Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 December 25



Category:Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios series and characters

 * 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: Split. Timrollpickering (talk) 02:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Propose splitting:
 * Category:Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios to Category:Hanna-Barbera and Category:Cartoon Network Studios (didn't notice this category when I first created the nomination).
 * Category:Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios series and characters to Category:Hanna-Barbera series and characters and Category:Cartoon Network Studios series and characters.
 * Category:Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios superheroes to Category:Hanna-Barbera superheroes and Category:Cartoon Network Studios superheroes.
 * Category:Video games based on Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios series and characters to Category:Video games based on Hanna-Barbera series and characters and Category:Video games based on Cartoon Network Studios series and characters.
 * Category:Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios films to Category:Hanna-Barbera films and Category:Cartoon Network Studios films.
 * Nominator's rationale: Split. Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios are seperate companies. While Cartoon Network Studios was created as a division of Hanna-Barbera, it is now its own company with its own distinct library of series and characters. Hanna-Barbera was absorbed into Warner Bros. Animation, and WB Animation is the company that has made new programs based on former H-B properties such as Scooby-Doo. Since Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios are distinct companies with their own libraries of programs, I feel that it would be appropriate for these two companies and their programs to be categorized seperately. There are some programs that were co-produced by Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios; these programs' articles can just be categorized into the appropriate proposed seperate categories for both Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios. &mdash;{&#124;Retro00064&#124;&#9742;talk&#124;&#x270D;contribs&#124;} 23:03, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support. Per nominator. Inox   talk  02:39, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: I have found and added another category to the nomination: Category:Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios films. &mdash;{&#124;Retro00064&#124;&#9742;talk&#124;&#x270D;contribs&#124;} 02:52, 26 December 2011 (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:Deep Blue Something

 * 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: Delete. The Bushranger One ping only 14:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * deep blue something


 * Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category for a band who aren't really notable enough to need one; once the albums were properly recategorized in an "Artist albums" category like they were supposed to be in the first place, all that's now left is the band's main article and the one single they ever had that's notable enough to warrant its own article instead of just being named in the track listing of its parent album. Per standard Wikipedia WP:OCAT policy about this kind of thing, the band's article itself already serves as more than enough of a navigational hub for the articles in question. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 19:47, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete If a members subcat and a discography page existed, then I would say keep. As is, the two subcats. can be navigated with cat see also. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:14, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:34, 27 December 2011 (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:Category:Habonim Dror kenim

 * 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: Upmerge to Category:Zionist youth movements. The Bushranger One ping only 14:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * category


 * Nominator's rationale: Upmerge Presently contains only Habonim Dror Australia. Could also contain Habonim Dror, but both are already in the parent category Category:Zionist youth movements, and that seems adequate to me. Not to mention that the article itself could use some improvement. Debresser (talk) 16:45, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Upmerge per nom. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 20:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Upmerge this is the only sub-cat of its parent category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:41, 31 December 2011 (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:Orcus

 * 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: Delete. 90482 Orcus has been added to Category:Binary TNOs. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:43, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * orcus


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete. This category is redundant. It contains only two articles and has a zero potential for expansion. It does not aid navigation because the articles already link to each other. It is not part of any categorization scheme as all others TNOs (except dwarf planets) lack their own categories. Ruslik_ Zero 12:46, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * According to Brown and Ortiz, who discovered Orcus and its moon, it is a dwarf planet, and these do have their own categories. It also has potential for expansion: other moons may be discovered, for example. Not to say this makes the category worthwhile: there are only two interlinked articles at present. — kwami (talk) 02:43, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * What you are saying is a lie. Neither Brwon nor Ortiz ever said that Orcus is a dwarf planet. Ruslik_ Zero 18:02, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ahem - Brown has. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:44, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * "Near certainly" does not equal "is". Ruslik_ Zero  18:24, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Nothing in science really "is". Everything that we think of as being "is" is in actuality just "near certainly". We can't say that E=mc2 "is" true, but we can say it is true with "near certainty". Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:36, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, keeping these two together somehow vs. both being lost in a sea of TNOs unconnectededly makes sense. But I would not oppose an upmerge to Category:Binary TNOs (despite not at all supporting it either). - The Bushranger One ping only
 * Delete—Agree with nominator's rationale. They are already "kept together" by links in the articles themselves, but Bushranger's proposal to up-merge makes sense. Regards, RJH (talk) 03:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I actually do not object, but only Orcus itself should be moved to Category:Binary TNOs, the satellite should not. Ruslik_ Zero 14:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay. Regards, RJH (talk) 00:49, 6 January 2012 (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:Defunct American oil companies

 * 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 rename C2C. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Defunct American oil companies to Category:Defunct oil companies of the United States
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. To be in line with the parent categories Category:Oil companies of the United States and Category:Defunct companies of the United States by industry. Beagel (talk) 11:29, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy rename C2C - The Bushranger One ping only 20:26, 25 December 2011 (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.

