Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 March 28



Category:North Group (Trujillo)

 * 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. – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:08, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:North Group (Trujillo) to Category:to be decided
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename to one of two options:
 * 1 - The key article is North Group, so a rename to is better than the current name.
 * 2 - All other categories for Trujillo follow the standard of ; as such, is also better than the current name.
 * Personally, I favour Option 1, but either would be an improvement. Grutness...wha?  23:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep -- categories sometimes need disambiguators where articles have none. The categories are at Birmingham, West Midlands, not Birmingham, to keep Birmingham, Al out of them.  I am surprised that there is no other "North Group", and so would discourage 1.  On the other hand, there is no need for a disambiguator to be any longer than needed.  Peterkingiron (talk) 13:54, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose option 1/neutral on other. This needs some amount of disambiguation.  I am not sure if it might need more than it has, but it needs at least what it has.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:03, 12 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:UCI Road World Cup

 * 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:UCI Road World Cup (men). – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:UCI Road World Cup to Category:UCI Men's Road World Cup
 * Nominator's rationale: To distinguish from the ongoing UCI women's world cup category. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 15:45, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose The main article of the category is UCI Road World Cup. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename to Category:UCI Road World Cup (men), to distinguish it from Category:UCI Women's Road World Cup. The head article is at UCI Road World Cup, so we disambiguate by keeping the WP:COMMONNAME, but adding a parenthetical disambiguator. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:02, 5 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:Road bicycle races

 * 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, but move all contents to the subcategory Category:Men's road bicycle races.--Mike Selinker (talk) 17:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Road bicycle races to Category:Men's road bicycle races
 * Nominator's rationale: In this category are only men's races listed. There is also a category for women's races (Category:Women's cycle races). Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 15:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment: I have posted a question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling about changing related articles and categories from "bicycle" to "cycle". – Fayenatic  L ondon 23:30, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment this should be a container category for men's, women's race categories, and contain articles on mixed gender races. So, move the content to Men's, but keep the category around. The equivalent Women's should be subcategorized to Category:Women's road bicycle races to match, since there are non-road races as well (velodrome racing, mountain racing, BMX stadium, etc). They should use "bicycle", since there are other types of cycling, such as unicycle racing, so "cycle" should be used as supercategorization for various forms of cycles. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 05:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose per the IP, but create Category:Men's road bicycle races and Category:Women's road bicycle races as sub-categories. There are plenty of articles on women's road cycling races, such as Giro d'Italia Femminile, Tour de l'Aude Cycliste Féminin. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:40, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename to Category:Road cycle races and create sub-cat Category:Men's road cycle races. No-one has responded at WikiProject Cycling, so this is just my own view. – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:21, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as a container category, create Category:Men's road bicycle races, & move relevant content there. And just keep "bicycle" for now:  the "bicycle" to "cycle" issue can be handled separately, since it hasn't been fully discussed here.  --Lquilter (talk) 14:31, 2 May 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.

Grand viziers

 * 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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 02:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Grand viziers of Süleyman I to Category:Grand Viziers of Suleiman the Magnificent
 * Category:Grand viziers of Selim I to Category:Grand Viziers of Selim I
 * Category:14th-century Ottoman grand viziers to Category:14th-century Ottoman Grand Viziers
 * Category:15th-century Ottoman grand viziers to Category:15th-century Ottoman Grand Viziers
 * Category:16th-century Ottoman grand viziers to Category:16th-century Ottoman Grand Viziers
 * Category:17th-century Ottoman grand viziers to Category:17th-century Ottoman Grand Viziers
 * Category:18th-century Ottoman grand viziers to Category:18th-century Ottoman Grand Viziers
 * Category:19th-century Ottoman grand viziers to Category:19th-century Ottoman Grand Viziers
 * Category:20th-century Ottoman grand viziers to Category:20th-century Ottoman Grand Viziers


