Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 September 17



Category:Animal video games

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 16:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * animal video games


 * Nominator's rationale:
 * Um this category appears to be a lot less broad than Category:Video games, do you perhaps mean that the criteria for inclusion are too subjective? Kappa 20:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Rename to Category:Animal-related video games for clarity. LeSnail 21:47, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. To clarify: many video games feature animals, so it's too broad. People are a form of animal as well, so just about any game could be put in this category. RobJ1981 22:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Let's have some common sense when arguing. I doubt anybody would be as stupid as to actually use that argument to categorise The Sims there (as opposed to The Sims 2: Pets and The Sims Pet Stories). Circeus 02:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename to Category:Animal-themed simulation games. Poor choice of name. Circeus 02:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete not defining, those suggesting Animal-themed or Animal-related, how much themed or related must it be to be included and what RSes will tell us it's at least that much? It cannot be maintained as suggested, so it should just be deleted. Carlossuarez46 17:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Andrew c [talk] 23:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as excessively broad and subjective. All of the current contents ought to be in Category:Simulation video games if they aren't already, and Category:Animal simulation video games would be too specific a subcategory. -Sean Curtin 04:14, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: There is Category:Biological simulation video games. --AVRS 06:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Media coverage

 * 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: speedy delete per WP:CSD G7. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:47, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * media coverage


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * 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:Ohio State University fraternities and sororities

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete, articles already merged into correct categories. Kbdank71 16:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * ohio state university fraternities and sororities


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Delete per the other fraternity categories. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Category:Fraternities and sororities, many are on dozens of campuses. -- Prove It (talk) 22:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Category:Fraternities and sororities per Prove It (changing my !vote). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)
 * All articles have now been categorized into either Category:Fraternities and sororities or Category:United States student societies where appropriate. (Good call ProveIt.) This category can now be deleted.&mdash;ScouterSig 18:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Afghan politicians

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was keep. – Black Falcon (Talk) 16:21, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Afghan politicians to Category:Politicians in Afghanistan
 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Keep - Category:Politicians by country is well settled on the "Fooian politicians" format as is Category:Afghan people by occupation. Otto4711 21:11, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Otto4711. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:20, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per BHG & Otto. We mean Afghan as nationality only, not to imply anything about ethnicity. -- Prove It (talk) 03:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - As noted, this name is a settled matter -- in fact, it was affirmed in a recent CFD, in which User:Behnam was a dissenting participant. As for the suggested confusion, that's a non-issue, because, for example, Zalmay Khalilzad is not an "Afghan politician", he's an "Afghan-American politician". Cgingold 13:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, as per standard scheme. --Soman 16:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Institutes of Management Technology

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 16:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * institutes of management technology


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Poland under-21 international footballers

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 16:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * poland under-21 international footballers


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Marvin, the Paranoid Android songs

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. After Midnight 0001 20:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * marvin, the paranoid android songs


 * Nominator's rationale:
 * Agree with nom rationale. Delete--SarekOfVulcan 16:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. I came to propose them and found it had already been done.  SilkTork  * SilkyTalk 21:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Australian albums by artist

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was merge into Category:Australian albums and Category:Albums by artist. Kbdank71 15:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * australian albums by artist


 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_August_8
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_February_20
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_June_8
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_June_30
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_6
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_9
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_9
 * Merge into Category:Albums by artist, which is designed to function as a directory. Creating subcats for it defeats the entire point of its existence.  You shouldn't need to know the nationality or genre of Foo in order to find Foo albums. -- Prove It (talk) 14:31, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * ProveIt, there is a wealth of difference between genre and nationality. Merge into, as is surely standard practice for albums by artist nationality, given the other subcats of . Grutness...wha?  23:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I hadn't noticed that the ' category had been entirely depopulated. Of course you're right, they should be restored. All of these categories should belong to both ' and .  -- Prove It (talk) 03:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Open source software

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was merge. Kbdank71 15:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Suggest merging Category:Open source software to Category:Free software
 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Conditional merge
 * Merge, if it's certain that non-free things like unrar (which prohibits the use of the source to recreate the compression algorithm) do NOT get into Category:Free software.
 * Otherwise make Category:Open source include Category:Free software, and not vice-versa, and move articles to where they belong. --AVRS 14:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * It is certain that this merge would not cause unrar to get into Category:Free software. Unrar is not free software and cannot be called free software (and it cannot be called "open-source software").  Unrar can only be called "viewable source" or "shared source", neither of which is part of the category to be merged or the merge target. --Gronky 14:38, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge. I agree with gronky on unrar. By many definitions of OS (including the one in the category description), it doesn't belong in the current cat anyway.  --Karnesky 14:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep -- Open Source software is not necessarily free (see Microsoft's Shared Source program), and free software is not necessarily open source.--SarekOfVulcan 16:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * ...but shared source is not open source, so it would never be in Category:Free software or in Category:Open source software. The only link between "shared source" and free software (or "open-source software") is two licences which FSFE say are free software licences, and which have now been submitted to OSI for approval, and under which Microsoft have released nothing worthy of a Wikipedia article. --Gronky 19:20, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge. --Hamitr 22:31, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge: the "open source definition" was originally called the "Debian free software guidelines". The two terms are effectively synonyms with slightly different emphasis.  Suggest making Cat:OSS into a cat redirect though, or it's likely to get recreated.  Xtifr tälk 06:07, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep if I'm right -- It seems to me that free software is a subset of open source. Maybe I'm thinking about source-available? Free is open but open is not necessarily free; OSI approved does not means FSF approved. So if I'm right, then Category:Free software should be a sub-category of Category:Open source software. Someone could correct me with a reference. Open-source software is confusing... -- Kl4m  Talk Contrib 06:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Neither is a subset of the other. The alternative terms for free software article has info and references for this.  OSI and FSF have virtually identical definitions.  They have disagreed with each other three times about licences.  One time, FSF approved a licence that OSI rejected (an old Netscape licence), and two times it happened the other way around (an old Apple licence and an old RealNetworks licence).  Of these three licences, none are used for any projects that are active anyway.


