subcategorization. No response at category talk page. I recommend ~~upmerge+delete, as any redirects left behind would be confusing~~ not leaving behind redirects. czar 21:57, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:33, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as nominated. The nominator's rationale advocates merger, but the category listing above advocates deletion. the nom should amke u their mind which is being proposed, and amend the nomination to suit.

If the intent is actually to merge, then the cat listing should say "Cat:A to Cat:B" or "Cat:A to Cat:B and Cat:C". --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:30, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl, it coincides with the other discussion above. It wouldn't make sense to upmerge "Anabaptist anarchist" to "Christian anarchist" if, as you state above, we keep "American Christian anarchist". I think it's possible to get consensus on whether these categories should exist before whomever executes on making sure the results are sorted into the right categories. Also these categories were added fresh, not diffusing an existing tree, so they can be reversed non-destructively. czar 10:52, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: if you list the merge targets, then the bots will handle the ultimate destinations.

In the meantime, you shouldn't leave editors to guess what you actually intend, or give the closng admin the job of trying to interpret the result. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:52, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Clarified above. czar 12:44, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Departments of the University of Dublin, Trinity College

Propose renaming Category:Departments of the University of Dublin, Trinity College to Category:Departments of Trinity College Dublin

Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C, for consistency with the category tree Aloneinthewild (talk) 21:49, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Civil War defenses of Washington, D.C.

Propose renaming Category:Civil War defenses of Washington, D.C. to Category:Civil War Defenses of Washington, or split to Category:American Civil War forts in Maryland, Category:American Civil War forts in Virginia, and Category:American Civil War forts in Washington, D.C.

Nominator's rationale: This category is specifically about the topic of Civil War Defenses of Washington, not "defenses" (lower case) of Washington, D.C., which could include topics such as the Battle of Fort Stevens or other actions/battles (e.g. of the Maryland Campaign) that kept Confederate forces away from Washington, D.C. (I am pinging the category's creator, User:AjaxSmack.) -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 20:44, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ecozones

Propose renaming Category:Ecozones to Category:Biogeographic realms

Nominator's rationale: Per the main article, Biogeographic realm. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:27, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Small Isles, Inner Hebrides

Propose renaming Category:Small Isles, Inner Hebrides to Category:Small Isles, Highland