 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Capitalise per Grand Vizier, List of Ottoman Grand Viziers and parent ; change monarch name to match main article Suleiman the Magnificent. – Fayenatic  L ondon 13:45, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose : Vizier was a title. It was equivalent to modern government minister and grand vizier was the equivalent of Prime minister. In WP article Prime minister the word minister is written with a small p. So why to capitalize vizier ? (Well the article Grand Vizier may need moving, but that's another story.) I also oppose moving Suleyman I to Suleyman the Magnificient in cat. Most other sultans (Mehmet II, Selim I etc.) also have epithets. But their cats doesn't use the epithets. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 15:06, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Category:Grand viziers of Süleyman I to Category:Grand viziers of Suleiman the Magnificent – C2B per /Suleiman the Magnificent Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment This should be renamed to as C2A per Grand Vizier. Armbrust The Homunculus 08:21, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not so sure about that; see most of the subcategories of, which are not capitalized. I think speedy-wise we should leave the capitalization alone until all of them can be addressed together one way or the other. Good Ol’factory (talk) 09:18, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm not against it, but it should be addressed later one way or other. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:24, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * IMHO, if it's being done as a Speedy, it should follow Grand Vizier. – Fayenatic  L ondon 23:22, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Doing something speedily kind of presupposes that it is uncontroversial. Since there are categories that exist in both formats and we've had some discussion above, I think it's safe to say that changing the caps is something that should be discussed more broadly. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:01, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I should have posted the above discussion here more promptly. – Fayenatic  L ondon 23:33, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom to match the main article. The article on Prime Minister will probably have to be moved. Dimadick (talk) 08:37, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Reaname to follow the capitalisation of the main article. Armbrust The Homunculus 07:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * REname all -- This is the correct capitalisation, as much as Prime Minister. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:56, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename per correct capitalization. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:22, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. I commented above in the speedy nomination. I'm fine with the capitalization as long as it is consistently applied through all these categories. It should indeed be Category:Grand Viziers of Suleiman the Magnificent per /Suleiman the Magnificent. Good Ol’factory (talk) 20:52, 2 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:Films based on works by Huh Young-man

 * 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. The article has moved back to match the category name.--Mike Selinker (talk) 22:10, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Films based on works by Huh Young-man to Category:Films based on works by Heo Yeong-man
 * Propose renaming Category:Television programs based on works by Huh Young-man to Category:Television programs based on works by Heo Yeong-man
 * Propose renaming Category:Adaptations of works by Huh Young-man to Category:Adaptations of works by Heo Yeong-man
 * Nominator's rationale: These were speedily renamed to the spelling "Huh Young-man," but the article is at Heo Yeong-man.-- Mike Selinker (talk) 05:27, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Rename : I agree with Mike Selinker. Refreshersss (talk) 13:36, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * HOLD. The main article was moved on 26 March apparently without discussion. The spelling Heo Yeong-man may be technically correct but Huh Young-man has 20 times as many web hits. I will start a RM at Talk:Heo Yeong-man. – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:25, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I didn't know that. OK, let's hold off here until the RM is done.--Mike Selinker (talk) 20:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename now, as the RM has been closed as "don't move" the article. – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:39, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Someone has just moved it anyway, on the grounds that Huh Young-man is more commonly used. That seems right to me because WP:UE says, "if there is a common English-language form of the name, then use it, even if it is unsystematic". – Fayenatic  L ondon 23:36, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep' Our article currently sues the names that the categories currently use.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:04, 2 May 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:Statistics qualifications

 * 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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 17:20, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Statistics qualifications to Category:Statistics education
 * Nominator's rationale: Seems to be an example of over categorisation. Three of the 4 articles in this cat are already in the parent cat (Statistics education) Illia Connell (talk) 04:38, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Upmerge. Only one is a qualification and that is already in . – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:05, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * merge per nom. Three entries plainly belong in the education cat rather than here, and the fourth is not enough to rest a category on. "Qualifications" is vague and potentially misleading. Mangoe (talk) 14:06, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. There is a clear distinction in topics, with reasonable scope for expansion of qualfications in other countries. Unfortunate blurring of scope by incorrect additions can be remedied. 81.98.35.149 (talk) 14:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I note that you have removed two today; as they are in the head category this is not a problem, but it's generally not appropriate to remove pages during a category discussion. As for the scope for expansion: the category could always be re-created once there are sufficient articles to justify it. I would have no objection to redirecting it in the meantime, to make it slightly easier to re-create it if & when needed. – Fayenatic  L ondon 23:47, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Re-categorisation of articles has ALWAYS been allowed during discussions, particularly since editors usually only look at the aticldes they are editing, not the category listing which is where the notice is. The only constraint is "Please do not empty the category or remove this notice while the discussion is in progress." The two articles were clearly misclassified. 81.98.35.149 (talk) 14:01, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge The current category is too small to be useful.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:50, 6 May 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.

Al Ahli SC (Doha)

 * 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) 10:51, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Al-Ahly Doha to Category:Al Ahli SC (Doha)
 * Propose renaming Category:Al-Ahly Doha managers to Category:Al Ahli SC (Doha) managers
 * Propose merging Category:Al-Ahli (Doha) footballers to Category:Al-Ahly Doha players
 * Propose renaming Category:Al-Ahly Doha players to Category:Al Ahli SC (Doha) players
 * Nominator's rationale: per Al Ahli SC (Doha). – Michael (talk) 00:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. – Michael (talk) 00:50, 28 March 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.