Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 April 2



Category:J-ska

 * 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. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * j-ska


 * Nominator's rationale: Only one entry since 2007 (which is the main article). Also the title does not reflect its' main article (which was renamed because the sources did not indicate common use of the term "J-ska"). Xfansd (talk) 16:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Per WP:SMALLCAT. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:47, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as small cat. If it is kept it should be renamed.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:45, 8 April 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:Former students by secondary school in New Zealand

 * 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. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:57, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Former students by secondary school in New Zealand to Category:People educated by school in New Zealand


 * Category:Former students of Auckland Girls' Grammar School to Category:People educated at Auckland Girls' Grammar School
 * Category:Former students of Auckland Grammar School to Category:People educated at Auckland Grammar School
 * Category:Former students of Christ's College, Canterbury to Category:People educated at Christ's College, Canterbury
 * Category:Former students of Christchurch Boys' High School to Category:People educated at Christchurch Boys' High School
 * Category:Former students of Gisborne Boys' High School to Category:People educated at Gisborne Boys' High School
 * Category:Former students of Hato Petera College, Auckland to Category:People educated at Hato Petera College, Auckland
 * Category:Former students of John Paul College, Rotorua to Category:People educated at John Paul College, Rotorua
 * Category:Former students of Kavanagh College to Category:People educated at Kavanagh College
 * Category:Former students of King's College, Auckland to Category:People educated at King's College, Auckland
 * Category:Former students of Liston College to Category:People educated at Liston College
 * Category:Former students of Massey High School to Category:People educated at Massey High School
 * Category:Former students of Mount Albert Grammar School to Category:People educated at Mount Albert Grammar School
 * Category:Former students of Mount Roskill Grammar School to Category:People educated at Mount Roskill Grammar School
 * Category:Former students of Napier Boys' High School to Category:People educated at Napier Boys' High School
 * Category:Former students of Nelson College to Category:People educated at Nelson College
 * Category:Former students of New Plymouth Boys' High School to Category:People educated at New Plymouth Boys' High School
 * Category:Former students of Onslow College to Category:People educated at Onslow College
 * Category:Former students of Opunake High School to Category:People educated at Opunake High School
 * Category:Former students of Otago Boys' High School to Category:People educated at Otago Boys' High School
 * Category:Former students of Palmerston North Boys' High School to Category:People educated at Palmerston North Boys' High School
 * Category:Former students of Palmerston North Girls' High School to Category:People educated at Palmerston North Girls' High School
 * Category:Former students of Rongotai College to Category:People educated at Rongotai College
 * Category:Former students of Sacred Heart College, Auckland to Category:People educated at Sacred Heart College, Auckland
 * Category:Former students of Scots College, Wellington to Category:People educated at Scots College, Wellington
 * Category:Former students of Southland Boys' High School to Category:People educated at Southland Boys' High School
 * Category:Former students of St Bede's College, Christchurch to Category:People educated at St Bede's College, Christchurch
 * Category:Former students of St Paul's College, Auckland to Category:People educated at St Paul's College, Auckland
 * Category:Former students of St Peter's College, Auckland to Category:People educated at St Peter's College, Auckland
 * Category:Former students of St Thomas of Canterbury College to Category:People educated at St Thomas of Canterbury College
 * Category:Former students of St. Kevin's College, Oamaru to Category:People educated at St. Kevin's College, Oamaru
 * Category:Former students of St. Patrick's College, Silverstream to Category:People educated at St. Patrick's College, Silverstream
 * Category:Former students of St. Patrick's College, Wellington to Category:People educated at St. Patrick's College, Wellington
 * Category:Former students of Takapuna Grammar School to Category:People educated at Takapuna Grammar School
 * Category:Former students of Tauranga Boys' College to Category:People educated at Tauranga Boys' College
 * Category:Former students of Te Aute College to Category:People educated at Te Aute College
 * Category:Former students of the Church College of New Zealand to Category:People educated at the Church College of New Zealand
 * Category:Former students of Timaru Boys' High School to Category:People educated at Timaru Boys' High School
 * Category:Former students of Waitaki Boys' High School to Category:People educated at Waitaki Boys' High School
 * Category:Former students of Wanganui Collegiate School to Category:People educated at Wanganui Collegiate School
 * Category:Former students of Wellington College (New Zealand) to Category:People educated at Wellington College (New Zealand)
 * Category:Former students of Wellington Girls' College to Category:People educated at Wellington Girls' College
 * Category:Former students of Wesley College, Auckland to Category:People educated at Wesley College, Auckland
 * Category:Former students of Westlake Boys High School to Category:People educated at Westlake Boys High School


