Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 August 29



Category:Anatolia Beyliks architecture

 * 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: Relisted to Categories for discussion/Log/2013 September 19. Dana boomer (talk) 22:45, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Anatolia Beyliks architecture to Category:Architecture of the Anatolian beyliks
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename per main article on the Anatolian beyliks as well as a clearer name. Constantine  ✍  17:22, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:37, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose. "FOOian architecture" or "FOO architecture" is the standard across almost all categories for describing architecture of a particular place. Cf. . Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:45, 17 September 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:People from Adams, Minnesota

 * 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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Adams, Minnesota to Category:People from Mower County, Minnesota
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Small town with only one entry....William 16:39, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Upmerge per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:58, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Upmerge per nom. –Fredddie™ 16:44, 6 September 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:First Ladies and Gentlemen of North Dakota

 * 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 as proposed. Anyone can start a nomination to propose a rename to Category:Spouses of Governors of North Dakota, either as a test nomination or as a group nomination. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:41, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:First Ladies and Gentlemen of North Dakota to Category:First Ladies of North Dakota
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per main article and also history (cf. WP:CRYSTAL). We don't have (e.g.) category:First Ladies and Gentlemen of the United States. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I also oppose Hmains's proposal. The idea has some merit, but only if applied to all such categories, and that can be done only by a group nomination. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:29, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename Mainly because of the rule against predicting the future.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment I would rename the category: Spouses of Governors of North Dakota. It is simple and concise and we don't need about changing the category. Thank you-RFD (talk) 22:44, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * rename to Spouses of Governors of North Dakota and go on and rename all the by-state subcats of Category:Spouses of United States state governors to follow the same pattern: Spouses. Hmains (talk) 02:47, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I guess that the basis of the nominator's concern is that there has not been a "first gentleman" of North Dakota. If so, he should make that clear, and link to the relevant article(s) rather than leaving other editors to guess. Either way, I oppose the proposed change, because the more inclusive form is the convention of Category:Spouses of United States state governors.
 * rename to Spouses of Governors of North Dakota, as a NPOV (or rather gender-neutral) title. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:53, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose because we shouldn't need to rename the category whenever someone is elected. Category:Spouses of Governors of North Dakota per PKI/HM is a reasonable name tough. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 02:38, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Relist for further consideration as a test nomination. I support renaming to . These are the only subcategories of Category:Spouses of American politicians not to use the term "spouses", with the sole exceptions of the subcats for First & Second Ladies of the United States‎. Even the direct parent of this category,, does not use "First Ladies and Gentlemen". When relisted as a test nom, a notice should also be posted on that parent cat. Cgingold (talk) 01:28, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Unlike the national kind, state-level "first ladies and gentlemen" are not automatically notable enough for their own independent articles. Only one person in the entire list actually has her own article (and one other one just has a redirect to her husband), and few to none of the others are likely to possess any claim of notability that would survive WP:NOTINHERITED — so at this time, this is an WP:OC violation with only a theoretical, not a particularly real, prospect of expansion. Delete until such time as we actually have enough content to warrant it. Bearcat (talk) 07:49, 9 September 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:Routes needing a junction list

 * 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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:38, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Routes needing a junction list to Category:Road articles needing a junction list
 * Nominator's rationale: Changing "routes" to "articles" would globalize this category. Not every instance of where a junction list would be needed can be considered a route. –Fredddie™ 16:21, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong support per nom – Kind of a gimme really. Mitch 32 (Wikipedia's worst Reform Luddite.) 16:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Category:Articles in roads needing a junction list would be clearer. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:51, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I changed my request to something clearer. –Fredddie™ 22:39, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:38, 6 September 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:Paul Lorenzen

 * 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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:51, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting paul lorenzen


 * Nominator's rationale: This category does not perform a useful purpose - it contains only one article (that is in plenty of other categories) and the category is itself uncategorized. DexDor (talk) 05:01, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete – very odd. Oculi (talk) 15:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment the subject is a philosopher who founded the "Erlangen School", a philosophic movement. His co-founder has a redlink.  The other member of the category was a student of Lorenszen.  Erlangen School is currently a redirect to Neo-Lutheranism, presumably as a result of the place having given its name to another movement.  One might argue for the category to be renamed Category:Erlangen School, but sicne we do not have an article on the school, we ought not to have a category.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:01, 31 August 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:Hello Venus 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: Withdrawn by nominator - Non-admin close. Cgingold (talk) 02:00, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting hello venus members


 * Nominator's rationale: This category does not perform a useful purpose - it contains only one article (that is in plenty of other categories) and the category is itself uncategorized. DexDor (talk) 05:00, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn. DexDor (talk) 20:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep – standard subcat of Category:Musicians by band. Now has 6 members. Oculi (talk) 15:21, 29 August 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:Video gaming templates by country

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


 * The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 19:35, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting video gaming templates by country


 * Nominator's rationale: I the creator of this category is nominating to delete it because, I originally created the category to help categorize the video gaming templates in... templates, which all of them got deleted. So this category is now useless. Seqqis (talk) 02:02, 29 August 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:Zoids releases

 * 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: Withdrawn by nominator - Non-admin close. Cgingold (talk) 02:02, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting zoids releases


 * Nominator's rationale: This category no longer has any use. TTN (talk) 00:56, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I forgot about empty categories applying for speedy deletion. This can be closed, and I'll put up the tag later. TTN (talk) 01:00, 29 August 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.