Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 April 21



Category:Golden Gloves champions

 * 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) 11:06, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Propose deleting golden gloves champions


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete. Confusing - this is used by boxers who have won regional or local Golden Gloves amateur boxing championships but who do not qualify to be in Category:National Golden Gloves champions. Winning such a competition does not confer notability per WP:NBOX.  Only 4 people are in the category now.  3 of the 4 are professional boxers and they are better categorized using other existing boxing categories.  1 is a professional hockey player and his being in this category does not add any value to the encyclopedia. Note that the "Underpopulated category" template is a recent addition from last November.  The category has existed since 2007.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  21:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Aside from the inherently confusing aspects described above, this is a sort of special instance of "performers by performance" and "people by awards they've won" -- both of which are generally not appropriate categories unless they are highly defining. --Lquilter (talk) 13:53, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete, appears to be confusing application here. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:53, 29 April 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:Birmingham Gay Village

 * 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. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:08, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Propose merging Category:Birmingham Gay Village to Category:LGBT culture in Birmingham
 * Nominator's rationale: Unnecessarily WP:OC and WP:OC subcategory for an individual neighbourhood; is sufficient (and not all that large), and the main article already links to all of the other pages in the category anyway. Merge. Bearcat (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge -- not upmerge as gthe Hippodrome is not specificially LGBT. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:03, 22 April 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:Gay culture in London

 * 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. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Propose merging Category:Gay culture in London to Category:LGBT culture in London
 * Nominator's rationale: Yet another in the constant profusion of quadrant-specific diffusions of LGBT categories last fall by banned user RafikiSykes and his sockfarm. No real indication that we need a separate category here, when already existed and wasn't all that large to begin with. Merge. Bearcat (talk) 18:44, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge -- We rarely need any split below LGBT. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Support --NaBUru38 (talk) 15:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge - Not typically helpful to split LGBT into gay & other subsections. --Lquilter (talk) 15:16, 24 April 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:Gay culture in Liverpool

 * 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.--  Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Propose merging Category:Gay culture in Liverpool to Category:LGBT culture in Liverpool
 * Nominator's rationale: Yet another in the constant profusion of quadrant-specific diffusions of LGBT categories last fall by banned user RafikiSykes and his sockfarm. No real indication that we need a separate category here, when already existed and wasn't all that large to begin with. Merge. Bearcat (talk) 18:36, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * As the user who created the original category LGBT Culture in Liverpool, I have no idea why someone insisted on fragmenting the articles into another unnecessary category. Agreed 100% with the above. Merge Richie wright1980 (talk) 09:18, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Support --NaBUru38 (talk) 15:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge - Not typically helpful to split LGBT into gay & other subsections. --Lquilter (talk) 15:16, 24 April 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:Retcon films

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


 * The result of the discussion was: rename. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Retcon films to Category:Alternative sequel films
 * Nominator's rationale: The word "retcon" can refer to all sorts of continuity changes made from one instalment to the next, even very minor ones, so it's not appropriate to use it as the name of a category for films that ignore previous instalments entirely. Also, the term is rare outside fandoms, which means many readers won't understand it. "Alternative sequel films" is much more intuitive and precise. —Flax5 16:01, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom First, "Retcon" is short for Retroactive continuity, and the article on the subject uses the longer form. Second, the concept includes several types of additions, alterations, and subtractions to a series' canon material. If these films simply ignore one or more of their predecessors, this should be stated in the title. Dimadick (talk) 20:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename The target is much clearer as to what it means, and much easier to tell if it is fulfilled.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:55, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename, suggested proposal is logical in this case. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:53, 29 April 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:Kurdish inhabited regions

 * 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) 08:49, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

This category is just horrendous. a-there is no real clear definition. b-the suggested definition involves us in trying to say that an area is "traditionally inhabited by Kurds". However considering the anti-Kurdish policies of Turkey, population change in some areas, and the contested nature of even who is a Kurd this is a mess at best. Even worse, the idea of what is "traditional" is not clear. How far back to Kurds have to have lived in the area. Would we exclude a place that has a current Kurd majority if the Kurds were not the "Traditional" inhabitants? For example, if we could find places in Germany with Kurd-majority populations would we include them or exclude them because that is just the result of post-WWII mgrations and not "traditiona". Then we could revive the "Hispanic" category, but exclude Orlando and its large Puerto Rican population because they are not "traditionaly" there like the Hispano population of New Mexcio.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:45, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Category:Kurdish inhabited regions
 * Comment. Can we get a link to the category? It should have auto-generated if the template steps were used. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:14, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Link now added. Category is tagged.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:13, 22 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete -- I find it hard to see how this differs from Category:Kurdistan. If it is supposed to larger, I suspect someone is POV pushing for a greater Kurdistan.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:13, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. --NaBUru38 (talk) 15:23, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WP is not a place to stake your proposed state's claims to territory. Presumably, Kurds live in Istanbul, Tehran, London, New York, and basically every metropolitan place. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 02:18, 23 April 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.