 * Nominator's rationale: In the wake of User:BrownHairedGirl’s demolition of the Old Boys system, these New Zealand categories look like strange outliers. The subcategories of Category:Alumni by secondary school overwhelmingly use two formats, one “alumni (of)” and the other “people educated at.” The Commonwealth categories now use the latter format. Two years ago, I closed this nomination to create this situation. Now, I’m reopening it.-- Mike Selinker (talk) 12:29, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Rename. however this rename is not related to the Old Fooians discussions.  This rename is wise because in general we do not distinguish former/present.  While the number of present students in any of these categories will be low, there is no reason to exclude current students if they are in fact notable, and the people educated at form does not do that.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Also that.--Mike Selinker (talk) 16:43, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename all per nominator, to avoid both the past/present split and the distinction between pupil and student. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename. I do think this is better; I never agreed with the "Former students of ..." formatting, partly because it gives editors the impression that we should be creating categories for people's former and current statuses. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:24, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename the school categories; for the parent I think Category:People educated in New Zealand by school is clearer, but I'm not sure what the convention is elsewhere.- choster (talk) 23:11, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * All subcategories of Category:Alumni by secondary school that begin with "People" have this format.--Mike Selinker (talk) 01:58, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename all as the proposed names are commonsensical and clear. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:37, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename all as it is logical and allows for both past and present pupils NealeFamily (talk) 08:49, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename all seems more logical this way.--Karl.brown (talk) 22:48, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename All per nom. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:45, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom. Snappy (talk) 10:17, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * REname all -- This is much better than a "former" category. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:49, 7 April 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:Jarlabanke runestones

 * 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:Runestones in Uppland. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Remove Category:Jarlabanke runestones and its subcategory Estrid
 * Nominators rationale: Category contains only one article in itself and four in the subcategory. All of these are also categorized in Category:Runestones in Uppland. These extra categories just confuse the navigation. --Full steam (talk) 10:37, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Upmerge to Category:Runestones in Uppland. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:37, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Upmerge is a good word. --Full steam (talk) 12:09, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Upmerge per Bushranger. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:46, 4 April 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:Dinosaurs in literature fiction

 * 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 to Category:Novels about dinosaurs. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:58, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Dinosaurs in literature fiction to Category:Dinosaurs in fiction
 * Nominator's rationale: poor grammar and per convention. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 08:35, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Speedy rename to Category:Novels about dinosaurs, as Category:Dinosaurs in fiction already exists as the parent cat here, and the intent seems to be to categorise, well, novels about dinosaurs. This also fits the tree at Category:Novels by topic. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:36, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Support the novels idea.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:08, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename to Category:Novels about dinosaurs, per User:The Bushranger. - jc37 01:15, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note, the creator of this cat also created several other dinosaur-related categories (see here), including Category:Dinosaurs in television fiction. All of which should probably be looked over. - jc37 01:21, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename to Category:Novels about dinosaurs per The Bushranger. No objection to speedy. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:17, 6 April 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.

Christ's Hospital Old Blues

 * 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 as proposed. T. Canens (talk) 14:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

The current name was adopted at CfD 2007 May 20 as a way of reducing the appalling ambiguity in the previous name "Old Blues", but it has been superseded by the adoption of the descriptive "People educated at" format (PEA). Other similar efforts to disambiguate the most ambiguous "Old Fooian" terms were adopted before the PEA format was devised, and all the others were removed at Cfd 2012 March 5. Given the number of similar discussions where you have made similar claims, it really is long past the time when you should have read the policy WP:COMMONNAME and given up advancing arguments contrary to its clear instructions. The reason to keep the Old Fooian name in a hatnote is as explained in my first point above: it is to ensure that "a reader doesn't need to do any guessing when they encounter the category name", and doesn't need to open up the page to figure out what it is for. Categories are a navigational device, and you seem determined to ignore the question of whether a category name does what it says on the tin, without needing further explanation. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:44, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename Category:Christ's Hospital Old Blues to Category:People educated at Christ's Hospital.
 * Nomiunator's rational the main rationale is expertely explained by Brown Haired Girl in the nomination just below this. Read that explanation.  Additionally, in this case this is not at all the used term.  The used term is "old blues" but this is far to ambiguous.  It could refer to the early phases of the blues form of music.  With the current name I expected this to related to connections between Blue Cross/Blue Shield and some hospital.  From the category "old houses in the Philippines" we saw that "old foos" do not indicate "people educated at", even if on rare occasions "old fooians" might.  Lastly, back in 2006 we abandoned all denonyms for populated placed.  Thus we do not categorize people as "Londoners" or "New Yorkers" even though these are the most common names.  Applied here we ought to make the change.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:20, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename per nominator to adopt the standard descriptive format (per WP:NDESC) which is now used for all but about 30 of the by-school subcats of.