Crime victims by nationality

 * 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: Rename. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:03, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming


 * Category:Afghan crime victims to Category:Afghan victims of crime
 * Category:Albanian crime victims to Category:Albanian victims of crime
 * Category:Algerian crime victims to Category:Algerian victims of crime
 * Category:American crime victims to Category:American victims of crime
 * Category:American Samoan crime victims to Category:American Samoan victims of crime
 * Category:Puerto Rican crime victims to Category:Puerto Rican victims of crime
 * Category:Angolan crime victims to Category:Angolan victims of crime
 * Category:Antigua and Barbuda crime victims to Category:Antigua and Barbuda victims of crime
 * Category:Argentine crime victims to Category:Argentine victims of crime
 * Category:Armenian crime victims to Category:Armenian victims of crime
 * Category:Australian crime victims to Category:Australian victims of crime
 * Category:Austrian crime victims to Category:Austrian victims of crime
 * Category:Azerbaijani crime victims to Category:Azerbaijani victims of crime
 * Category:Bahraini crime victims‎ to Category:Bahraini victims‎ of crime
 * Category:Bangladeshi crime victims to Category:Bangladeshi victims of crime
 * Category:Belarusian crime victims to Category:Belarusian victims of crime
 * Category:Belgian crime victims to Category:Belgian victims of crime
 * Category:Beninese crime victims to Category:Beninese victims of crime
 * Category:Bolivian crime victims to Category:Bolivian victims of crime
 * Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina crime victims to Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina victims of crime
 * Category:Brazilian crime victims to Category:Brazilian victims of crime
 * Category:British crime victims to Category:British victims of crime
 * Category:English crime victims to Category:English victims of crime
 * Category:Manx crime victims to Category:Manx victims of crime
 * Category:Scottish crime victims to Category:Scottish victims of crime
 * Category:Welsh crime victims to Category:Welsh victims of crime
 * Category:Bulgarian crime victims to Category:Bulgarian victims of crime
 * Category:Burkinabé crime victims to Category:Burkinabé victims of crime
 * Category:Burmese crime victims to Category:Burmese victims of crime
 * Category:Burundian crime victims to Category:Burundian victims of crime
 * Category:Byzantine crime victims to Category:Byzantine victims of crime
 * Category:Cambodian crime victims to Category:Cambodian victims of crime
 * Category:Cameroonian crime victims to Category:Cameroonian victims of crime
 * Category:Canadian crime victims to Category:Canadian victims of crime
 * Category:Central African crime victims to Category:Central African victims of crime
 * Category:Chadian crime victims to Category:Chadian victims of crime
 * Category:Chilean crime victims to Category:Chilean victims of crime
 * Category:Chinese crime victims to Category:Chinese victims of crime
 * Category:Taiwanese crime victims to Category:Taiwanese victims of crime
 * Category:Hong Kong crime victims to Category:Hong Kong victims of crime
 * Category:Colombian crime victims to Category:Colombian victims of crime
 * Category:Comorian crime victims to Category:Comorian victims of crime
 * Category:Costa Rican crime victims to Category:Costa Rican victims of crime
 * Category:Croatian crime victims to Category:Croatian victims of crime
 * Category:Cuban crime victims to Category:Cuban victims of crime
 * Category:Cypriot crime victims to Category:Cypriot victims of crime
 * Category:Czech crime victims to Category:Czech victims of crime
 * Category:Czechoslovak crime victims to Category:Czechoslovak victims of crime
 * Category:Danish crime victims to Category:Danish victims of crime
 * Category:Democratic Republic of the Congo crime victims to Category:Democratic Republic of the Congo victims of crime
 * Category:Djiboutian crime victims to Category:Djiboutian victims of crime
 * Category:Dominican Republic crime victims to Category:Dominican Republic victims of crime
 * Category:Dutch crime victims to Category:Dutch victims of crime
 * Category:East Timorese crime victims to Category:East Timorese victims of crime
 * Category:Ecuadorian crime victims to Category:Ecuadorian victims of crime
 * Category:Egyptian crime victims to Category:Egyptian victims of crime
 * Category:Ethiopian crime victims to Category:Ethiopian victims of crime
 * Category:Fijian crime victims to Category:Fijian victims of crime
 * Category:Filipino crime victims to Category:Filipino victims of crime
 * Category:Finnish crime victims to Category:Finnish victims of crime
 * Category:French crime victims to Category:French victims of crime
 * Category:Gambian crime victims to Category:Gambian victims of crime
 * Category:German crime victims to Category:German victims of crime
 * Category:Greek crime victims to Category:Greek victims of crime
 * Category:Guatemalan crime victims to Category:Guatemalan victims of crime
 * Category:Guinea-Bissauan crime victims to Category:Guinea-Bissauan victims of crime
 * Category:Guyanese crime victims to Category:Guyanese victims of crime
 * Category:Haitian crime victims to Category:Haitian victims of crime
 * Category:Honduran crime victims to Category:Honduran victims of crime
 * Category:Hungarian crime victims to Category:Hungarian victims of crime
 * Category:Indian crime victims to Category:Indian victims of crime
 * Category:Indonesian crime victims to Category:Indonesian victims of crime
 * Category:Iranian crime victims to Category:Iranian victims of crime
 * Category:Iraqi crime victims to Category:Iraqi victims of crime
 * Category:Irish crime victims to Category:Irish victims of crime
 * Category:Israeli crime victims to Category:Israeli victims of crime
 * Category:Italian crime victims to Category:Italian victims of crime
 * Category:Ivorian crime victims to Category:Ivorian victims of crime
 * Category:Jamaican crime victims to Category:Jamaican victims of crime
 * Category:Japanese crime victims to Category:Japanese victims of crime
 * Category:Jordanian crime victims to Category:Jordanian victims of crime