Nominator's rationale: At Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 November 2#Category:Small Isles I proposed using "Highland" to disambiguate but suggested "Inner Hebrides" as an alternative title, however the Small Isles in Argyll and Bute are also part of the Inner Hebrides [1]. I didn't realize that the Inner Hebrides was this far south and though it was more the islands around the Isle of Skye. Therefore while "Inner Hebrides" is more recognizable it doesn't disambiguate especially since the Argyll and Bute Small Isles were the main reason for this needing to be disambiguated. Crouch, Swale (talk) 06:51, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose.~~ Article Small Isles in main namespace does not seem to require disambiguation. "Inner Hebrides" is a better geographic designation than "Highland". There may be small islands elsewhere in the Hebrides Sea or other bodies of water, but Small Isles capitalized seems to refer explicitly to these islands. Place Clichy (talk) 10:34, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should pretend that's so. However, as Crouch said at the previous CFD, "Small Isles" locates to by Jura according to the Ordnance Survey[2] and to get the ones everyone knows as the Small Isles you need to search for "The Small Isles"[3] So far as I can see the only ones marked as "Small Isles" on OS maps are the ones off Jura[4] and they are very, very small indeed! Thincat (talk) 11:17, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Either the category should be renamed as proposed to Small Isles, Highland, or it should be moved back to "Small Isles", the current title is unacceptable either way. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:38, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I hoped Hamish Haswell-Smith would help but, most unusually, he does not. He has a full chapter (section 4) "The Small Isles" as you would expect. However, if you look up "Small Isles" in the index you are only referred to section 2.5 "Jura" were there is merely what we would call a passing mention. I'm looking at my first edition. They are all certainly in the Inner Hebrides. Thincat (talk) 11:54, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Gazetteer for Scotland has an entry on them as well as those in Highland. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:48, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Change vote to Move back to Category:Small Isles at the light of the discussion above. If no one is certain that these islands are collectively called Small Isles, then the article should probably not be called that. There are many small isles in the world. Anyway, the renaming discussion should be held at the article talk page, probably with a call for discussion at the Scotland project page. Category should follow the article's name per C2D. Place Clichy (talk) 17:53, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The category might need disambiguation even if the article doesn't see BrownHairedGirl's reasoning at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 March 24#Ambiguous Irish towns. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:48, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I would support renaming the category to Category:Small Isles. This would match the article Small Isles and the template Template:Small Isles. The group of populated islands including Eigg is clearly the primary topic for the name. If anyone were to decide the tiny uninhabited islands off Jura deserved an article and a category, they could be disambiguated as Small Isles, Jura, but as far as I can see we don't have coverage of these at present. The current disambiguation is unhelpful as both the Eigg Small Isles and the Jura Small Isles lie within the Inner Hebrides. As pointed out above, the Ordnance Survey labels the Eigg group "The Small Isles" and the Jura group simply "Small Isles", but this distinction is not reflected in general usage, where the Eigg group would always be understood unless Jura was obvious from the context. --Deskford (talk) 21:34, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Deskford: Draft now at User:Crouch, Swale/Small Isles, Argyll and Bute, however I doubt that we will need a category for the Jura ones anytime soon. @Laurel Lodged and Peterkingiron: who participated in the previous discussion. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:05, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good to see that waiting in the wings! Per WP:UKPLACE we don't use "Argyll and Bute" as a disambiguator, though. My suggestion was "Small Isles, Jura", using the parent island, but maybe "Small Isles, Argyll" would be closer to the spirit of the naming convention. --Deskford (talk) 17:04, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose using "Jura" as the parent island fits the spirit of the "placename, island/island chain" convention even though Jura isn't an island group (which is actually part of Islay group according to the article). Note we have Sheep Island, Argyll but the Commons category is at Category:Sheep Island, Scotland. Crouch, Swale (talk) 14:03, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The OS label "The Small Isles" appears to refer to the Small Isles National Scenic Area, not the island group. Crouch, Swale (talk) 14:23, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The label that appears SW of Rùm in 1:50000 mapping (hope this link works!) appears to me to refer to the islands. --Deskford (talk) 17:04, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that link works and does indeed appear to refer to the island group but as "The Small Isles". Crouch, Swale (talk) 14:03, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom to Category:Small Isles, Highland to avoid ambiguity. Those such as @Place Clichy who cite WP:C2D appear not to have read it thoroughly, because it says explicitly " If the page names are controversial or ambiguous in any way, then this criterion does not apply, even if an article is the primary topic of its name."

Ambiguity in category names is a nuisance, because most articles are categorised either by using WP:HOTCAT or by directly entering the code in the edit box. In both cases, the hideously crude software displays no guidance to the editor about the actual scope and purpose of the category, so we need a category which does exactly what it says on the tin, i.e. have a clear and unambiguous category title. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:44, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I support that general approach. My wariness is that, even if "Small Isles, Highland" is unambiguous, "Highland" is very much not so. Category:Highland redirects to Category:Highlands and that includes all sorts of highlands all over the place and has a very general article Highland as its main article. All I feel pretty sure about is that Category:Small Isles, Inner Hebrides is unsuitable. Thincat (talk) 14:41, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see the problem, @Thincat, but I think this a matter of choosing the least worst option. "Small Isles, Highland" is not perfect ... but so far, it seems better than any alternative.

The only option I can see is to disambiguate with some sort of parenthesised list as "Small isles (Eigg etc)", which seems ugly. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Using "Highland" to disambiguate would only be an issue if there are other Small Isles in other Highlands, it doesn't otherwise matter that the qualifier "Highland" is ambiguous. Newton, Surrey isn't a village in Surrey and Queens Park, Ipswich isn't a park in Ipswich. Commons:Category:Highland is about a house in Virginia which already has an incorrect image which I will move tomorrow. Possibly Category:Highland should be a DAB page here with Category:Highland (council area) Category:Highland, California and Category:Highland, Maryland but Category:Highlands could be viewed as the broader category. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:24, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We have a problem, because there are two groups both called "Small Isles" in Inner Hebrides: one in the Argyll and Bute area and the other in Highland area. That is a clear case of ambiguity. This was not clear when the original rename was done. Calling any Isles "Highland" is counterintuitive, but seems to be technically correct. I see no reason why the disambiguator has to be unambiguous. The Argyll and Bute case does not need a category, because all the islands are uninhabited and have redlinks. The present name does however need to become a dab-category with the target renamed to Category:Small Isles, Highland. An alternative might be to keep the present name and deal with this dab-issue in a headnote, saying that the category covers an archipelago in within Highland region, not Small Isles, Argyll and Bute. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:41, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keeping the current title would be a bit silly since the Argyll and Bute islands were the original reason for this. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:38, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Small Isles, Highland (I commented above). Thincat (talk) 09:33, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Further comment: This looks very much like trying to create a solution where no problem exists. On closer examination I note that the category was at Category:Small Isles until very recently, and I see no reason not to move it back to where it has been for most of its existence. The islands including Eigg and Rùm are the clear primary topic for the name "Small Isles", and these are what anyone in Scotland would understand by the term unless the context specified the tiny uninhabited islands off Jura. If it is decided to disambiguate, the above suggestions of "Small Isles, Highland" are inappropriate – per WP:UKPLACE we use districts as disambiguators within Highland, so we would use "Small Isles, Lochaber". My opinion, though, remains that no disambiguator is needed. --Deskford (talk) 17:17, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The original rename was at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 November 2#Category:Small Isles I'd be fine with using the district to disambiguate. Crouch, Swale (talk) 14:03, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 08:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC) [reply]