 * The PEA format offers several advantages:
 * It is consistent across all schools. If an editor wants to apply the category to a biographical article, they don't need to look anything up; they just enter "People educated at", and add the title of the head article on the school. Similarly, a reader doesn't need to do any guessing when they encounter the category name.
 * It reduces ambiguity. By using the title of the head article, it incorporates any disambiguation applied to the title of the head article
 * It massively increases recognisability. The inhouse jargon terms may be used by some independent reliable sources, but the schools names are much more widely used, which makes them much more "recognizable to readers", one of the core principles of WP:AT.
 * No information will be lost to readers by this renaming, because the "old Blues" terminology is explained both in a hatnote in the category and in the head article. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:46, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * If an explanation in a hatnote is sufficient then the Old Fooian names can be used with an explanation in the hatnote. It is not an inhouse jargon if as in most cases it is used publically, such as on websites. Cjc13 (talk) 11:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The inhouse jargon is not a secret, but it remains inhouse jargon because it is not used more widely. Per WP:COMMONNAME, we do not prioritise official names, and prefer common usage; and we prefer usage on reliable sources to usage on any old website.


 * Rename per nom, clarity and past CFDs. This isn't even the correct internal jargon but a confusing hybrid that has been preserved in past CFDs by "Keep - it's correct" (sic) !votes. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:37, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename. That's a Frankenstein's monster of a category name.--Mike Selinker (talk) 11:17, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename for clarity, conciseness, unambiguity, and standardization. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:32, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename there are many hospitals called "Christ's Hospital", and "old blues" can easily refer to former staff. 70.24.244.198 (talk) 02:57, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom. Cures problems of ambiguity, jargon, obscurity, and non-conformance with the now overwhelming majority of similar categories. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:01, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom and recent CFDs. Snappy (talk) 10:18, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename (with consisterable regret). This is a prominent public school, for which I would expect a high number of Ghits.  However, it is ambiguous.  Christ's Hospital is the original Bluecoat school, so that the term "old blue" is not as obscure as some old boys terms, but
 * a blue is also person who represented Oxford or Cambridge University at sport (which is also a notable distinction). I am not sure if people who achieved a blue are referred to as old blues.
 * the term for Christ's Hospital is "old blue" not the present category name, so that it ought to be Category:Old Blues, but that has been made a dab-category, because the term is also used of a Reading School, and may well be used of a number of others, such as one at Edgbaston.
 * "Blue" is a common colour, so that the term might have a dozen other meanings. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:02, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The name for the association is "Christ's Hospital Old Blues Association" so the current name is consistent with that. Cjc13 (talk) 10:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Secondly, the search you link to is actually for two separate phrases, which can appear at opposite ends of sentence or even of an article; the results cannot determine common usage of the phrase "Christ's Hospital Old Blues" any more than the 29 hits for "prophylactic" "hamster" are evidence of the common usage of the phrase "prophylactic hamster", which gets zero hits. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:54, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Change Vote to Keep as Category:Christ's Hospital Old Blues. It seems from what Cjc13 has pointed me to, that I was wrong.  With both the school name AND "old blue", ther is no ambiguity, so that my objection as to ambiguity disappears.  My previous comments were on the (false) basis that the correct name would just be "Old Blues".  AS this is not the case my reasons for thinking a change was needed disappear.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:53, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Peter, there are zero hits on Google News for "Christ's Hospital Old Blues". Even if that title is sometimes used by the alumni association, it is not in common usage. Wikipedia names things according to common usage, rather than by an official name ... and while the school name is in common usage, "Christ's Hospital Old Blues" is not.
 * The phrase "Christ's Hospital Old Blues" is also unintelligible to anyone who is not already familiar with the school's inhouse WP:JARGON, because as you yourself pointed out above:
 * a blue is also person who represented Oxford or Cambridge University at sport (which is also a notable distinction). I am not sure if people who achieved a blue are referred to as old blues.