 * Category:Kazakhstani crime victims to Category:Kazakhstani victims of crime
 * Category:Kenyan crime victims to Category:Kenyan victims of crime
 * Category:Korean crime victims to Category:Korean victims of crime
 * Category:North Korean crime victims to Category:North Korean victims of crime
 * Category:South Korean crime victims to Category:South Korean victims of crime
 * Category:Kuwaiti crime victims to Category:Kuwaiti victims of crime
 * Category:Kyrgyzstani crime victims to Category:Kyrgyzstani victims of crime
 * Category:Laotian crime victims to Category:Laotian victims of crime
 * Category:Latvian crime victims to Category:Latvian victims of crime
 * Category:Lebanese crime victims to Category:Lebanese victims of crime
 * Category:Lesotho crime victims to Category:Lesotho victims of crime
 * Category:Liberian crime victims to Category:Liberian victims of crime
 * Category:Libyan crime victims to Category:Libyan victims of crime
 * Category:Lithuanian crime victims to Category:Lithuanian victims of crime
 * Category:Malagasy crime victims to Category:Malagasy victims of crime
 * Category:Malawian crime victims to Category:Malawian victims of crime
 * Category:Malaysian crime victims to Category:Malaysian victims of crime
 * Category:Maltese crime victims to Category:Maltese victims of crime
 * Category:Mauritanian crime victims to Category:Mauritanian victims of crime
 * Category:Mexican crime victims to Category:Mexican victims of crime
 * Category:Monegasque crime victims to Category:Monegasque victims of crime
 * Category:Mongolian crime victims to Category:Mongolian victims of crime
 * Category:Montenegrin crime victims to Category:Montenegrin victims of crime
 * Category:Moroccan crime victims to Category:Moroccan victims of crime
 * Category:Mozambican crime victims to Category:Mozambican victims of crime
 * Category:Namibian crime victims to Category:Namibian victims of crime
 * Category:Nepalese crime victims to Category:Nepalese victims of crime
 * Category:New Zealand crime victims to Category:New Zealand victims of crime
 * Category:Nicaraguan crime victims to Category:Nicaraguan victims of crime
 * Category:Nigerian crime victims to Category:Nigerian victims of crime
 * Category:Nigerien crime victims to Category:Nigerien victims of crime
 * Category:Norwegian crime victims to Category:Norwegian victims of crime
 * Category:Pakistani crime victims to Category:Pakistani victims of crime
 * Category:Palauan crime victims to Category:Palauan victims of crime
 * Category:Palestinian crime victims to Category:Palestinian victims of crime
 * Category:Panamanian crime victims to Category:Panamanian victims of crime
 * Category:Papua New Guinean crime victims to Category:Papua New Guinean victims of crime
 * Category:Paraguayan crime victims to Category:Paraguayan victims of crime
 * Category:Peruvian crime victims to Category:Peruvian victims of crime
 * Category:Polish crime victims to Category:Polish victims of crime
 * Category:Portuguese crime victims to Category:Portuguese victims of crime
 * Category:Qatari crime victims to Category:Qatari victims of crime
 * Category:Republic of the Congo crime victims to Category:Republic of the Congo victims of crime
 * Category:Romanian crime victims to Category:Romanian victims of crime
 * Category:Russian crime victims to Category:Russian victims of crime
 * Category:Rwandan crime victims to Category:Rwandan victims of crime
 * Category:Saint Kitts and Nevis crime victims to Category:Saint Kitts and Nevis victims of crime
 * Category:Salvadoran crime victims to Category:Salvadoran victims of crime
 * Category:Samoan crime victims to Category:Samoan victims of crime
 * Category:Saudi Arabian crime victims to Category:Saudi Arabian victims of crime
 * Category:Senegalese crime victims to Category:Senegalese victims of crime
 * Category:Serbian crime victims to Category:Serbian victims of crime
 * Category:Kosovar crime victims to Category:Kosovar victims of crime
 * Category:Seychellois crime victims to Category:Seychellois victims of crime
 * Category:Sierra Leonean crime victims to Category:Sierra Leonean victims of crime
 * Category:Singaporean crime victims to Category:Singaporean victims of crime
 * Category:Slovak crime victims to Category:Slovak victims of crime
 * Category:Slovenian crime victims to Category:Slovenian victims of crime
 * Category:Solomon Islands crime victims to Category:Solomon Islands victims of crime
 * Category:Somalian crime victims to Category:Somalian victims of crime
 * Category:South African crime victims to Category:South African victims of crime
 * Category:Spanish crime victims to Category:Spanish victims of crime
 * Category:Sri Lankan crime victims to Category:Sri Lankan victims of crime
 * Category:Sudanese crime victims to Category:Sudanese victims of crime
 * Category:Surinamese crime victims to Category:Surinamese victims of crime
 * Category:Swazi crime victims to Category:Swazi victims of crime
 * Category:Swedish crime victims to Category:Swedish victims of crime
 * Category:Swiss crime victims to Category:Swiss victims of crime
 * Category:Syrian crime victims to Category:Syrian victims of crime
 * Category:Tajikistani crime victims to Category:Tajikistani victims of crime
 * Category:Tanzanian crime victims to Category:Tanzanian victims of crime
 * Category:Thai crime victims to Category:Thai victims of crime
 * Category:Togolese crime victims to Category:Togolese victims of crime
 * Category:Tongan crime victims to Category:Tongan victims of crime
 * Category:Trinidad and Tobago crime victims to Category:Trinidad and Tobago victims of crime
 * Category:Turkish crime victims to Category:Turkish victims of crime
 * Category:Ugandan crime victims to Category:Ugandan victims of crime
 * Category:Ukrainian crime victims to Category:Ukrainian victims of crime
 * Category:Uruguayan crime victims to Category:Uruguayan victims of crime
 * Category:Uzbekistani crime victims to Category:Uzbekistani victims of crime
 * Category:Vanuatuan crime victims to Category:Vanuatuan victims of crime
 * Category:Venezuelan crime victims to Category:Venezuelan victims of crime
 * Category:Vietnamese crime victims to Category:Vietnamese victims of crime
 * Category:Yemeni crime victims to Category:Yemeni victims of crime
 * Category:Zimbabwean crime victims to Category:Zimbabwean victims of crime


