Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 September 6



Category:Monorchistic 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: speedy delete WP:CSD . – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:28, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting monorchistic people


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete I suppose a link to monorchism will be helpful. This medical problem is not a defining characteristic of an individual. Pichpich (talk) 22:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as duplicate of Category:Monorchid people (which is also on its way to deletion). - The Bushranger One ping only 22:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as being intrinsically a contentious categorization for which exceedingly strong sourcing would be needed in any case at all. Collect (talk) 22:24, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete My apology for an error in creating this category which I have now remedied be recreation under simpler alternative terminology.Oxycut (talk) 00:28, 7 September 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.

Faculty by university in Sri Lanka

 * 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) 17:03, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Faculty by university in Sri Lanka to Category:Academics by university in Sri Lanka
 * Propose renaming Category:Faculty of the University of Colombo to Category:Academics of the University of Colombo
 * Propose renaming Category:Faculty of the General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University to Category:Academics of the General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University
 * Propose renaming Category:Faculty of the University of Kelaniya to Category:Academics of the University of Kelaniya
 * Propose renaming Category:Faculty of the University of Peradeniya to Category:Academics of the University of Peradeniya
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename following recent precedent for Thailand. There is no reason to use this term of American English for Sri Lankan academics. Further renames should follow. – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:26, 6 September 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:People from Arlington, Washington

 * 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) 17:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Arlington, Washington to Category:People from Snohomish County, Washington
 * Propose merging Category:People from Brewster, Washington to Category:People from Douglas County, Washington
 * Propose merging Category:People from Neah Bay, Washington to Category:People from Clallam County, Washington
 * Propose merging Category:People from Port Hadlock, Washington to Category:People from Jefferson County, Washington
 * Propose merging Category:People from Forks, Washington to Category:People from Clallam County, Washington
 * Propose merging Category:People from Kalama, Washington to Category:People from Cowlitz County, Washington
 * Propose merging Category:People from Soap Lake, Washington to Category:People from Grant County, Washington
 * Propose merging Category:People from Enumclaw, Washington to Category:People from King County, Washington
 * Propose merging Category:People from Ephrata, Washington to Category:People from Grant County, Washington
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. All categories have 3 or fewer entries ...William 17:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge all per nominator. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:53, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:31, 11 September 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:Tintin

 * 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. It seems from the discussion that there might be scope for a wider renaming of this category and all is subcats, or for creating a new sub-cat Category:The Adventures of Tintin. Either way, feel free to bring this back to CfD for a further discussion. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:18, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Tintin to Category:The Adventures of Tintin
 * Nominator's rationale: Brought from speedy to full at suggestion. Propose renaming to follow the main article for the category, The Adventures of Tintin. If passed subcats would be speedied. The Bushranger One ping only 16:22, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * weak oppose It's clear enough as the bare Tintin. Not strongly against it, but I'm not in favour of it either.  'Tintin' also covers things like the Paris Tintin shop or whatever cons and the like Tintin fans might get up to, whilst 'The Adventures of Tintin' sounds too much like a category only for the original book series, and nothing else.  Andy Dingley (talk) 17:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: it was my suggestion that this should have a full discussion rather than a Speedy decision, because at first glance it seemed pretty obvious what the category is for. Although Tintin is a disambiguation page, many of the other meanings are derivative from this character & franchise. Many of the articles in Category:Tintin are just named according to "Tintin", not "The Adventures of Tintin", e.g. Ideology of Tintin not "Ideology of The Adventures of Tintin". My starting point is that it would be unnecessary to rename such pages, so I need to think through why we would rename the categories. I didn't know there was a Tintin (magazine) which carried other stories (such as Alix and Blake and Mortimer), but confusion with that seems unlikely. Would it be helpful to expand this nom with proposed renames for the sub-categories as well? (except for Category:Tintin games which was already nominated on Sept 1 to "Video games based on..." but with options for the short or long name.) – Fayenatic  L ondon 17:40, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep The category covers the entire franchise, not just the comic series entitled The Adventures of Tintin. Compare at Category:Bambi, Category:Sailor Moon, and much else in Category:Media franchises.- choster (talk) 19:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that if the rename happened, the rest of the franchise as well as the unofficial works should still come within the category as "works based on The Adventures of Tintin"; that would fit within a wide-ranging series of CFDs to distinguish original works and clarify which categories are for "works based on" them. – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Such an outcome would result, on the one hand, for most franchises with few articles, in the equivalent of an eponymous band category containing the main article and a single subcategory for albums; on the other hand, for large franchises, of making Category:Star Wars a subcategory of Category:Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope called Category:Works based on Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope. One of the main points of the Category:Media franchises branch is to capture cases where the original work is overshadowed in popular usage by its extended universe of sequels, adaptations, merchandise, and extended fictional universe.- choster (talk) 15:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That's an important example, but it's not quite that bad: Episode IV was only ever going to be part of a series of films collectively called Star Wars, so if this method goes ahead, Category:Works based on Star Wars would hold the categories for books, TV, games & other merchandise; even though Lucas planned the merchandising in advance, they are still based on the films. Category:Star Trek was recently set up this way, and looks fine to me. Category:Comics characters in other media is already set up with many sub-cats, and could simply be renamed from "X in other media" to "Works based on X". strikes me as a more trenchant case where, as you put it so well, the original work is overshadowed. What other media franchises strike people as inappropriate to categorise as "works based on foo" where foo is the original medium, or "works based on bar" where bar is the central name? – Fayenatic  L ondon 18:12, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I still don't understand your argument. By this standard, Category:G.I. Joe television series would become Category:Television series based on G.I. Joe, but they aren't "based on" G.I. Joe, which was a doll. G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero was based on both the G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero toy line and its simultaneously released comic book series. Yet all of these things are within a larger universe called G.I. Joe, and thus we have Category:G.I. Joe.- choster (talk) 16:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the example. However, it seems to me that they are ultimately based on the toy, since that came first; so yes, I would be inclined to rename the TV category to Category:Television series based on G.I. Joe, as part of which would be within  as well as . (I've heard of but am not acquainted with the franchise, so excuse me if I'm missing a point.) – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:42, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename and redirect to help with the "works based on..." renaming project. – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:57, 7 September 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:Melvillians