 * "Blue" is a common colour, so that the term might have a dozen other meanings
 * Additionally, a plain English reading of the term is that it relates to old blues music associated with the school. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:43, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * People who achieved a blue at Oxford or Cambridge would be referred to as "Blues" and not "Old Blues". Similarly for the other uses of "blues" to which you refer. As has been explained previously, "Old Fooians" is not jargon as it is widely used. Thus "Christ's Hospital Old Blues" is recognised as following the Old Fooian format and would be understood as such. Also there is no reason to limit searches for use to only Google news, as Wikipedia is not solely based on Google news. I would also point out that a search on Google News for "Christ's Hospital" "Old Blues" does produce relevant results. Cjc13 (talk) 11:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Another Cjc13 old chestnut. Per WP:COMMONNAME, general Google searches should be avoided be avoided, and preference given to Google News and Google Books because they concentrate reliable sources.
 * Where are the sources for using "people educated" in relation to this category? WP:commonname, WP:NDESC and WP:TITLECHANGES are consistent in supporting use of sourced terms. Cjc13 (talk) 12:55, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yawn. Cjc13 trots out the same nonsense at every similar CfD discussion, and repeats it even when nobody agrees with him and multiple editors rebut these false assertions. So I will simply paste my reply from another discussion, and lightly edit it.
 * Your reading of WP:NDESC is, I'm afraid, either a flight of fantasy or a deliberate falsification. (Or maybe both).
 * Can you read the bit where it says that descriptive titles "are often invented specifically for articles"? (It's in the first para of WP:NDESC).
 * That's what this one is: it is a plain English phrase invented specifically for alumni of schools, and is used in 97% of similar categories in the UK, including all of those in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
 * The second para of WP:NDESC includes the phrase which you often quote: "descriptive titles should be based on sources". However, when you quote it, you scurrilously snip off the rest of the sentence, which reads in full "Even descriptive titles should be based on sources, and may therefore incorporate names and terms that are commonly used by sources". As has been pointed out you many times, the proposed descriptive name does exactly that; it incorporates the common name of the school, as used in reliable sources.
 * Why do you continue to repeat the same half-sentence with inverted meaning in discussion after discussion? Do you simply hope that some day, other editors will somehow forget to read the linked policy and allow your fantasy to go uncorrected?
 * I no longer believe that you are sincere in your misuse of the policy, but if I am wrong and you really are sincere in your claim that WP:NDESC requires the whole phrase to be source as a bloc, then please explain why for nearly 6 years we have had plain English descriptive phrases as the category titles for Londoners, Parisians, Glaswegians and New Yorkers. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:06, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:commonname. Since the current name includes the school name, then per BFG it is also consistent with WP:NDESC. It is also consistent with the American categories in that it follows the American format but as a regional variation uses Old Blues in place of alumni. The current name is easily understandable given that the school name is in the title and it would not be confused with any other category, particularly as there are no other categories that use "Old Blues" in the title. Cjc13 (talk) 10:10, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Umm, no. Alumni is a term that BFG has pointed out exists in the Oxford English Dictionary, which does not preclude its use for those who attend schools.  "Old Blues" is not a regional variant of "Alumni".  Even if it was, we in general do not use regional variants of language.  On the "common name" front, the "common name" by your general argument would be "Old Blues" which has the same flaws as all other "old foos" names, such as "Old Houses".  Anything other than "Old Blues" is not what these people "are actually called" by those within the old boys network, and so cannot be defended on that principal.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Look at the link. The heading on that page and website is "Christ's Hospital Old Blues Association". Hence the current name reflects actual usage. Cjc13 (talk) 09:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No that's (part of) the name of the association, not the term actually used for the ex pupils individually or collectively. Look at the information at the base that states "This website has been designed and created by Old Blues for Old Blues." Look also at the category's talk page where several Old Blus have repeatedly stated that the current title is not the name used. The current title was not selected "because it's correct" (sic), it was selected as a result of a past CFD that conceded that "Old Blues" is seriously confusing and adopted a clunky method of disambiguation. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:34, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "Old Blues" is an understandable abbreviation of the full title on the website. The current title is used by the association which is the ex pupils collectively. Cjc13 (talk) 11:56, 12 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. The proposed name seems to contrary to WP:TITLECHANGES which states:
 * "While titles for articles are subject to consensus, do not invent names as a means of compromising between opposing points of view. Wikipedia describes current usage but cannot prescribe a particular usage or invent new names."