 * Rationalle: The current names of these categories is ambiguous - it's not clear from the names of the categories if the "Fooian" refers to the crime or the victims. This ambiguity can be seen, for example, from the fact that Category:British crime victims is a subcategory of Category:Crime in the United Kingdom (Grutness's example), and the fact that among the subcategories of Category:Iraqi crime victims is the category People murdered in Iraq‎. Note that a previous nomination for these categories was made in July 2011, which was closed as "No consensus". עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:52, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Rename – per the sagacious remarks of Occuli in the previous discussion. Occuli (talk) 17:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No objection to renaming in this manner. Thank you for informing me it was back up for discussion. I still believe there's no real cause for confusion in the current names. While we should endeavour to be clear, we should not push that concern to the point of possible absurdity; "Fooan crime victims" quite obviously refers to the nationality of the victims rather than the "nationality of the crime". Having said that, I see no harm in this particular proposed renaming, either. I also agree that "British crime victims" should not be a subcategory of "Crime in the United Kingdom". Same for every other nationality, of course. ∼∼∼∼ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aridd (talk • contribs)
 * Rename to Category:Crime victims in Foo. I think we are focusing on where the crime happened, not what the nationality of the victim was.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:29, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * A common parent is Category:Crime victims by nationality. There is also Category:Crime victims by country. Occuli (talk) 03:00, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, Occuli is right on this one. the category names you proposed belong in the tree, which focuses on the location of the crime. The categories in this nomination are about the nationality of the victim. If a British person is the victim of a crime while visiting the United States, (s)he belongs in the UK nationality category and the US country category (were such a category to exist). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom and make sure these are limited to the nationality tree. These should not be subcategories of the tree, as many of them are currently. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:10, 29 December 2011 (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:2011s Malayalam-language films

 * 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 deleted as error. The Bushranger One ping only 20:28, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 2011s malayalam-language films


 * Nominator's rationale: 2010s category exist, which covers from 2010 to 2019.

This category seems to be created by ignorance. Anish Viswa  10:15, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete – created in error and now empty. Occuli (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2011 (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.

LGBT foos by country

 * 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 rename C2C. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming:


 * Category:LGBT comedians by country to Category:LGBT comedians by nationality
 * Category:LGBT journalists by country to Category:LGBT journalists by nationality
 * Category:LGBT politicians by country to Category:LGBT politicians by nationality
 * Category:LGBT radio personalities by country to Category:LGBT radio personalities by nationality
 * Category:LGBT sportspeople by country to Category:LGBT sportspeople by nationality
 * Category:LGBT television personalities by country to Category:LGBT television personalities by nationality
 * Category:LGBT writers by country to Category:LGBT writers by nationality
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename all - these categories shou;d match the standard categrization scheme for country/nationaliuty categories. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:43, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy rename C2C - The Bushranger One ping only 06:48, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I'm still not entirely convinced that some of these were necessary in the first place — the LGBT project has always tried to restrict "by country/nationality" subcats to those where the intersection of occupation and nationality is itself an encyclopedically significant distinction in its own right, rather than doing it for every "LGBT occupation" category (meaning, frex, that politicians and writers should be subcatted that way, but comedians and journalists should not.) However, as they were duly requested and created by a category-creation project, I'm not prepared to be the assassin on this one. Rename per nom. Bearcat (talk) 20:02, 25 December 2011 (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.