 * 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. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:26, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Melvillians to Category:Wikipedians who read Herman Melville
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename When possible, titles of user categories should clearly indicate their nature. Moreover the rename would be consistent with the format of other categories in Category:Wikipedians by interest in an author. Pichpich (talk) 14:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete: This falls under the 'liking' category and isn't of aid to constructing the encylopedia. - The Bushranger One ping only 14:55, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * While I'm tempted to agree, it would be a little unfair to target this one and not Category:Wikipedians by interest in an author as a whole. Pichpich (talk) 21:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep: The category was created to identify and bring together editors who are interested in working on all articles relating to him. Which makes it useful and worth keeping. "Editors who read" would not suffice. ~ Alcmaeonid (talk) 17:56, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. After two months, it's not working yet. I suggest you have a look round WikiProject Novels (or go up from there to WP Literature) and start a Herman Melville task force instead. – Fayenatic  L ondon 18:36, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename - since it's a single member category, who has commented here stating that they want to collaborate on such topics. - jc37 20:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete and let people create a properly named and clear category for those interested in studying Herman Melville. The category as currently named does not make it clear it is a user category, so we should delete it ASAP.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:33, 11 September 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:Wolverine

 * 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 and rename to Category:Wolverine (comics). Timrollpickering (talk) 17:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting wolverine


 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT; category just contains ol' Wolvy and his Ultimate alterverse alter-ego which are already properly categorised under Category:Marvel Comics superheroes, along with the "titles" category which is already properly categorised under Category:Marvel Comics titles. The Bushranger One ping only 14:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. If kept, it should definitely be as Category:Wolverine (comics). Pichpich (talk) 21:30, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Now that Fayenatic has populated the category, it appears to be sound. So I'm changing my !vote to 'Rename. Pichpich (talk) 08:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 *  Keep ; nominator's rationale no longer applies as it has since been populated, and currently contains 7 articles, 1 template and a sub-category for comics titles. No objection to renaming to Category:Wolverine (comics) per Pichpich. – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:43, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, changing my !vote explicitly from Keep to Rename. – Fayenatic  L ondon 18:15, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Neutral but agree if kept it should be named Category:Wolverine (comics).--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:52, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Nice work on populating! Rename to Category:Wolverine (comics). - The Bushranger One ping only 19:41, 7 September 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.

