Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:London Rivers

The following discussion comes from Categories for deletion. This is an archive of the discussion only; please do not edit this page. -Kbdank71 14:55, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Category:London Rivers
Badly capitalised categories. Category:London Rivers may be better named Category:Rivers in London. Susvolans (pigs can fly) 17:24, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Neutral: I would support a change but not the alternative given: They are either "London's Rivers" or "Rivers of London" sfaiac. --Vamp:Willow 23:38, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * The standard form for rivers categories is "Rivers in X". (This is less of a standard that some of the others, but "Feature in X" is pretty much the standard for geographical features.) Take a look at the siblings in Category:British rivers (noting that "British rivers" should probably be "Rivers in Great Britain", but definitely not "British Rivers"). -Aranel (" Sarah ") 00:42, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If recent category clean-ups suggested below are anything to go by, there is a gradually approaching consensus of "Natural features of X", "Artificial features in X". Thus "River crossings in London", "Rivers of London" ("Rivers in..." is not the standard! See Landforms tidy-up below!). Government is a little different, not being a geographic term. Personally I'd favour Government of London, but ymmv. As far as Districts is concerned, "Districts in London" makes sense, but there are several other "X districts"-type categories, so just dropping it to a minuscule would be okay by me. Grutness hello? 01:19, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC) Rivers should definitely not be capitalized unless it is the first word in the title (after Category:). -- Beland 23:32, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Renominated.