"Old" School

 * 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: Rename all.  The discussions appeared to cover pretty much the same grounds, so I closed them together. In closing, I looked over the other previous discussions noted/linked in the discussions below. One thing that the opponents of the rename did not seem to address is that the purpose of the category system is to facilitate navigation for our readers, and in addition, category names should be clear, with as little ambiguity as possible. No one seems to dispute the accuracy of the renames, merely that those opposing have a personal preference for the local colloquial name. (Note that there are other sub-sub-subcats of Category:People_educated_by_school_in_the_United_Kingdom containing more similarly named cats.) - jc37 18:07, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Old Guildfordians

 * Rename Category:Old Guildfordians to Category:People educated at Royal Grammar School, Guildford
 * Nominator's Rationale Old Guildford is a city in Australia. It would be logical to think Old Guildfordians are its residents.  The current term is clearly too ambiguous, and the new term would put it in line with a large number of other categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:49, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support, same as the others. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong support This should be about the place in Australia, Old Guildford; WP:JARGON about some school which isn't called "Old Guildford" or even "Guildford" is very poor usage. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 09:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support – there is also potential confusion with the output of Guildford County School and Guildford High School. Occuli (talk) 19:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support to use a term that is clear to all, rather than one that is WP:JARGON. Timrollpickering (talk) 01:42, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong support for the reasons given by others and to bring this in line with changes that were made earlier to categories of this kind. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  08:21, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support, but Why isn't the suggested name something like Category:Royal Grammar School, Guilford alumni? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koavf (talk • contribs)
 * Because the term "alumni" is not commonly used in the UK for secondary schools. The use "People educated at.." is now widely used for UK categories of this kind as a compromise after a long set of discussions in several places. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  08:47, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose; Old Guildfordians is the correct nomenclature and has survived all our previous cfds. It is wearying to see such cfds reopened time and time again. Moonraker (talk) 07:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In addition, in British universities where "alumni" is used, it is always in the form "alumni of foo" which makes it so that "people educated at foo" is a very parraelel form for secondary schools.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:32, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment in fact, "alumni of foo" is principally the creation of Wikipedia. This is all self-fulfilling. Moonraker (talk) 07:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * They keep getting re-raised because they're clealy unsatisfactory and not the correct nomenclature. "Old Fooians" is utterly uncomprehensible WP:JARGON to anyone outside of the Old Fooians themselves, and ambiguous to boot - why are old people from Guildford categorised seperatly from the younger ones? - The Bushranger One ping only 08:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Let me also comment on all of these proposals, but with a different take. For a long while I supported naming these categories as "Old Fooians", if that is what they call themselves, for example, if there is an "Old Fooians Association". I came to realise that there was too such opposition to that view. I also realised that there was opposition to the use of "pupil" and "alummni". I looked for something that was not tied to what people called themselves and that was neutral. I think I was the first to suggest "People educated at ..". This suggestion has taken off, at least for countries where the term "alumni" is opposed by some people. It is neutral and it seems the best compromise. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  09:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support. No way to know what this category is about without knowing it in advance.--Mike Selinker (talk) 23:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. We have been here before and made our decision. Please respect that and take it on the chin rather than opening up the debate again. Ericoides (talk) 09:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Consensus can change. And telling someone to "take it on the chin" doesn't seem very WP:CIVIL. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Apologies if it came across that way to you. But you must admit this is getting very boring; I tend to concur with Motmit's analysis here. Ericoides (talk) 09:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Past discussions over the last (at least) four years have either removed the form or ended in no consensus; what "decision" made are you referring to? Timrollpickering (talk) 11:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The decision that there is no decision. I do not see what has/could have changed in the intervening months. Perhaps someone might enlighten me? If we are going on consensus here, I guess all those who opposed last time need to be informed of this discussion to stop the "homogenising" bandwagon? Ericoides (talk) 12:21, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In the intervening months a succession of discussions have tidied up the non-Old Fooians forms so that the UK ones use the consistent format of "People educated at [Current School Name]" (and other countries have been tidied to individual formats) and several of the "Old Fooians" and, especially, the even more obscure "Fooians" forms have been renamed to this form. Other discussions have stalled with accusations of canvassing which does nothing to settle the matter. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:01, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You are following this more closely than I am. Ericoides (talk) 14:49, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Rename. This is a good compromise that has been widely adopted elsewhere, so I don't see any reason not to continue with this one. The current form is quite hard to understand for those unfamiliar with the topic; the proposed form is perfectly clear to all. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:33, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose Contrary to what the nom says, Old Guildford is not a city but a suburb of Syndney inside another "city", with a population of 2,000. Any ambiguity should be dealt with by a note. Johnbod (talk) 13:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ambiguious or not, the wrong term is still the wrong term. Why use WP:JARGON when a clear and correct term is available? - The Bushranger One ping only 19:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment OK, so I should have said "Old Guildford" is a populated place in Asutralia. This comes from Australia using city in a different way than it is used in the United States.  The point is that Old Guildford is an actual something, and it is not the something that this category is pointing to.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Oldham Hulmeians