Businesspeople in the oil industry

 * 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 for now. The oil and gas industry question is best handled in a separate nomination. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:05, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Category:American oil businesspeople → Category:American businesspeople in the oil industry
 * Category:Azerbaijani oil magnates → Category:Azerbaijani businesspeople in the oil industry
 * Category:British oil industrialists → Category:British businesspeople in the oil industry
 * Category:Russian oil industrialists → Category:Russian businesspeople in the oil industry


 * Rename all. Per the recently closed Categories for discussion/Log/2012 August 30 my proposed naming scheme may not be the best one, but it's hard for me to consider "businesspeople in oil" a good phrase. Perhaps then "Businesspeople in petroleum?" I don't know. I leave it up to the discussion to come up with the best target name. If a different name template than I am suggesting is picked, also include Category:Norwegian businesspeople in the oil industry which I am creating concurrently. __meco (talk) 14:25, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Businesspeople in oil? Nobody light a match! - The Bushranger One ping only 16:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename all. Much better title. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:37, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom. Some categories will need the "industry" suffix; others won't, it shouldn't be used when it can be avoided but, as pointed out, this is a case where omitting it is awkward. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom. At the same time, I am little bit confused. This proposal includes some oil industrialists' categories (British, Russian) but not category:American oil industrialists. I propose to upmerge it into Category:American oil businesspeople (or by the proposed name Category:American businesspeople in the oil industry). Otherwise, if kept, also other oil industrialists categories should be kept. Beagel (talk) 18:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Update/comment. I have realized since I made the nomination that we also have the natural gas industry with its separate category hierarchies. And obviously (at least from a Norwegian perspective) oil and gas go hand in hand. Unless we actively integrate this industry we'll be left with having to create a separate, albeit significantly smaller, hierarchy for it at some later time, or not. So, perhaps the smart thing at this point would be to merge the two industries, either as "oil and gas industry." Take a look at the content of Category:Oil companies by country and Category:Natural gas companies by country and observe how the membership of both overlap almost completely. __meco (talk) 08:06, 7 September 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:Sekoku no Ryuu Kishi

 * 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. Misplaced article in category space. Creator has already properly created an article. The Bushranger One ping only 17:38, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting sekoku no ryuu kishi


 * Nominator's rationale: Improper use of article text in a Category page. The category consists solely of a user space page and an empty list (that has been nominated for deletion under WP:CSD.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:08, 6 September 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:Skillet members

 * 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 C2D. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:21, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Skillet members to Category:Skillet (band) members
 * Propose renaming Category:For King & Country albums to Category:For King & Country (band) albums
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename to match Skillet (band) and For King & Country (band) respectively and avoid any potential ambiguity. Pichpich (talk) 13:58, 6 September 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:Indian motor scooters

 * 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.  Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:28, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Propose deleting indian motor scooters


 * Nominator's rationale: This is a completely unnecessary split of the existing Category:Motor scooters. No other scooters are grouped by country. Biker Biker (talk) 06:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * oppose Category:Motor scooters by country would be a reasonable hierarchy to create. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:05, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That would make sense. --Biker Biker (talk) 21:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep and create Category:Motor scooters by country as parent - The Bushranger One ping only 22:08, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm unsure we should create a by-country hierarchy. There aren't that many scooters all in all. But I wouldn't object. __meco (talk) 11:02, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename Category:Motor scooters built in India. With the interational trade in motor vehicles, one might expect that natioanl categories would be obsolete.  However having checked a sample of the articles, all are either made in India or assembled in India from imported parts.  This applies to the Honda and Suzuki brands, which seem to be built by Indian joint-ventures.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:34, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That does not fit the pattern set by Category:Indian motorcycles and Category:Indian automobiles. Motor vehicle by country categories use "Y X" format. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:05, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, it works in its current categories. Hold off on a moterscotters by country structure until we have other countries to put in it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:36, 11 September 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:People from Grafton, New Hampshire

 * 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) 16:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Grafton, New Hampshire to Category:People from Grafton County, New Hampshire
 * Nominator's rationale: Single-article by-city cat, not much reasonable chance for expansion for this town of under 1500 people. The Bushranger One ping only 05:56, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge per nominator and per WP:SMALLCAT. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:06, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge per WP:SMALLCAT....William 16:41, 8 September 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:Alumni of the University of Malta