 * The proposed name does not reflect current usage. Cjc13 (talk) 10:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

As your claim that "people educated" is jargon, please go and consult a dictionary. For example, taking Merriam Webster's definition of jargon, do you regard "People educated at" as: i) confused unintelligible language; ii) a strange, outlandish, or barbarous language or dialect; iii) the technical terminology or characteristic idiom of a special activity or group; iv) obscure and often pretentious language marked by circumlocutions and long words. Is "educated" too long a word for your tastes? -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * As has been pointed out every time you make this argument, the proposal is a descriptive form not a name and reflects the general usage of the school name rather than the limited usage of the jargon. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:34, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:TITLECHANGES applies to all titles including descriptive forms. As has been pointed out previously, the Old Fooian names are used publically, for instance on websites. If anything "people educated" is jargon of only limited use. Cjc13 (talk) 11:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your reading of WP:TITLECHANGES would make WP:NDESC unusable, and prevent us from using plain English descriptive phrases as the category titles for Londoners, Parisians, Glaswegians and New Yorkers. If your reading was right, none of those categories would use descriptive titles, but they have all done so for 6 years, without controversy.
 * I am merely reading what is there in the policy. WP:TITLECHANGES does not make WP:NDESC unusable but it does suggest that it should be with caution. The use of WP:NDESC for Londoners, New Yorkers, etc was to do with the lack pf clarity of meaning in the terms and is a separate matter. I think "people educated" falls in the pretentious language category amongst other things. Cjc13 (talk) 16:20, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Proceed with caution? Yes, that's exactly why these renamings have considered at 79 separate CfDs. Never in the history of CfD has so much scrutiny been applied to one set of categories.
 * Once again, you are simply making up a post-facto rationale wrt of city demonyms. The 2006 CfD at which and  were renamed is linked in the nomination, and the reason for the rename was consistency. No definitional issues are mentioned.  was renamed in August 2006, again without definitional issues being a concern.
 * As to clarity, I see no evidence that "Christ's Hospital Old Blues" is clear to anyone who does not already know the school's traditions. It is also gets zero hits in Google News search, even with archive search included. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * If only there was proper scrutiny in these discussions. Try a search in Google Books and it does produce results. Cjc13 (talk) 22:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I have just done a search of Google Books, excluding "Books LLC" as recommended by WP:COMMONNAME. The result is only 6 hits for "Christ's Hospital Old Blues", three of which don't count because they are Wikipedia reprints. ( and, ). So that leaves zero hits on Gnews, and only 3 non-Wikipedia hits on Gbooks.
 * What was your point about scrutiny? -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:32, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Do the same searches for "People educated at Christ's Hospital" and there are zero non-wiki hits. Three is bigger than zero. There are no sources that use "People educated at Christ's Hospital" but there are sources that use "Christ's Hospital Old Blues". Per WP:TITLECHANGES, "Wikipedia describes current usage but cannot prescribe a particular usage or invent new names." "People educated at Christ's Hospital" as a title does not reflect current usage, but there are examples of "Christ's Hospital Old Blues" being used.
 * as regards the lack of scrutiny, many of the discussions have been closed without any reasons given by the closing admins. This seems to indicate a lack of scrutiny. In several of the discussions the outcome seems to reflect the personal feelings of the closing admins rather than the actual discussion. This seems to indicate a lack of independent and unbiased scrutiny. Cjc13 (talk) 11:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The relevant search would be "educated at Christ's Hospital", which gives 7000 results, comfortably exceeding 6. Cjc13 continues to advance ludicrous non-arguments and to cast doubts upon the integrity of cfd closers, rather than to perceive a consistent consensus for the last 12 months or so, or to take anything to drv. Oculi (talk) 12:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * At this point, Cjc13's tendentious barrage of ludicrous non-arguments looks like a deliberate strategy of disruption.  -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:15, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom, clarity and multiple recent CFDs. Oculi (talk) 23:19, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Actually Cjc13's Titlechanges example points out why the current name should never have been adopted. If anything was a case where "invent[ing] names to compromise between opposing points of view" it was the current name.  I I write "Larry EchoHawk recieved his undergraduate education at Brigham Young University" everyone who knows English will understand me, if I write "Sir Arthur Henrickson was an old blue" not one in 100 readers of wikipedia will have the foggiest notion what I mean.  If I write "Sir Arthur Henrickson was a Christ's Hosptial Old Blue", 60% of readers will still be lost, 20% will assume he was some sort of medical professsional (especially with the existence of Blue Cross/Blue Shield, 1% of reders will assume I should have left out old and meant Christ's College, another 1% will assume old should be capitalized, 17% will think that maybe as charitty Sir Arthur sang the blues at some hosptal, and 0.75% of readers will send me angry notes sahying that I am not using the correct term.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:39, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I istelling that Cjc13 avoids even trying to answer my pouint about the specific flaws of "old foos" (as opposed to "old fooians") categories. He is consistently ignoring the fact that each form of creating an old foo category is unique.  In this case I guess it is an old flubs category (different than an old flubbian category), that is one where we take foo, change it to the totally unrelated flub, and then pluralize it without making it denomic.  If this was old fooing it would Old Christ's Hospitalar, and if it was flubbing it would be Old blueians.  It would be nice if the old boys would accept how ambiguous many of the terms they insist on using are.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment there is also Blues (disambiguation) which points to many things an old Blue could be.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:45, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * As regards "Sir Arthur Henrickson was a Christ's Hosptial Old Blue", I think a reasonable people could work out that he must have gone to Christ's Hospital even if they had not heard of Christ's Hospital. I also think that a reasonable person would be interested to know that former pupils were called Old Blues.
