Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 December 19



Category:Albums recorded in California

 * 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) 12:46, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Albums recorded in California to Category:Albums recorded in the United States
 * Nominator's rationale: Merge. I don't think there is a need to categorize by the state an album was recorded in anymore than categorizing by city (see Categories for discussion/Log/2012 March 7). The venue itself is what makes where an album was recorded somewhat defining, not the location of the venue. Plus it encourages editors to put any album recorded anywhere in the state of California in this category, which is not defining to the album. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 22:35, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:20, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Question: is the recording location non-defining to the point where these should be removed from Category:Music of California? – Fayenatic  L ondon 22:07, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see how an artist recording an album in California would mean it qualifies as or represents the music of California. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 01:31, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge per nom. Trivial. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:40, 24 December 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:Mahala

 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


 * The result of the discussion was: speedy delete. – Fayenatic  L ondon 22:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting mahala


 * Nominator's rationale: What is the purpose of this category? The sole page that it contains is a user page with nothing on it.  Super Mario  Man  22:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete as G1. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:08, 19 December 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:Customary units in India

 * 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: no consensus to rename.   delldot   &nabla;.  08:39, 3 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Customary units in India to Category:Customary units of measurement in South Asia, per List of customary units of measurement in South Asia, as these units are not only used in India but also Pakistan and possibly Bangladesh and elsewhere. Opposed at Speedy, which was fair enough. – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:20, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Category:Customary units in India to Category:Customary units of measurement in South Asia, C2D per List of customary units of measurement in South Asia – Fayenatic  L ondon 15:04, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose If needed new category for a region can be created but it is not appropriate to change the country speci category's name.Shyamsunder (talk) 19:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Object to speedy rename. Changes scope of the category, so requires discussion -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 22:35, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:43, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose If needed new category for a region can be created but it is not appropriate to change the country specific category's name.Shyamsunder (talk) 19:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep The units are those that have been historically used in various parts of India. To the extent that we have categories for systems of units they are by country categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:32, 20 December 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:Fictional clones

 * 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: no consensus to rename.  I'm not going to purge this, any editor is invited to remove an article from this category that they feel doesn't belong there.   delldot   &nabla;.  08:45, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Fictional clones to Category:Fictional clones and clonees
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the content, the category also contains characters that were cloned and as it stands is somewhat misleading. Brandmeistertalk  09:31, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Support seems more apt.146.90.110.75 (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep and perge. I do not think that having been cloned is really worth merging with being a clone.  I think it makes sense to limit this category to just clones.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Splitting would require an interested user and some scrutiny. Brandmeistertalk  01:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Just cleanup/purge. adding evert character who has ever been cloned is a bad idea. And futher, I would support suggesting listify/delete, because I have a feeling that most of these clones likely will not have their own article, and so will merely be included in the "clonee"s articles (if such exists). This is a common plot device in fiction. Oh and also due to the overlapping vagueness of the terms "clone", "duplicate", and "replicant" in sci-fi. Oh and also because of the Silver Age Bizarro World : ) - jc37 05:24, 20 December 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:Permanent Representatives of Colombia to the United Nations Office at Nairobi

 * 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: speedily deleted per G7: creator emptied it and immediately replaced it with Category:Permanent Representatives of Colombia to the United Nations at Nairobi. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting permanent representatives of colombia to the united nations office at nairobi


 * Nominator's rationale: mijotoba (talk) 07:08, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:OVERCAT, empty category. Brandmeistertalk  14:25, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as C1. Empty. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:46, 19 December 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:Ezhava People

 * 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. Dana boomer (talk) 01:38, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting ezhava people


