Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Japanese sports

The following discussion comes from Categories for deletion. This is an archive of the discussion only; please do not edit this page. -Kbdank71 17:49, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Category:Japanese sports and Category:Sport in Japan
''4 votes for "Sport in Japan", 2 for "Japanese sports". -Kbdank71 17:20, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)''

Merging required. I would prefer the latter. It presents less confusion (not all sport/sports/sporting events that exist/occur/involve Japan may be considered a "Japanese sport")--ZayZayEM 14:18, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC) ZayZayEM 00:53, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Object to the use of non-standard "Sport in Japan". The overwhelming dominance of the adjective form is a clear sign of the true consensus and a few activists should not be allowed to use this little frequented page to undermine it. Wincoote 23:57, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Okies. Shouldn't it be Category:Japanese sport then anyway, similar toCategory:Chinese sport, Category:Hungarian sport, Category:Australian sport etc.
 * Yes. Wincoote
 * I prefer the latter, since adjective forms can be problematic. They exist due to inertia and because someone happened to create some like that, not because there has necessarily been serious discussion of the matter. But as long as the U.S. and UK are allowed to use their proper adjectives, the adjective forms don't bother me. Category:Sports by country seems to contain a mixture of sports and sport, though, so we need to either declare one standard or just accept the mixture. -Aranel (" Sarah ") 03:06, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * It is not "inertia" if something was implemented by many people, presumably because it came naturally to them, and it survives because most people are happy with it. You are abusing the term. Wincoote 22:39, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * We most certainly need to accept the mixture. "Sports" is American English and "sport" is British English. If the former is imposed Wikipedia will cease to be a global encyclopedia and become an American national encyclopedia. Wincoote 22:39, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Ever hear of Chicken Little? Somehow, I don't think the global nature of Wikipedia hinges on "sports" vs "sport". -Kbdank71 15:53, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge into Category:Sport in Japan. I agree that the current "consensus" most likely isn't a consensus at all.  There are many articles and categories that are "Foo in Bar".  Besides, the Naming conventions (adjectives) states that "It is recommended that adjectives be redirected to nouns."    -Kbdank71 21:20, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Do you have any evidence for that? I suggest it is merely wishful thinking that you are in the majority. Categories should be in normal English as far as possible, and that means the adjective form here. Wincoote 22:39, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * No, I don't, but then again, I suggest that you don't either. Unless you mean proof of "There are many articles and categories that are 'Foo in Bar'." or proof of "It is recommended that adjectives be redirected to nouns.", either of which I'll be happy to supply.  As for "normal English", I'm confused.  What do you mean by "normal", and why "should" categories be in it?  -Kbdank71 14:25, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I believe he did link to Naming conventions (adjectives). Nouns are preferred to adjectives.--ZayZayEM 02:21, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Personally speaking, Category:Sport in Japan makes more sense than Category:Japanese sports. Why?  Because when I think of "Japanese sports", I think of stuff like sumo wrestling - sports that originated in Japan.  Obviously, the scope of these categories goes beyond traditional Japanese sports. --Azkar 15:15, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * That problem doesn't apply with "Japanese sport"
 * This is a P.O.V. statement. To some people, the problem obviously does exist.--ZayZayEM 02:21, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and move to Category:Japanese sport as most common useage. James F. (talk) 12:03, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)