 * Proposed renaming' Category:Oldham Hulmeians to Category:People educated at Hulme Grammar School
 * Nominator's rationale We do not even have the category Category:Liverpudlians (it is a soft redirect) and that is well known. This specific identification of people who attended this school is obscure, and there is nothing about the category name that even makes it evident on seeing the category name that it is related to education.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:06, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support for clarity and comprehension. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:13, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support – this is particularly obscure: we have on the one hand a name which would baffle almost everyone, and on the other hand a name comprehensible to anyone with a basic command of English. Occuli (talk) 15:00, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support to use a term that is clear to all, rather than one that is WP:JARGON. Timrollpickering (talk) 01:42, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong support for the reasons given by others and to bring this in line with changes that were made earlier to categories of this kind. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  08:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose; what we have is the correct nomenclature, per all our previous discussions. It is wearying to see such cfds reopened time and time again. Moonraker (talk) 07:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * They keep getting re-raised because they're clealy unsatisfactory and not the correct nomenclature. "Old Fooians" and similar structures are utterly uncomprehensible WP:JARGON to anyone outside of the Old Fooians themselves. "Oldham Hulmeians" sounds like some sort of disease you don't want to be told you have. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Let me also comment on all of these proposals, but with a different take. For a long while I supported naming these categories as "Old Fooians", if that is what they call themselves, for example, if there is an "Old Fooians Association". I came to realise that there was too such opposition to that view. I also realised that there was opposition to the use of "pupil" and "alummni". I looked for something that was not tied to what people called themselves and that was neutral. I think I was the first to suggest "People educated at ..". This suggestion has taken off, at least for countries where the term "alumni" is opposed by some people. It is neutral and it seems the best compromise. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  09:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment what other discussion has supported a similar term? Cite just one example that has supported a similar phrase.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:01, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 7 has three such discussions. If you also look at the parent categories you will see that most are now called "Category:People educated by school in .." and you will see that many of the categories for other schools use this approach. There are exceptions and they are mainly for the "Old Fooians" categories. Some have been proposed for renaming and the CfD was closed as "No consensus", but there has been a steady trend to use "People educated at ..". -- Bduke   (Discussion)  02:41, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 17 and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 August 17. A discussion of several at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 19 had some closed as no consensus and one changed to "People educated at ..".-- Bduke   (Discussion)  03:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually though those discussions in general involve cases where the supposed identifier "Old" proceeds the name, this is "Oldham Humerians" who would be the same as "London Citizens" as people educated at the City Academy of London or a similarly named institution. There is nothing that says to even the most initiated and jargon familiar that this is a category for those educated at Hulme Grammar School.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Support. No way to know what this category is about without knowing it in advance.--Mike Selinker (talk) 23:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. We have been here before and made our decision. Please respect that and take it on the chin rather than opening up the debate again. Ericoides (talk) 09:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Consensus can change. And telling someone to "take it on the chin" doesn't seem very WP:CIVIL. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Apologies if it came across that way to you. But you must admit this is getting very boring; I tend to concur with Motmit's analysis here. Ericoides (talk) 09:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Past discussions over the last (at least) four years have either removed the form or ended in no consensus; what "decision" made are you referring to? Timrollpickering (talk) 11:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The decision that there is no decision (this posting the same answer in each cfd is equally daft). Ericoides (talk) 12:21, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * (...says a person who has copied & pasted their own comments several times, without even noting the differences between the individual categories.) And the previous "no decision" you refer to was focused on the "Old Fooians" forms but as listed below the other "Fooians" forms were struck out in CFDs back in July. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:03, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It is quite as you say. Ericoides (talk) 14:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * We have not "been here before", no previous discussion covered this unique form. Even the most jargon familiar will not be able to recognize this form.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Rename. This is a good compromise that has been widely adopted elsewhere, so I don't see any reason not to continue with this one. The current form is quite hard to understand for those unfamiliar with the topic; the proposed form is perfectly clear to all. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:33, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Old Collyerians

 * Proposed renaming Category:Old Collyerians to Category:People educated at The College of Richard Collyer
 * Nominators rationale This is based on the general rule that the name of the "people educated at X" category reflects the current name of the institution. When an institution name changes, we change the category name.  So here the institution name has changed so we ought to change the category name.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:15, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support for clarity and avoiding jargon. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:19, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support this is not about old people from Collyer, Kansas. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 09:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support – clarity is always to be welcomed. Occuli (talk) 14:55, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support to use a term that is clear to all, rather than one that is WP:JARGON. Timrollpickering (talk) 01:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong support for the reasons given by others and to bring this in line with changes that were made earlier to categories of this kind. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  08:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose; what we have is the correct nomenclature, per all our previous discussions. It is wearying to see such cfds reopened time and time again. Moonraker (talk) 07:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * They keep getting re-raised because they're clealy unsatisfactory and not the correct nomenclature. "Old Fooians" is utterly uncomprehensible WP:JARGON to anyone outside of the Old Fooians themselves, and ambiguous to boot - what's an Old Collyerian? Somebody who worked on a collier?. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Let me also comment on all of these proposals, but with a different take. For a long while I supported naming these categories as "Old Fooians", if that is what they call themselves, for example, if there is an "Old Fooians Association". I came to realise that there was too such opposition to that view. I also realised that there was opposition to the use of "pupil" and "alummni". I looked for something that was not tied to what people called themselves and that was neutral. I think I was the first to suggest "People educated at ..". This suggestion has taken off, at least for countries where the term "alumni" is opposed by some people. It is neutral and it seems the best compromise. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  09:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support. No way to know what this category is about without knowing it in advance.--Mike Selinker (talk) 23:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. We have been here before and made our decision. Please respect that and take it on the chin rather than opening up the debate again. Ericoides (talk) 09:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Consensus can change. And telling someone to "take it on the chin" doesn't seem very WP:CIVIL. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Apologies if it came across that way to you. But you must admit this is getting very boring; I tend to concur with Motmit's analysis here. Ericoides (talk) 09:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Past discussions over the last (at least) four years have either removed the form or ended in no consensus; what "decision" made are you referring to? Timrollpickering (talk) 11:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The decision that there is no decision (this posting the same answer in each cfd is equally daft). Ericoides (talk) 12:21, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Rename. This is a good compromise that has been widely adopted elsewhere, so I don't see any reason not to continue with this one. The current form is quite hard to understand for those unfamiliar with the topic; the proposed form is perfectly clear to all. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Old Lancing

