Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 September 8



Category:Czech language-films (merge)

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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, no consensus to merge, and definably part of a consistent categorisation scheme. Without prejudice to some future rethink to improve the overall scheme, however. --cjllw ʘ  TALK 03:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I propose to merge Category:Czech-language films into existing Category:Czech films.

Rationale: while I am all for consistent structure among categories it makes little sense to have these two categories. All movies where Czech language dominates have been shot in Czech lands (starting with few silent movies with Czech subtitles during Austria-Hungary) and, as far as I know, there's no exception. The word Czech is commonly used to denote the language, the country and the people and is the most fitting for given topic and conveniently short as well.

Historical notes:
 * Slovak actors usually spoke Czech in Czech movies, with preciously few exceptions.
 * Movies shot in pre-war Czechoslovakia in German language (e.g. Ecstasy (film)) were intended for the Europe-wide German speaking market. (Dtto for many current English movies shot in the Czech Rep. for financial reasons.)

The current structuring is messy: we have Czech, Czech-language and even strange Category:Czechoslovak films with no clear criteria for inclusion and massive overlap among all 3. See categories for Ecstasy (film) - there are 6 language/country categories, few of them absurd. Reusing "Czechoslovak films" for pre-1993 and "Czech films" for later movies would be incorrect and invented here (and for large and popular group of movies shot during the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia it would be absurd).

The suggested merge should help with categorisation of up to 5,500 articles about Czech(-language) movies. Pavel Vozenilek 00:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as part of the overall Category:Films by language structure. I understand the arguments of the nomination but when there's an extensive structure like this it would be odd to omit Czech-language films from that structure. Otto4711 14:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Otto, but there is a case for drastically pruning the films by language categories to cases like Arabic, Spanish and Indian languages, where country and language do not fit neatly. Johnbod 17:14, 9 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:Civic Organizations of North Carolina

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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 to Category:Associations in North Carolina. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 03:06, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * civic organizations of north carolina


 * Nominator's rationale:
 * Upmerge to parent category Category:Associations in North Carolina where this belongs. Hmains 20:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Upmerge to parent category per Hmains. Johnbod 12:28, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Upmerge per above.-Andrew c [talk] 00:45, 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:Youth Organizations of North Carolina

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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 per precedent at Category:Youth organizations based in the United States, though it doesn't make sense that "Organizations" is capitalized. That's another discussion, though. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 03:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Youth Organizations of North Carolina to Category:Youth organizations based in North Carolina
 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Oppose there is established naming scheme at Category:Youth organizations based in the United States. It is "Youth Organizations of state". Because of this established tree, it seems improper to delete, even if the category is small, and even more improper to rename, unless all over states are considered to be renamed for consistency.-Andrew c [talk] 00:47, 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:The New Yorker

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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. --cjllw  ʘ  TALK 03:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * the new yorker


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Delete, I think there used to be other New Yorker-related articles in there but they were merged. Recury 13:09, 11 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:Stars named after scientists

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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. There is a clear consensus in the debate. Sam Blacketer 15:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * stars named after scientists
 * Delete as Categorization by name, see also many precedents. -- Prove It (talk) 13:28, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_November_13
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_June_18
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_5
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_10
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_15
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_16
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_April_18
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_April_19
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_April_29
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_May_16
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_May_20
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_June_17
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_4
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_6
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_August_18
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_August_26


 * Delete, but mostly becaus ethis is explicitly covered by a list. Circeus 02:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Wryspy 05:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep – I need this category for updating certain articles in the Category:Stars with proper names. Said: Rursus ☻ 10:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Unless you're already active in the star naming business and have an alternative registry, keep hands off. Said: Rursus ☻ 10:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * And since I'm already nagging around: you might also refrain from deleting the Category:Stars with proper names, since that is part of my sinister scheme to update the List of traditional star names to remove joke names, like the since long slain star name Bogardus. Rules and policies aside! Said: Rursus ☻ 10:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If you need a personal list for personal reasons, the best thing to do is create a personal list (i.e. User:Rursus/List of stars named after scientists and work from that instead of cluttering up the active encyclopedia with an inappropriate category. Xtifr tälk 08:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 17:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and ample precedent. If someone wants to use this as a maintenance category, they should find a wikiproject that's willing to sponsor a proper maintenance category (which would go on the talk page), or, as I suggested above, simply create a list in userspace.  Xtifr tälk 20:08, 17 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:People from Jordan

 * 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: merge --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * people from jordan
 * Merge into Category:Jordanian people, convention of Category:People by nationality. -- Prove It (talk) 11:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy merge per nom (if speedies are allowed). Rich Uncle Skeleton 11:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge per nom. Johnbod 17:16, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * 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:Polygamous sects leaders

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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. the wub "?!"  11:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Polygamous sects leaders to Category:Mormon fundamentalist leaders
 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Rename per nom. All the individuals in the category fit the bill of Mormon fundamentalist leaders. Just about all of them wikilink Mormon fundamentalism in the lead. Sounds like "polygamous sect" is a term of art, which those not familiar with, would imply non-Mormon cultures as well.-Andrew c [talk] 00:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom, on the assumtion there are no leaders of Mormon fundamentalism favouring monogamy. Johnbod 01:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it's accurate to say that if a leader favored monogamy, the group would not be included as a Mormon fundamentalist group. Rich Uncle Skeleton (talk) 02:05, 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:Latter Day Saint military leaders