 * 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; there seems to be a better case for a mass renaming in other direction. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:25, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Alumni of the University of Malta to Category:University of Malta alumni
 * Nominator's rationale: All subcategories of Category:Alumni by university or college in Europe except for those in the UK and Ireland use the "(X) alumni" format. As an independent nation, Malta doesn't seem to have a reason to be more like the UK and Ireland than all of the other countries in Europe.-- Mike Selinker (talk) 05:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Category:Alumni of the University of Malta to Category:University of Malta alumni – C2C. The BushrangerOne ping only 22:56, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose this one. It's the only entry in Category:Alumni by university or college in Malta and the order shouldn't be reversed. Malta has strong historic and cultural ties to the UK. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I might take it to full later (or not). - The Bushranger One ping only 20:20, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The "Foo alumni" convention is a bad choice in terms of usability, because it places the crucial modifier word at the end of what can be a very long title. For example, Category:University of Cincinnati – College-Conservatory of Music alumni and Category:Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania alumni would me much more easily read if they were named Category:Alumni of the University of Cincinnati – College-Conservatory of Music and Category:Alumni of the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. That "Alumni of Foo" format would also make it easier to apply these categories using WP:HOTCAT, because it would save editors from having to search through a long list of other categories relating to that university. I accept that "Foo alumni" is more common usage in many places, but "Alumni of Foo" is equally understandable and much better suited to the speed-reading habits of online usage. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:17, 6 September 2012 (UTC) I can see the case for consistency, and I usually favour it, but consistently enforcing a bad naming convention is silly. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support; the argument that Malta has close ties to the UK is a reasonable enough concern, however other 'close ties' countries - Canada, Australia, and India, for instance - all uniformly and without exception use the standard "Foo alumni" format. There's no reason for Malta not to follow the standard for Europe or, for that matter, the standard of the rest of the world. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Neutral. The convention is as stated by Bushranger, so I will not oppose this move ... but nor will I support it.
 * I can see your point; perhaps eventually they all should be renamed, but they should conform to one standard or the other as a whole, and getting them all to "Y X" now saves having to do it again later if "X of Y" failed to gain consensus. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:25, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * This one already conform to one standard or the other. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:14, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose (restated from Speedy) The current form is just as easily readable if not more so ("...alumni" is a particular source of confusion when the institution name contains punctuation) and there's no need to change in the name of European wide conformity. We already have two other European countries that use a different form and should allow other national categories to go their own way where appropriate. Timrollpickering (talk) 15:03, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Those "two other European countries" should also be renamed. Standardisation is professional and encyclopedic; letting them "go their own way" just gives the nabobs a chance to titter at how silly Wikipedia looks when they can't even keep their naming formats straight. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:24, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Bushranger, are you channelling the borg? What about local usage or comprehensibility or usability?
 * Resistance is Futile. I'm not sure I'd call it "bad". It may not be preferable, but which is more silly: enforcing a 'second choice' system until they can all be moved to the first choice, in case that 'first choice' doesn't get passed, or having a mish-mash of category names under both systems? As I mentioned above, it can't be assured that a rename for all would be passed, which would, if it didn't, leave us back at square one with the mish-mash. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:45, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Umm, we don't have a mish-mash, we just have a grand total of two systems (shock horror!) reflecting variations in usage. Similar variations exist in many other category trees. If this one is going to be standardised, let's standardise it to the more usable format. (I don't see anyone arguing that "Foo alumni" is better). -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:11, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I will. It puts the school at the front, making it easier to scan the list of subcategories when you bring up a container category.--Mike Selinker (talk) 01:40, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose – 'Alumni of' is vastly preferable to horrible concatenations such as Category:California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo alumni (which would merit much tittering, unlike the entirely cromulent 'Alumni of the University of Malta'). Oculi (talk) 21:49, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That name actually looks just fine to me. But then again, I know I'm weird. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:45, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me too.--Mike Selinker (talk) 01:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge one way or the other. That said, I would go with the current proposal, but I would ask those who have said oppose to reconsider.  What they are currently advocating is leaving duplicate categories.  There is no reason to do that.  Do you mean reverse merge or are you advocating that we leave duplicate categories?John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:39, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually there's no duplicate category. The current content of the target is a category redirect. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:58, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support: Most of the categories use "Foo alumni", and because the University or college is listed first, then one does not have to use a default sortkey for those categories; whereas, when "Alumni" is first, a default sortkey would have to be used on every category to sort by the university or college name. I have cleaned up many categories, and the default sortkey is not used regularly by editors, so it just makes more work for those of us who like organized categories to have to add default sortkeys all the time. --Funandtrvl (talk) 00:56, 27 September 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:User en-2.5

 * 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) 16:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting user en-2.5


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete. Joke category. "This user has significantly improved his/her vocabulary and thinks he/she is able to contribute with an advanced level of English, but may actually not."  Previous similar babel categories have been deleted, see here.  Does not benefit the encyclopedia. VegaDark (talk) 05:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Humorous Categories such as Category:Rouge editors seems to be permitted. ibicdlcod (talk) 08:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Does not assist collaboration between editors. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:18, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator and BrownHairedGirl. Ncboy2010 (talk) 11:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:USERCAT - jc37 20:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:USERCAT. Nominating Category:Rouge editors would be both logical and instant drama-ish. Pichpich (talk) 21:34, 6 September 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.