 * Proposed renaming Category:Old Lancing to Category:People educated at Lancing College.
 * Nominators rationale the current name brings to mind a surgical procedure that was done before 1900 (thus making it old). This is not a form that suggests it is linked to the school, and it is not the form that people who were educated at the school use in refering to their connection to this fact.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:54, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sees the "Old Fooians" thing resurfacing, dives for a foxhole. Oh, and Support. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:08, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong support Ambiguous, WP:JARGON, it is not about the older parts of Lancing, West Sussex, as one would expect (like "Old town name" usually means) 76.65.128.132 (talk) 03:48, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support – clarity is always to be welcomed. Occuli (talk) 14:54, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * As second choice I would support a rename to Category:Old Lancings. The article on Lancing College says they are called OLs (with an s). Occuli (talk) 20:13, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose -- If kept, Rename to Category:Old Lancings to match. If the nom is accepted, that plural form should be retained as a category redirect.  Personally I see no harm in this.  I am an "Old Salopian".  We have an "Old Etonians" category.  However, I do accpet that the "Old Fooian" format should be restricted to the following cases:
 * 1) The most famous Public Schools
 * 2) Cases where the name of the school is obvious from the name
 * Lancing meets both these, and merely needs to be pluralised. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:49, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * "Old Etonians" needs to be renamed, too, as very few people are likely to know what an Eton is, or why being one of advanced age is notable. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:31, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support to use a term that is clear to all, rather than one that is WP:JARGON. "Old Etonians" is the extreme outlier for recognisability and not a remotely typical example. Timrollpickering (talk) 01:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong support for the reasons given by others and to bring this in line with changes that were made earlier to categories of this kind. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  08:23, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose; what we have is the correct nomenclature, per all our previous discussions. It is wearying to see such cfds reopened time and time again. No objection to -s being added, supposing that is correct. Moonraker (talk) 07:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * They keep getting re-raised because they're clealy unsatisfactory and not the correct nomenclature. "Old Fooians" is utterly uncomprehensible WP:JARGON to anyone outside of the Old Fooians themselves, and is ambiguous to boot - is an "Old Lancing" a medical procedure of some sort?. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Let me also comment on all of these proposals, but with a different take. For a long while I supported naming these categories as "Old Fooians", if that is what they call themselves, for example, if there is an "Old Fooians Association". I came to realise that there was too such opposition to that view. I also realised that there was opposition to the use of "pupil" and "alummni". I looked for something that was not tied to what people called themselves and that was neutral. I think I was the first to suggest "People educated at ..". This suggestion has taken off, at least for countries where the term "alumni" is opposed by some people. It is neutral and it seems the best compromise. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  09:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment The category page says the correct term in "Lancing Old Boys". So by the category page we are not using the correct term.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:00, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. No way to know what this category is about without knowing it in advance.--Mike Selinker (talk) 23:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. We have been here before and made our decision. Please respect that and take it on the chin rather than opening up the debate again. Ericoides (talk) 09:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Consensus can change. And telling someone to "take it on the chin" doesn't seem very WP:CIVIL. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Apologies if it came across that way to you. But you must admit this is getting very boring; I tend to concur with Motmit's analysis here. Ericoides (talk) 09:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Past discussions over the last (at least) four years have either removed the form or ended in no consensus; what "decision" made are you referring to? Timrollpickering (talk) 11:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The decision that there is no decision (this posting the same answer in each cfd is equally daft). Ericoides (talk) 12:21, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Rename. This is a good compromise that has been widely adopted elsewhere, so I don't see any reason not to continue with this one. The current form is quite hard to understand for those unfamiliar with the topic; the proposed form is perfectly clear to all. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:32, 5 January 2012 (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:Bon's Boys