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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 20:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * latter day saint military leaders


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Delete as irrelevant intersection by religion. -- Prove It (talk) 11:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * ROFL, no wait, delete. Circeus 00:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete trivial intersection per OCAT. Carlossuarez46 17:05, 10 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:Latter Day Saint sports figures

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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 20:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * latter day saint sports figures


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Delete per nom, and by overwhelming precedent against Sportspeople by religion. -- Prove It (talk) 11:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_25
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_August_24
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_August_24
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_August_24
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_August_25
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_5
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_10
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_10
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_October_24
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_October_24
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_2
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_2
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_11
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_12
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_28
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_February_4
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_April_24


 * Delete per nom, trivial intersection per OCAT & ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 17:06, 10 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:Latter Day Saint entertainers

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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 20:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * latter day saint entertainers


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Delete by overwhelming precedent against Entertainers by religion. -- Prove It (talk) 11:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_December_25
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_February_13
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_February_22
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_March_31
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_May_7
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_August_29
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_10
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_10
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_25
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_October_22
 * Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_27
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_12
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_12
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_29
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_April_4
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_13
 * Delete per nom, trivial intersection per OCAT & ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 17:07, 10 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:Bigamists

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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 as "convicted bigamists". the wub "?!"  11:44, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * bigamists


 * american bigamists


 * british bigamists


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Comment I would like to see the whole of Category:Criminals and its sub-cats restricted to persons who were either convicted of crimes or who have made undisputed confessions, but unfortunately that view did not prevail in previous CfDs (last year, I think, though I don't have the links). In the previous CfD to which you linked, I argued that Category:Bigamists should be restricted to those convicted of bigamy, and made a sub-category of Category:Criminals ... but looking at it again now, I don't think it makes sense to apply this test for one crime but not for others. So I'm afraid that unless the parent category is restricted to convicted criminals, we can't logically restrict this one to convicted bigamists ... and by the same token, there is no purpose in removing Category:Bigamists from Category:Criminals, because Category:Criminals lacks any clear definition. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * But this doesn't explain then why the category Category:Polygamists was worthy of deletion if we can just apply this one in the exact same manner .... That's the source of my confusion with the category. Rich Uncle Skeleton (talk) 07:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment: perhaps it should be renamed to "Convinced bigamists" if kept. Pavel Vozenilek 01:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * rename to "convicted bigamists" to clear out confusion. Circeus 02:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment (Nominator) I think the renaming is a good idea as it avoids deletion and makes the desired definition clear; I feel like a dunce for not just proposing that in the first place. I'm willing to change my proposal to a rename to Category:Convicted bigamists. Rich Uncle Skeleton (talk) 07:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Rename per revised nom and others. BHG's comments are valid, but there is no reason why change cannot come from below. Johnbod 17:18, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, the important reason that I see is of consistency; why should bigamists be restricted to those convicted, but not e.g. Category:Arsonists? A CfD in November 2006 proposed renaming all the subcats of Category:Criminals, but did not reach consenus. I'd be happy to support a revival of that proposal, but I'm not happy with a piecemeal change unless there is a clear reason for treating bigamy as an exception. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename to Convicted Bigamists, per discussion above. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 00:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename to Convicted Bigamists sounds like a good idea. The concept of bigamy is mostly a legal concept anyway, narrower than the more general term polygamy. This makes that clear. CO GDEN  18:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * "Convicted bigamist" is a brilliant solution, which will hopefully end the casual recreation of the polygamy categories. Thanks for the suggestion, Pavel Vozenilek. Rename. Cool Hand Luke 05:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I am looking for a category to put Hezekiah Bradley Smith and Frankie Lymon as bigamists. Hezekiah wasn't prosecuted, and Frankie Lymon wasn't discovered, until he died, and three woman claimed marriage to him with two producing documents. The "legal" definition of bigamy is satisfied without a conviction. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment : if these two belong in a bigamy-related category, then there are dozens of Mormon polygamists from the nineteenth century who have articles that also need a category. The old discussion over Categoryt:Polygamists suggested that we didn't want to go there. Rich Uncle Skeleton (talk) 21:41, 17 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:Olympic gymnasts of Beglium

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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, CSD C1 empty and misspelled. -- Prove It (talk) 13:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * olympic gymnasts of beglium


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Speedy delete per nom. Rich Uncle Skeleton 09:36, 8 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:Spider-Man music

 * The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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 20:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * spider-man music


 * Nominator's rationale:


 * Delete Overcategorization; perfect example of information that should be in a list/article as opposed to a category. Rich Uncle Skeleton 10:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. An alternate course would be to remove songs, but this leaves 4 articles in the category. Circeus 02:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete overcat. Wryspy 07:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete OCAT per nom. Carlossuarez46 17:07, 10 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.