Relisting comment, there is a clear consensus to rename the category but no clear consensus about the target. Options discussed are:

Option A: Category:Small Isles, Highland as nominated

Option B: Category:Small Isles

Option C: Category:Small Isles, Lochaber as suggested late in the discussion

Especially with respect to the 3rd option, more input would be welcome. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Armenian parliament shooting

Propose deleting Category:Armenian parliament shooting (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: per WP:SMALLCAT. Currently contains only the head article Armenian parliament shooting. The only other possible content which I can see is Category:Victims of the Armenian parliament shooting (itself a single item category, but could be populated with more).
The shooting appears to have been a significant event in Armenian political history, but per WP:CAT categories exist to facilitate navigation between articles, not to somehowindicate the percieved importance of a topic. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:59, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Case reports journals

Propose renaming Category:Case reports journals to Category:Case report journals

Nominator's rationale: proper grammar Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:55, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This should be a speedy, I just thought Twinkle would give that option. Apparently not. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:56, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Most of these redirect to a list of non-notable journals by a single borderline fraudulent publisher. Guy (Help!) 15:00, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And many don't. The category is legit, however it is wrongly named. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:01, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Politics and violence

Propose deleting

Nominator's rationale: Redundant to Category:Political violence and its subcats. The three categories were created to parent the single-item Category:Armenian parliament shooting, which is already in Category:Terrorist incidents in Armenia. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:20, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Countries of the Indian Ocean

Propose renaming Category:Countries of the Indian Ocean to Category:Island countries of the Indian Ocean

Nominator's rationale: This category was deleted in 2013, but was then re-created (by a now-blocked editor). However, the new category's parent, text and contents indicates that it is just for island countries so the category name should also indicate this. Note: there is List of sovereign states and dependent territories in the Indian Ocean. DexDor^(talk) 06:56, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NCAA Men's Division I Final Four basketball players by year and subcategories 1939–present

Propose deleting Category:NCAA Men's Division I Final Four basketball players by year (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Subcategories

Category:Basketball players at the 1939 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1940 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1941 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1942 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1943 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1944 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1945 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1946 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1947 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1948 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1949 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1950 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1951 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1952 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1953 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1954 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1955 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1956 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1957 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1958 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1959 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1960 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1961 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1962 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1963 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1964 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1965 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1966 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1967 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1968 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1969 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1970 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1971 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1972 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1973 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1974 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1975 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1976 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1977 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1978 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1980 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1981 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1982 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1980 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1981 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1982 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1983 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1984 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1985 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1986 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1987 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1988 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1989 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1990 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1991 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1992 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1993 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1994 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1995 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1996 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1997 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1998 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 1999 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2000 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2001 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2002 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2003 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2004 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2005 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2006 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2007 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2008 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2009 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2010 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2011 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2012 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2013 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2014 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2015 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2016 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2017 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Category:Basketball players at the 2018 NCAA Men's Division I Final Four

Nominator's rationale: While they're not small, mone of these categories can ever have more than 48 articles, and they fail WP:PERFCAT ... we don't have corresponding categories for players in each Super Bowl, each year's World Series, each Stanley Cup final etc. We don't even have a category for each year's Final Four that this would presumably go under. Seems like fancruft, really. Daniel Case (talk) 06:17, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:46, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Organizations based in Oman