 * It is telling that there ia a Blues (disambiguation) but not a Old Blues (disambiguation). On your basis any name with school in the title would be ambiguous as there is School (disambiguation). Ultimately the school website shows that the current name is used in full and so it is the full name that should be judged as to whether it was ambiguous, not just part of it. Looking at the name as a whole and given the widespread use of the Old Fooian terms and their variations, the meaning of Christ's Hospital Old Blues seems clear and unambiguous. Cjc13 (talk) 16:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * How many schools in the world are called "Foo Hospital"? About 3, AFAICS, so readers unfamiliar with the school won't even know that this is a school rather than a medical centre.
 * How many schools in the world call their alumni "Old Blues"? One, AFAICS.
 * So how on earth is anyone not already familiar with the school's jargon supposed to know that "Christ's Hospital Old Blues" refers to the alumni of a school? -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:56, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Because they would recognise the similarity to the Old Fooian format. Note Christ's Hospital is the name of the article for the school and school is not included in the proposed rename. Cjc13 (talk) 22:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * If this was an Old Fooian format, then then school would call its alumni Old Christians" or "Old Hospitalians". It does neither, and doesn't include any of the -ian or -ist'' tyoe words conmmon to the Old Fooian firmat. The result is a phrase which looks nothing like the Old Fooian terms.
 * Well-spotted that school is not included in the proposed rename. However, the fact the new name begins with "people educated at" makes it clear that the category refers to former pupils. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:17, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Why not use the term "former pupils" then?
 * The current name is a variation on the Old Fooian format which is used by many schools. Old is used to indicate that they are former pupils. Since the current name includes the school name it seems to satisfy your interpretation of WP:NDESC. Cjc13 (talk) 11:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * As you well know, the reason not to use "former pupils" is that the convention for UK schools is "People educated at". This was first adopted last year, and has been adopted in nearly 80 CfD discussions since then.
 * The current name is indeed a variant on the "old Fooian" format, but that format has been almost completely abandoned on Wikipedia ... for the simple reason that it does not explain the category's purpose as clearly as "People educated at Foo". Per WP:CAY, the central purpose of categories is navigation. Why exactly do you claim that "Christ's Hospital old Blues" is more helpful to navigation than "People educated at Christ's Hospital"? -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:12, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment We do not use "former pupils" because we avoid the use of former in category names wherever possible.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:15, 20 April 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:Old Haileyburians

 * 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 to Category:People educated at Haileybury and Imperial Service College - if you need a bot to do the category changing on the pages, let me know. The  Helpful  One  15:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Old Haileyburians to Category:People educated at Haileybury and Imperial Service College
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename, to a standardised descriptive format (see WP:NDESC and note below) which combines a plain English phrase with the title of the head article. This clarifies the purpose of the category to the non-specialist reader for whom Wikipedia is written, by eliminating obscurity and ambiguity.
 * Even if readers and editors happen to be familar with the format of the "Old Fooian" terminology used by some (mostly English) schools for their alumni, the term "Old Haileyburians" is ambiguous. It is used both by Haileybury and Imperial Service College in England (see 10 hits on the website of the Haileybury Society at http://www.hailsoc.net) and also by Haileybury, Melbourne (see http://www.haileybury.vic.edu.au/oha http://oha.org.au/)
 * The Australian Haileyburians are categorised in Category:People educated at Haileybury, Melbourne, but listed in List of Old Haileyburians. That list needs renaming, and some disambiguation categories are also needed.
 * The proposed name follows the "People educated at Foo" convention of . Since 287 "Old Fooian" categories have been renamed in 72 separate CfDs, this convention is now used by by all except ~35 of the ~1,045 people-by-school categories in the UK. No information is lost to the reader by these renamings, because the "Old Fooian" term is explained in a hatnote in the category as well as in the articles on the schools.
 * Note that in previous discussions of "Old Fooian" categories, some editors who appear not to have read WP:NDESC have claimed that the full phrase "People educated at Foo School" must be sourced. This is incorrect: WP:NDESC explicitly says that such titles "are often invented specifically for articles", and that is the case here, where a plain English phrase is combined with the WP:COMMONNAME of the school. (A further paragraph of NDESC refers to the use of non-neutral terms in titles, which does not apply here).