 * 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: Rename. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:08, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Proposed renaming Category:Bon's Boys to Category:People educated at St Bonaventure's Catholic Comprehensive School
 * Nominator's rationale This is an extreme colloquialism that does not have anything about it that would make it obvious what exactly this is to someone not familiar with the specialized subject. It does not follow any pattern that would be generally percieved and is a very unclear category title.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:35, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy rename C2C - The Bushranger One ping only 02:42, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support not about boys pertaining to someone by the name of Bon (surname). 76.65.128.132 (talk) 03:50, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment the article that appears under Bon is about a form of Tibetan Budhism. The disambiguation page on Bon not only makes no references to this phrase or this school, but never suggests that there is a connection between Bonaventure and Bon, and does not even list Bonaventure under see also.  It does tell us that the Bankon language of Cameroon is also called Bon.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Napoleon had a noted conversation with one of Louis André Bon's sons. If this Bon had another son they could easily have been called "Bon's Boys" and this is an easy point of confusion.  In fact this use of the possesive form is fairly rare in category names.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:09, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support – especially as the present school "has a co-educational sixth form". Occuli (talk) 14:52, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support to use a term that is clear to all, rather than one that is WP:JARGON. Timrollpickering (talk) 01:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong support for the reasons given by others and to bring this in line with changes that were made earlier to categories of this kind. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  08:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: clarification of the status of the term is needed. Moonraker (talk) 07:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The status of the term is irrelevant; it's WP:JARGON and ambiguous. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Let me also comment on all of these proposals, but with a different take. For a long while I supported naming these categories as "Old Fooians", if that is what they call themselves, for example, if there is an "Old Fooians Association". I came to realise that there was too such opposition to that view. I also realised that there was opposition to the use of "pupil" and "alummni". I looked for something that was not tied to what people called themselves and that was neutral. I think I was the first to suggest "People educated at ..". This suggestion has taken off, at least for countries where the term "alumni" is opposed by some people. It is neutral and it seems the best compromise. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  09:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I would strongly advice that the best thing to do would be to re-name the category from Category:Bon's Boys to Category:St Bon's Boys, because if you look at the school's history it will show you that the school has been re-named on quite a few occasions, so re-naming the category to Category:St Bon's Boys would be more wiser than re-naming it to People educated at St Bonaventure's Catholic Comprehensive School, as the former pupils are known as Bon's Boys. MarkMysoe (talk) 13:08, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No, because "St. Bon's Boys" = "Sons of St. Bon". Standard practice in categorisation is to use the most recent name of a school, company, place, etc. to group all, including those who would be applicable under previous names. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:13, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * But if the category name suggested People educated at St Bonaventure's Catholic Comprehensive School is used would it not take up too much space in a article's category section, as the name of the category would be simply to long. Perhaps we could use the name Category:People educated at St Bon's CCS or second alternative Category:People educated at St Bonaventure's CCS, as this will proportionality reduce the size of the first proposed category re-naming of "People educated at St Bonaventure's Catholic Comprehensive School". - MarkMysoe (talk) 08:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support. No way to know what this category is about without knowing it in advance.--Mike Selinker (talk) 23:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. We have been here before and made our decision. Please respect that and take it on the chin rather than opening up the debate again. Ericoides (talk) 09:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Consensus can change. And telling someone to "take it on the chin" doesn't seem very WP:CIVIL. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Apologies if it came across that way to you. But you must admit this is getting very boring; I tend to concur with Motmit's analysis here. Ericoides (talk) 09:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Past discussions over the last (at least) four years have either removed the form or ended in no consensus; what "decision" made are you referring to? Timrollpickering (talk) 11:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * &tc. Ericoides (talk) 12:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In this particular case forms that don't contain the word "Old" have been struck out in the following CFDs:
 * Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 19 - Renamed Category:Icenians to Category:People educated at Langley School, Loddon
 * Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 19 - Renamed Category:Downe House Seniors to Category:People educated at Downe House School
 * Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 31 - Renamed Category:St Margaret's Guildian to Category:People educated at St Margaret's School, Bushey
 * So what particular decision relevant to "Bon's Boys" are you referring to? Timrollpickering (talk) 12:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * See above. Ericoides (talk) 14:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment No discussion has approved of the use of "Boy's" paired with anything, and definately not "Boy's" paired with a short form of a school's name that is so rarely used it is not identified as anyway likely in the disambiguation for a term that has several other meanings. No previous discussion has ever come close to assesing this truly unique category name.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:45, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename. This is a good compromise that has been widely adopted elsewhere, so I don't see any reason not to continue with this one. The current form is quite hard to understand for those unfamiliar with the topic; the proposed form is perfectly clear to all. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:31, 5 January 2012 (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:Unique attack transports

 * 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. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:01, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Unique attack transports to Category:Attack transports of the United States Navy
 * Nominator's rationale: Don't believe that this is strictly necessary - IMHO, these should either be categorised as single-ship classes, or in the main category for the ship type (which is the proposal for now). Also the current category name is badly ambiguous. The Bushranger One ping only 01:10, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom, Current name shows no indication it is about only US ships. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 03:51, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Move to Category:Unique attack transports of the United States Navy. "Unique attack transports" is a bit pointless as a category, but "Unique attack transports of the United States Navy" will certainly be a useful subcat in the Category:Attack transports of the United States Navy. Gatoclass (talk) 05:03, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Do we even need the "Unique Foocarriers of the Fooian Navy" categories? Why not just categorise "unique" ships - if we rule out single-ship-class categories - in the "Foocarriers of the Fooian Navy" category itself? Grouping them in "unique" categories indicates they're somehow related to the other 'unique' ships, when the only connection is being the sole member of their class in most cases. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * They are related to the other ships in the category - by virtue of them all being unique (single-ship class) ships. Why not put them in the basic category instead? Because people will wonder why there are only two ships in that category. It might also encourage them to put other ships in the basic category. Which is all very well, but when somebody wants to look at just the unique ships in the category, they can't find them. It's a useful category and I think it should stay. Gatoclass (talk) 06:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hm, fair enough I reckon. I disagree, of course ;) but it's no biggie whichever way consensus goes for me (as long as it's renamed if kept!). - The Bushranger One ping only 06:33, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. The characteristic which the two items share seems to be that no other vessels of their class were built.  This contrasts with vessels that were oner of a series.  It is entirely appropriate to have these in a parent category that is otherwise a conmtainer for subcategories.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:42, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have requested more input on this discussion, listing my reasons here. Gatoclass (talk) 04:54, 26 December 2011 (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.