Propose renaming Category:Organizations based in Oman to Category:Organisations based in Oman (over redirect)

Nominator's rationale: Per MOS:TIES, given Oman was formerly part of the British Empire. If renamed, I will list the affected subcategories at WP:CFD/S. (Pinging the category's creator, User:Jpbowen) -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:20, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Procedurally, if the intention is to rename the subcats, then they should be listed here and tagged. CFDS is not a mechanism to enable incomplete CFD noms.
Substantively, I see no advantage to this change. It merely displaces inconsistencies from one category tree to another. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:02, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We can discuss procedure elsewhere, but there is no requirement for a CFR to encompass every affected subcategory—why tag dozens of pages needlessly if people disagree with the change in the first place—and CFD/S is in fact entirely appropriate for aligning the names of subcategories to their parent category. As for your point on substance, would you please clarify what you mean by "displaces inconsistencies from one category tree to another"? -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 18:45, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, British English also allows 'organizations' so let's then have all organizations categories with a 'z'. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:26, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree 100% with @Marcocapelle about this. Maybe even 200%.

This is not a standard WP:ENGVAR issue, because unlike gasoline/petrol or braces/suspenders there is a variant which is acceptable in all forms of English.

I have been meaning for the last few months to start an RFC on this. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:28, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I do see your point, but that argument will be convincing only after someone successfully changes Category:Organisations based in the United Kingdom to use 'z'. On the broader point, I do favor all categories using either 'organizations' or 'organisations', but that's a topic for a much larger nomination. Currently, Category:Organizations by country largely follows MOS:TIES, and we should not forgo applying an existing (albeit imperfect) naming convention due to an expectation of a more perfect convention at some indeterminate point in the future that may never come. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 18:45, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Black Falcon: that's such a crude misrepresentation of the situation that I am surprised to see it.

In this case, Oman's current ties to the UK are tenuous. And the UK is not a consistent user of the "s" spelling. That's two layers of tenuousness in the case for applying MOS:TIES..

On top of that, this proposal to rename all the categories without tagging and listing them all for this full discussion deprives the proposal of proper scrutiny. Given @Black Falcon's experience of CFD, I find it hard to see a good faith explanation for that. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:22, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I proposed the speedy renaming of the only inconsistency Category:Defunct organisations based in Oman within the category (opposed by Black Falcon) so it is startling to find that Black Falcon expects to rename everything else via this nom + speedies. I agree entirely that British English also allows 'organizations' and in any case a link in 2019 between Oman and the UK is rather tenuous. (Oman does not appear to mention the British Empire.) Oculi (talk) 23:57, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Expatriates from Georgia (country)

Propose renaming

OPTION A (use "from Georgia (country)")

42 more

OPTION B (use "Georgian expatriate")

Nominator's rationale: Standardise on one format or the the other. Either:

OPTION A, which follows the convention of Category:People from Georgia (country), or
OPTION B, which follows the "Fooian expatriates" convention of Category:Expatriates by nationality.

I much prefer OPTION A, because just as "Georgian people" is ambiguous between Georgia (country) and Georgia (U.S. state), "Georgian expatriates" is ambiguous between the country and the US state. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:45, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget consistent with option B. Option B uses an adjective, while option A uses a preposition and object. Option B is preferable. It puts the most distinguishing word, "Georgian", first, and next to "expatriates", which it modifies, and it is more concise. An expatriate is one who lives outside one's native country, so disambiguation is probably unnecessary. Even if it were, I would still prefer "Georgian (country) expatriate...". --Bsherr (talk) 07:14, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bsherr Wiukipedia categories rely on the principle of consistency in title. You advocate the adjectival form "Georgian", which creates inconsistency with Category:People from Georgia (country), and you suggested alternative "Georgian (country)" is also inconsistent with Category:People from Georgia (country), for no good reason -- any word order concerns apply equally to Category:Sporstpeople from Georgian (country) and to Category: Expatriate sportspeople from Georgian (country).

You might be able to make a good case for renaming Category:People from Georgian (country) and its subcats, but I see no reason to adopt a new format for expats.