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete. My understanding is that there has been a fairly long-standing consensus that we do not categorize people by Indian caste. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:43, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Do not delete: Please explain  I've struck the !vote here because also !votes below. - Sitush (talk) 15:18, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Kindly point to the discussion, rather than giving reference to "your understanding". Categorization based on ethnicity  is pretty common. What's special about Indian caste? Kadinjool (talk) 08:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That's just it—I don't know where the discussions are found. I have been told this in the past by members of the India WikiProject. You could ask that WikiProject for more details. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:49, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete caste is OCAT; as would be class in Western culture: Category:Land owning people, Category:Rich people, Category:Proletarian people, please, no! Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:51, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:OCAT. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:47, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. If people are similar in a well-defined way, what is wrong with the category? (As opposed to rich people, which is not well-defined enough). --  YPN YPN  21:50, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep This is definitely not WP:OCAT. Please read WP:OC. Ezhava itself is a unique and distinct cultural topic. And hence not over categorization.   Kadinjool (talk) 07:10, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete The long-standing precedent is to not categorize people by caste. Notifying the India wikipedia project might be useful in this case.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * WikiProject India notified. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:52, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per long standing consensus at WP:INDIA and WP:CFD. A recent Cfd has some links to past discussions. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  08:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per the precedent referred to by others above and, indeed, recent similar discussions concerning that precedent here. - Sitush (talk) 15:14, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per previous precedent, and because such categorisations violate core WP:BLP policy. 'Caste' is as much an economic/political/religious category as an 'ethnic' one... AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:20, 2 January 2013 (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:Ireland mountains and hills navigational boxes

 * 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: keep without rename.  I have gone ahead and created Category:Ireland geography navigational boxes, please feel free to populate it.   delldot   &nabla;.  08:31, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Ireland mountains and hills navigational boxes to Category:Ireland geography navigational boxes
 * Nominator's rationale: No Category:Mountains and hills navigational boxes currently exists. However, Category:Geography navigational boxes and Category:United Kingdom geography navigational boxes do exist so this would bring it into line with them. In addition, this would allow for other geography-related navboxes, such as Template:Rivers of Ireland and Template:Weather events in Ireland. 86.40.98.64 (talk) 05:21, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose. This category is reasonably well-populated, and groups a tightly-linked set of templates. It has a counterpart in Category:United Kingdom mountains and hills navigational boxes. It may be a good idea to create a new Category:Ireland geography navigational boxes as a parent, but that should be done as a separate step. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:39, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Support BrownHairedGirl's proposal. --86.40.195.205 (talk) 18:20, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Support BrownHairedGirl's proposal. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:47, 19 December 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.

Books by publisher

 * 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) 12:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Abrams books to Category:Abrams Books books
 * Propose renaming Category:Golden Book publications to Category:Golden Books books


 * Later addition to nomination: Propose renaming Category:Lists of Ace books to Category:Lists of Ace Books books – as below and per existing parent . – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:53, 19 December 2012 (UTC) I support this addition on the same grounds. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:47, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Two opposed speedies. The convention for the subcategories of is "NAME-OF-PUBLISHER books", where "NAME-OF-PUBLISHER" is formatted in the same manner as the WP article about that publisher. Here, the NAME-OF-PUBLISHER is Abrams Books; Golden Books is not an article, but it redirects to Western Publishing. (Upon investigation, I have learned that the publisher is not "Golden Book", it is "Golden Books".)
 * Yes, this leaves us with an "XXXX Books books" format, but this is no different than the already existing, , , , , , , and.
 * This is also similar to the formatting used for the subcategories of, which results in some "XXXX Films films" category names, but we have accepted this as implementation of a standard, and I see no reason to depart from it here in the context of a different medium.
 * Anyway, "Abrams books" is ambiguous; "Abrams Books books" is not. For the Golden Books one, there is no reason to use "publications" when they are all books and they are categorized in the tree. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:57, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Category:Golden Book publications to Category:Golden Book books – C2B, convention Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:59, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose undiscussed combination of "Books books". --86.40.98.64 (talk) 04:35, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Category:Abrams books to Category:Abrams Books books – C2B, convention Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:58, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose undiscussed combination of "Books books". --86.40.98.64 (talk) 04:35, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Category:Lists of Ace books to Category:Lists of Ace Books books – C2C per parent . – Fayenatic  L ondon 13:36, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Appalling English. --86.40.98.217 (talk) 08:45, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose per repetition books books. Materialscientist (talk) 08:47, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * }
 * Rename. Gotta be done, just like Category:Cheapass Games games and Category:Miramax Films films‎.--Mike Selinker (talk) 06:14, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy Rename - per GO & MS. "Golden Books" is the publisher (or imprint in this case), not "Golden". So the current categories are misnamed. Period. - jc37 06:47, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy Rename - evidently. Oculi (talk) 12:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename all per precedents, despite awkwardness. – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:53, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename all per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:46, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Support. Being wrong because "it doesn't look as awkward as being right" is still being wrong. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:11, 23 December 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.