 * Like you mention, if "open-source software" meant "source available", then free software would be a subset, but that is not the case. --Gronky 10:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Make that a merge then. -- Kl4m  Talk Contrib 23:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Taiwanese religious figures

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. Kbdank71 15:51, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Taiwanese religious figures to Category:Taiwanese religious leaders
 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Rename per nom, to match the conventions of Category:Religious leaders by nationality -- Prove It (talk) 13:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom & ProveIt Johnbod 20:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Forteana

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was no consensus. Kbdank71 15:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Propose merge Category:Forteana and Category:Anomalous phenomena using the name Category:Anomalous phenomena. Did Fort have to write about a topic to make it in the category? I had to look him up just to find out who he was.
 * Nominator's rationale:Shouldn't the category be Category:Anomalous phenomena which is more encompassing? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 05:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep as is, they are two different things.--Buridan 16:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment are there any sources defining Forteana, which redirects to Charles Fort, as a topic distinct from Anomalous phenomena?  Tewfik Talk 06:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --cjllw  ʘ  TALK 09:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as redundant and ambiguous. Afterwards, Category:Charles Fort ought to be created, which would contain articles and categories directly related to Fort, such as the Fortean Times. Reworking the category like so without changing the name would only serve as an open invitation to return to the current state of redundancy. -Sean Curtin 04:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into, redundant. Fort did not originate these topics, and the fact that he wrote about them is not a defining characteristic. His article would be the place to describe or list the topics he wrote about. As to whether or not we need a category to contain things specific to Charles Fort, am not sure there's enough to justify, so  could then just as easily be deleted. --cjllw  ʘ  TALK 03:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:That's It Production artists
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. – Black Falcon (Talk) 16:27, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * that's it production artists


 * Nominator's rationale:
 * Delete per nom.--SarekOfVulcan 16:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. There's nothing there but empty vanity.  SilkTork  * SilkyTalk 21:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Independant Record Label
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. – Black Falcon (Talk) 16:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * independant record label


 * Nominator's rationale:
 * Delete empty cat per nom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SarekOfVulcan (talk • contribs) 16:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Note: The correct cat is at Category:Independent record labels. Lugnuts 17:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, delete as a mistake.  SilkTork  * SilkyTalk 21:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Home security
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete, empty. Kbdank71 15:47, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * home security


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Comment. I think the intention might have been to group together Property security. There is no cat for that. Into Property security could go burglar alarms, car alarms, etc. Possibly rename this cat Category:Property security?  SilkTork  * SilkyTalk 22:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete That's not a bad idea if someone is prepared to populate it; there are plenty of articles in the Security category, which is rather large. But that can be started from scratch any time. Johnbod 00:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

"Motor racing" categories
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename all. After Midnight 0001 03:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Motor racing templates to Category:Motorsport templates
 * Propose renaming Category:Motor racing infoboxes to Category:Motorsport infoboxes
 * Propose renaming Category:Motor racing navigational boxes to Category:Motorsport navigational boxes
 * Propose renaming Category:Motor racing venues to Category:Motorsport venues
 * Propose renaming Category:Motor racing venues by country to Category:Motorsport venues by country
 * Propose renaming Category:Motor racing venues in Australia .. Category:Motor racing venues in Venezuela to Category:Motorsport venues in Australia .. Category:Motorsport venues in Venezuela
 * Propose renaming Category:Motor racing venues by series to Category:Motorsport venues by series
 * Propose renaming Category:Motor racing by year to Category:Motorsport by year
 * Propose renaming Category:1950 in motor racing .. Category:2007 in motor racing to Category:1950 in motorsport .. Category:2007 in motorsport
 * Nominator's rationale: Replace the term "motor racing" with "motorsport", which is more commonly used within Wikipedia, e.g. Motorsport venue, Motorsport formula, Category:Motorsport in Australia, Alfa Romeo in motorsport, etc. DH85868993 02:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Support per naming used at WikiProject Motorsport. "Motorsport" is the term that is most agreeable throughout the world. Royal broil  04:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support for the same reason as Royalbroil above. It would also allow non-racing forms of motorsport (rallying, speed events, trials etc) to sit more happily within such categories. Loganberry (Talk) 12:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:MOTOR ref above.--SarekOfVulcan 16:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - Davnel03 18:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename all per nom and Loganberry. Note that there are motor sports that aren't even close to being racing, like Freestyle Motocross.  Xtifr tälk 06:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support- sure, why not? Fclass 14:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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:Regions of the Middle East
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 15:46, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * regions of the middle east


 * Nominator's rationale:

Keep Palestinian territories is not a Middle Eastern county. I think the category needs improvement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RS1900 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Possibly so, but Bahrein is not a region either. Delete Johnbod 03:00, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, Bahrein is not a region. Some change should be made. RS1900 05:04, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have made some changes. The category can be improved. RS1900 05:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note:All members except Palestinian territories now removed, I presume by RS1900. Johnbod 12:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well there isn't much point in categorizing one article with nothing else, so I still think it should be deleted. Picaroon (t) 19:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Absolutely - the Palestinean territories aren't really a region either. Johnbod 20:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge/rename to . Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  23:54, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete regions are ill-defined allowing for a huge mix that bear little in common. Carlossuarez46 04:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.