Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 April 16



April 16

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. --Kbdank71 15:55, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:London airports
Changed to Category:Airports of the London region to fit in with the standard naming convention. Burgundavia 19:18, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. --Kbdank71 16:19, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:People of Swedish ancestry
"Ancestry" is a dubious base for a category; many people may have ancestry from a dozen different countries or ethnic groups, and unless it is very close it may be of no significance to their identity.

Most of the people in this category are Swedish-Americans. A new Category:Swedish-Americans might be motivated for people who are immigrants, or possibly children of immigrants or somehow have played a role in the Swedish-American community. / Uppland 19:07, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Postdlf 04:08, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Oliver Chettle 03:00, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Literally tens of millions of people fall into this category; far too broad and vague. -- tomf688 (talk) 16:11, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was keep. --Kbdank71 16:03, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:Professors, and subcategories

 * Category:Professors by nationality
 * Category:American professors
 * Category:Belgian professors
 * Category:British professors
 * Category:Bulgarian professors
 * Category:French professors
 * Category:Canadian professors
 * Category:Professors by subject
 * Category:Sociology professors
 * Category:Physics professors
 * Category:English professors
 * Category:Law professors
 * Category:American law professors
 * Category:British law professors
 * Category:Canadian law professors
 * Category:Professors by university
 * Category:Carnegie Mellon professors

First of all, "professor" means different things in different countries. In the U.S. a professor is more or less synonymous with "university teacher". In many other countries, only the equivalent of a U.S. full professor has the title of professor, others being readers, lecturers, privatdozents or whatever. Secondly, I think it is better to categorize academics after their field, not after position (at least not in such general and vague terms), i.e. not as a "sociology professor", but as a "sociologist". If the sociologist in question is a professor of some kind or works outside university is less relevant, as long as s/he is noted for his/her research and publications.

We need better categorization of academics, but I think this is the wrong way to go about. / Uppland 18:39, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed, for all the reasons you've given (in NZ, "professor" is only one step down from Head of Department, well above Senior Lecturer). And you haven't even mentioned the potential confusion of having "British professorrs" (by nationality) and "English professors" (by subject)! Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 02:07, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm very uncomfortable with using naming difficulties as a reason for deleting a page or category. Categories can have descriptions; if the category name is in some way ambiguous, the description can provide an explanation of which sense is being used.  I specifically disagree with the removal of Category:Professors by university, and its subcategory; I feel that information about what institutions someone is or has been affiliated with is useful, and can be independent of the other information.  A page can easily have both Category:Carnegie Mellon professors and Category:Sociologist.
 * On the other point, I'm unclear as to the distinction between a "sociologist" and a "sociology professor". Are there academics who are not professors?  The academia article indicates that the terms are essentially synonymous in U.S. English.  -- Creidieki 07:41, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * ...but not in other countries. see my note about the NZ instance, above - a professor is a higher rank than lecturer in many countries - a sociology lecturer may be a sociologist but not a professor. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 07:58, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * To which should be added that a lecturer at university may well be a very notable researcher too, in universities and countries where professorial chairs are in limited supply. And many published academics work outside universities; a notable historian may, for instance, work as an archivist. / Uppland 08:19, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I understand that the term is used differently in different countries. I was assuming that we were dealing with that by using category descriptions, but we could also change the name of the category to "Faculty" or something more general.  I guess I'm interested in discussing whether there's a point in having both "Category:Historian" and "Category:History Faculty".  In the example above, I definitely wouldn't disagree with "Category:Historian" and "Category:Archivist".  Should faculty positions be different? -- Creidieki 17:26, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Disagree. It's been pointed out that categories can and do have descriptions.  Also, not every Sociologist is a Sociology Professor, and for the ones that are, they can have two categories.--Kbdank71 13:56, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Neutralitytalk 17:45, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep all. Postdlf 01:43, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Cleduc 03:05, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. --Kbdank71 15:55, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:Shinto shrine
Dupe of Category:Shinto shrines and also empty. Should be speedy. SchmuckyTheCat 16:47, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was rename. --Kbdank71 16:08, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:Consonant
Needs to be in plural form. --Hooperbloob 16:43, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. --Kbdank71 15:55, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:World hip hop
Renamed to Category:Hip hop by nation to make its function more obvious and to make it more like the similar Category:Jazz by nation, Category:Rock music by nation and Category:Heavy metal by nation. Tuf-Kat 15:48, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. --Kbdank71 16:15, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:Rogers Communications subsidiaries
Delete. Most articles included in this category were not subsidiary companies but assets and have already been moved to Category:Rogers Communications. A category for subsidaries is redundant and unnecessary if Category:Rogers Communications is defined to simply include all assets of the company. Kurieeto 12:58, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was no consensus (keep). --Kbdank71 16:01, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:Mafia associates

 * vague, intrinsically controversial, difficult to prove/verify -- Viajero 12:01, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep unless someone shows a good reason otherwise. Court records are pretty good proof, if you need that level of veracity. If you don't, rename it to "Alleged..." and move on. SchmuckyTheCat 16:04, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I'm allowed to vote however as the creator of the category its purpose was to list suspected or convicted individuals associated, although not directly involved, with Mafia connections. I apologize if this is an inappropriate category, and I obviously should have specifically stated its purpose in a summery, however if this is the case I will certainly delete it. 209.213.71.78 15:19, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. --Kbdank71 15:55, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:Lil Jon & the East Side Boyz

 * I was the one that created the category. It was suppose to mean Category:Lil Jon & the East Side Boyz albums. The proper way to categorize a music act's album collection. Sorry for the trouble. --Anonymous Cow 15:33, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. --Kbdank71 15:55, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:Google bombing

 * This is an empty category that redirects to the article about the topic. No reason I can think of why it shouldn't be deleted. Feco 19:44, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.