Nor is it true to say that "An expatriate is one who lives outside one's native country, so disambiguation is probably unnecessary". Google Books searches (which concentrate reliable sources) throw up plenty of hits for expatriates from US states, e.g. "expatriate Texan"/"Texan expatriate" and "expatriate Californian"/"Californian expatriate ", "New York expatriate", "expatriate New Yorker". So whatever any of us might think about whether expatriate applies only to countries, the reality is that it is also applied to US states. So there is an ambiguity issue here. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:45, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Option A to avoid confusion with Georgia (U.S. state). Note that option C as proposed by Bsherr also avoids this confusion, but that proposal would only make sense as part of a larger nomination that would include Category:People from Georgia (country). Marcocapelle (talk) 09:01, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Option A - the local category Category:People from Georgia (country) should take precedence over the global Category:Expatriates by nationality. 'Georgian' has many possible meanings beyond the state and the country. Oculi (talk) 13:52, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I am all for Option B but I agree with User:BrownHairedGirl that Category:People from Georgia (country) and all the subcats would have to be renamed first, of which I am in strong favor. Equaling an independent country with one of the subdivisions of the United States is just ridiculous. Not to mention that the current system breaks the logical and established pattern of "Fooian people". - Darwinek (talk) 21:33, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Georgia (country) was chosen over the various options suggested here at cfd long ago. Oculi (talk) 00:05, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard

Propose deleting Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The linked Commons category was deleted. See Commons:Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/08/Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard. Bsherr (talk) 01:31, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Patriot Bowl

Category:Patriot Bowl (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Patriot Bowl champion seasons (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Procedural listing. These categories were emptied by @UCO2009bluejay with the following edit summary: "patriot bowl not a bowl game see discussion here". The first category included only its main article and the second had three college football season articles. See the Wayback Machine for a snapshot. - Eureka Lott 01:29, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Full disclosure, and just in case anybody is unfamiliar with college football categories and would like to know my reasoning for removing the articles. The category was set up as if it was Category:Rose Bowl and Category:Rose Bowl champion seasons which refers to the Rose Bowl (game) a postseason bowl game. The Patriot Bowl was a regular season kickoff game, and not a bowl game it would be more in tune with Chick-fil-A Kickoff Game, or Advocare Classic both of which do not have categories, and my edits were in tune with standardization of the articles. Note that the 2018 LSU Tigers football team article does not have Category:Advocare Classic champion seasons, nor an indication of winning the event in the infobox. Worth noting the 2007 Akron Zips football team were determined to not be bowl eligible by not getting to six wins and did not participate in that seasons bowl games. You may also note that the Patriot Bowl also isn't listed (and I don't think I ever edited on that page.)-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 19:29, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 ::* {{lc|Calvinist and Reformed Christian anarchists}}
 ::* {{lc|Methodist anarchists}}
 :'''Nominator's rationale:''' "[[Christian anarchists]]" collects followers of a specific school of anarchist thought, not all anarchists who identify as Christian or vice versa. The subcategory [[:Category:Christian anarchists by denomination]] defeats the purpose of the original categorization, as the intersection of "Catholic"/"Methodist" and "anarchist" is not a defining trait. That intersection is already handled by separate categories and it is best to not lose the "Christian anarchist" ideological category through further subcategorization. No response [[Category_talk:Christian_anarchists#Scope_–_denomination|at category talk page]]. I recommend upmerge+delete, as any redirects left behind would be confusing. <span style="background:#F3F3F3; padding:3px 9px 4px">[[User talk:Czar|<span style='font:bold small-caps 1.2em sans-serif;color:#871E8D'>czar</span>]]</span> 21:57, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * '''Support''' per nom. [[User:Marcocapelle|Marcocapelle]] ([[User talk:Marcocapelle|talk]]) 19:33, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 *'''Oppose as nominated'''.  The [[User:Czar|nominator]]'s rationale advocates merger, but the category listing above advocates deletion.  the nom should amke u their mind which is being proposed, and amend the nomination to suit.
@@ Line 69: / Line 69: @@
 :::{{yo|Czar}} if you list the merge targets, then the bots will handle the ultimate destinations.
 :::In the meantime, you shouldn't leave editors to guess what you actually intend, or give the closng admin the job of trying to interpret the result. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#663200;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 11:52, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
+:::: Sure. Clarified above. <span style="background:#F3F3F3; padding:3px 9px 4px">[[User talk:Czar|<span style='font:bold small-caps 1.2em sans-serif;color:#871E8D'>czar</span>]]</span> 12:44, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 ==== Category:Departments of the University of Dublin, Trinity College ====