 * Descriptive titles are used in tens of thousands of Wikipedia categories, including the closely-related example of the heavily-populated Category:People by city. The use of demonyms as category names for people from towns and cities is specifically deprecated in the Categorization of people guideline. That issue was settled at CfD back in July 2006 and has been incorporated in the guideline since at least August 2006. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:19, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Support This is conflating English and Australian schools. 70.24.244.198 (talk) 02:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename.--Mike Selinker (talk) 04:36, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename We have not done denonyms for populated places for almost six years. There is absolutely no reason at all we should have denonyms for schools.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:12, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename for the reasons provided by the nom, and to have the category name be at the clear, concise, unambiguous, unconfusing, jargon-free and standardized name. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom, clarity and past CFDs. An example of the utter confusion that comes when the terms are largely internal jargon so multiple uses don't get spotted. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose bossy boots and her obnoxious gang. Ericoides (talk) 20:36, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Er ... probably not an appropriate comment to make. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It appears that Ericoides needs to be reminded we believe in civility here at wikipedia. Just because you do not get your way is no reason to throw a tantrum.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:09, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Are you a 3 year old? If not then stop acting like one! Snappy (talk) 10:20, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Ericoides has apologised on my talk page for his comment above. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:25, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom. Cures problems of ambiguity, jargon, obscurity, and non-conformance with the now overwhelming majority of similar categories. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom and recent CFDs. Snappy (talk) 10:20, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * (with regret) Support due to the dab issue. The List of Old Haileyburians also needs to be renamed.  As far as I can see they are all Austrialians.  Peterkingiron (talk) 12:06, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:commonname. The dab issue can be dealt with by using Category:Old Haileyburians (UK) and Category:Old Haileyburians (Australia) for the two schools. Dab is not a sufficient reason to ignore the common name. Cjc13 (talk) 10:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. I have never claimed that "the full phrase "People educated at Foo School" must be sourced." Please stop misrepresenting what I have said. If you actually read WP:NDESC, it uses the term "should", as in "titles should be based on sources". That is not the same as "must" but it is stronger than "may". The implication is that a fully-sourced name is better than an partially-sourced name, particularly taking into account WP:commonname. Cjc13 (talk) 10:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Cjc13, I really wonder what your problem is in reading WP:NDESC, and why you continue to assert that I have misrepresented either you or the naming policy. WP:NDESC clearly and unambiguously says that descriptive phrases "are often invented specifically for articles". Can you see that phrasing, in the first paragraph of WP:NDESC??  It has been pointed out you enough times in enough discussions, so you should have grasped it by now.
 * The second paragraph of WP:NDESC, where you find the word "should" relates explicitly to the use of "non-neutral but common names ". Do you really claim that Haileybury and Imperial Service College is either non-neutral or no the common name of the school? Really?
 * The full text of the sentence relating to sourcing reads "Even descriptive titles should be based on sources, and may therefore incorporate names and terms that are commonly used by sources". My proposed name does exactly that: it incorporates a name commonly used by the reliable sources .... but instead of reading what the text actually says, you have taken the word "should" out of the policy and wrapped it in words of your own which deliberately omit the crucial word "incorporate". You then wrapped them in quote marks as if they were a real quote from the policy.
 * Please stop trying to disrupt discussions by pretending that the naming policy says something different to its actual words. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:22, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Cjc13's dab proposal ends up imposing an arbitrary and category developed disambiguation scheme on the system. BHG's system imposes a system based on actual article names.  That is much preferrable to ad hoc disambiguation in response to failure of categories to adequately distinguish items.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:37, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * My scheme is based on common name, unlike BHG's. The conventional way to disambiguate in Wikipedia is to add to the title, eg by country, not to try to invent a totally new name, which is what BHG is proposing. Cjc13 (talk) 10:04, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * More nonsense :(
 * My proposal does not invent a "totally new name" -- it doesn't invent any name at all. It uses the existing common name of the school, which is much more widely used than the inhouse jargon of the "old fooian" term.
 * As noted below, the addition of a parenthetical dissambiguator is not the preferred way to disambiguate. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:06, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "People educated" is an invented phrase. Cjc13 (talk) 12:06, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It is not an invented name, which is the point. It is a plain English descriptive phrase. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:46, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Where is the evidence for its use outside of Wikipedia in relation to this category? Cjc13 (talk) 12:44, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * For evidence of the usage of "Haileybury and Imperial Service College", see the 15,800 hits in Google Books. I'm sorry that you are unable to recognise "people educated at" as a plain English descriptive phrase.  If you choose to reveal what your normal language is, I'm sure that a translation can be arranged so that you recognise it's simplicity. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:19, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. The proposed name seems to contrary to WP:TITLECHANGES which states:
 * "While titles for articles are subject to consensus, do not invent names as a means of compromising between opposing points of view. Wikipedia describes current usage but cannot prescribe a particular usage or invent new names."
 * The proposed name does not reflect current usage. Cjc13 (talk) 10:30, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The proposed name combines a descriptive phrase (per WP:NDESC) with the commonly-used named of the school. It is not in any respect a compromise between opposing points of view, any more than is a compromise between "Liverpudlians" and "Scousers".
 * Your reading of WP:TITLECHANGES is clearly a misreading, because if you were correct in thinking that it debarred descriptive titles, the section further up that page at WP:NDESC would never be applicable.
 * You are also plain simple wrong in your assertion that "the conventional way to disambiguate in Wikipedia is to add to the title". If you read further up that page at WP:PRECISION, you will see that the preferred means of disambiguation is actually "natural disambiguation". In this case, natural dismabiguation is achieved simply by following the naming format used by 97% of similar categories in the UK: People educated at Foo. This approach has already been implemented for Haileybury, Melbourne, who are categorised in Category:People educated at Haileybury, Melbourne. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:TITLECHANGES seems quite clear and is consistent with my reading of WP:NDESC which clearly includes "descriptive titles should be based on sources". I think you are stretching the meaning of WP:NDESC beyond what was intended. Cjc13 (talk) 12:06, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your reading of WP:NDESC is, I'm afraid, either a flight fantasy or a deliberate falsification. (Or maybe both).
 * Can you read the bit where it says that descriptive titles "are often invented specifically for articles"? (It's in the first para of WP:NDESC. That's what this one is: it is invented specifically for alumni of schools, and is used in 97% of similar categories in the UK, including all of those in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
 * The second para of WP:NDESC includes the phrase which you quote: "descriptive titles should be based on sources". however, you have scurrilously snipped off the rest of the sentence, which reads in full "Even descriptive titles should be based on sources, and may therefore incorporate names and terms that are commonly used by sources". As has been pointed out you many times, in this and other discussions, the proposed descriptive name does exactly that; it incorporates the common name of the school, as used in reliable sources.
 * Why do you continue to repeat the same half-sentence with inverted meaning in discussion after discussion? Do you simply hope that some day, other editors will somehow forget to read the linked policy and allow your fantasy to go uncorrected?
 * I no longer believe that you are sincere in your misuse of the policy, but if I am wrong and you really are sincere in your claim that I am "stretching the meaning of WP:NDESC beyond what was intended", then please explain why for nearly 6 years we have had plain English descriptive phrases as the category titles for Londoners, Parisians, Glaswegians and New Yorkers. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:22, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Londoners, Parisians, Glaswegians and New Yorkers need to clearly defined so those denonyms are not be used for those categories. (Londoners can mean for instance people from London and also people living in London) This is not the case for Old Fooians as these terms are precisely defined. The common element to WP:commonname, WP:NDESC and WP:TITLECHANGES is that names should be based on sources. I sincerely believe that you are misinterpreting these policies. To say that the Old Fooian terms are not widely used also seems wrong to me. Cjc13 (talk) 12:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Reply. This is yet more deliberately-disruptive nonsense from Cjc13, who contains to clutter up these discussions with demonstrable untruths which he repeats ad nauseam. :(
 * The 2006 CfD at which and  were renamed is linked in the nomination, and the reason for the rename was consistency. No definitional issues are mentioned.  was renamed in August 2006, again without definitional issues being a concern.  You are simply making this up.
 * As to WP:NDESC, please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please try very very very very very very hard to actually read the policy. The proposed category title is indeed based on the sources, which quite clearly name the school as Haileybury and Imperial Service College; that sourced name is incorporated in the proposed category title, per NDESC. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:13, 16 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom, clarity and many past CFDs. Oculi (talk) 23:12, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment People educated at is not an invented phrase. If I went up to my grandmother and asked her "how many people have been educated at your high school in the last half century" she might not be able to answer, but she would not see my speech as representing some new turn of phrase.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:50, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * She might think it was an oddly phrased question. There are many other ways of phrasing that question. As regards naming the category, there appear to be no source that use "People educated at Haileybury and Imperial Service College". There are sources which use "Old Haileyburians". Cjc13 (talk) 12:27, 16 April 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.