Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 October 1



Category:Geology literature

 * 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 * The result of the discussion was: Nomination withdrawn. kelapstick(bainuu) 14:25, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Geology literature to Category:Geological literature
 * Nominator's rationale: Geology literature is not correct english satusuro 14:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Can you provide some more information to back up the claim that it is not correct English ? Presumably you also think Category:Geology books‎, Category:Geology journals‎, Category:Paleontology books‎ etc are wrong. DexDor (talk) 20:43, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No, please do not second guess my request - I am asking for one change not for the others you have quoted - the combination of geology X - where geology is the main noun, and the plural quantifier that follows is a plural noun. Geology as a noun and literature is a noun is not a common usage, the word before the second noun is usually changed - in this case geology noun becomes geological the adjective, and is the appropriate usage. satusuro 14:36, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose. We have Category:Logic literature, Category:Ethics literature etc and the above logic would, unless I'm missing something, (if applied to those categories) change them to "Logical literature" and "Ethical literature".  The current category structure is Category:Geology -> Category:Geology literature -> Category:Geology books and I'm unconvinced of the need to add extra complexity by using inconsistent terminology. DexDor (talk) 05:41, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * ' Nomination Withdrawn - after further investigation it is valid usage - despite it sounding wrong.satusuro 14:22, 3 October 2014 (UTC)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 on the autistic spectrum

 * 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. I did not see an effort to rename the article as suggested below, so this should move forward.  If someone later decides to get the article renamed we can reconsider this name. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:41, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:People on the autistic spectrum to Category:People on the autism spectrum
 * Nominator's rationale: I personally have never heard it referred to as the "autistic spectrum", and while that isn't grounds for a rename, our article sits at autism spectrum. Apart from consistency in naming, if you look at the Google hits for the two we have 2.8 million for "Autism Spectrum" and about 216,000 for "Autistic Spectrum". Further, the outcome of this discussion should apply to Category:Fictional characters on the autistic spectrum‎, but not to Category:Autistic savants. kelapstick(bainuu) 11:38, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy per WP:C2D, rename to match article name. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:54, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: Do not "speedy" this, as WP:ENGVAR; I believe "autistic spectrum" is the usual term here in the UK. The evidence from Google Scholar used at Talk:Autism_spectrum/Archive_1 showed only a marginal weight for "autism spectrum". Scholar now shows a majority for "autism spectrum", although Google Books shows a majority for "autistic spectrum". – Fayenatic  L ondon 15:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: I think that's an argument for renaming the article. I would be open to delaying this discussion if you want to work on that name change. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:50, 6 October 2014 (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:Compositions by V. Harikrishna

 * 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. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:38, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Compositions by V. Harikrishna to Category:Film scores by V. Harikrishna
 * Nominator's rationale: The contents are not musical compositions but films. See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 April 24. --Tijd-jp (talk) 10:45, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Support, current naming convention. --Cavarrone 11:31, 23 October 2014 (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:Roman Catholic bishops in Mexico

 * 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. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:25, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose upmerging Category:Roman Catholic bishops in Mexico‎ to Category:Bishops in Mexico‎
 * Nominator's rationale: There are currently only Roman Catholic bishops in the Bishops of Mexico tree so it is not meaningful to have two categories. Possible alternatives: downmerge instead of upmerge, or upmerge and rename back into Roman Catholic. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose Just added an Anglican bishop to the category and this has further room for growth since two Orthodox churches (OCA & Antiochian) have bishops in Mexico. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose per RevelationDirect.--kelapstick(bainuu) 12:07, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose I am surprised that Marcocapelle would make such a nomination. Even a junior editor would know that this cat is part of a long tree structure and also has ample opportunity to grow. I would urge him to withdraw the nomination. Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:26, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose per RevelationDirect satusuro 23:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Withdraw nomination per RevelationDirect. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:38, 4 October 2014 (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:American Anglican bishops‎

 * 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. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:37, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:American Anglican bishops‎ to Category:Anglican bishops in the United States‎
 * Nominator's rationale: to make it more clear that this is a country category, not a nationality category. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Support reasonable clarification. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:20, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Support bishops in America are not inherently American. Although see my comment below in the Jamaica section regarding in or of. and have a look at Category:Italian bishops (the contents not the probably improper name). --kelapstick(bainuu) 11:42, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Support per nom Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:27, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Support per nom satusuro 23:58, 2 October 2014 (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:Bishops of Jamaica

 * 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:Anglican bishops in Jamaica. There is a consensus to rename, but the issue in choosing in/of is not clear.  Based on the suggestion below that Category:Bishops in Jamaica be the parent, if I read the replies correctly, it should follow that name.  If there is a substantial objection to my logic we can have a new nomination to only discuss the two letters.  This rename fixes the more important larger problem. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:34, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Bishops of Jamaica to Category:Anglican bishops of Jamaica
 * Nominator's rationale: Per main article these are Anglican bishops, in contrast to Roman Catholic bishops in Jamaica who are in another category. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Support principle but shouldn't the target be Category:Anglican bishops in Jamaica with Category:Bishops of Jamaica redirecting to Category:Bishops in Jamaica? There seems to be a lot of inconsistency in Category:Bishops by country, but it generally looks like the standard is in not of. Or is it of because they may not be physically present in the country in question any more (after retirement, for example.)--kelapstick(bainuu) 11:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Rename to Something I agree with the spirit of the nomination and will defer to others what preposition to use. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:50, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Well put, I am sure there is a WikiProject or style guideline that covers this sort of thing. I have raised the question regarding where people do their bishoping at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:05, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I presume that the category is named "of Jamaica" because Jamaica is not only a country but also the Anglican diocese. Personally I don't have a clear preference for either "of Jamaica" or "in Jamaica". Marcocapelle (talk) 16:54, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Support Jamaica is an exception: for the Anglican Communion, the bishops may be said to be both bishops in and bishops of Jamaica. In the RC church, there are multiple dioceses so the issue does not arise. IT should then be a child of Category:Bishops in Jamaica. Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment -- The Anglican category should follow the title actually used, if necessary with the prefix "Anglican". There should be a parent covering bishops of all denominations.   Peterkingiron (talk) 12:21, 13 October 2014 (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:Pretzel knots and links

 * 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) 01:43, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Pretzel knots and links to Category:Pretzel knots and links (mathematics)
 * Nominator's rationale: Pretzel knot is a vague term that can mean a type of rope knot or bracelet knot, a soft pretzel with garlic, or a mathematical concept. Category:Fixed points (mathematics) shows an example of this approach. (Alternatively, we could use Category:Pretzel links since the main article, pretzel link, is much less ambiguous term but this is a subcategory of tree with a clear naming convention: Category:Knots and links.) RevelationDirect (talk) 02:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: Notified the category creator and this discussion has been included in WikiProject Mathematics. – RevelationDirect (talk) 02:40, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Support rename, prefer alternative rename Category:Pretzel links per main article, and shorter name. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:28, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Support All the articles in this category are mathematical in nature, so adding the disambiguation term is natural. "pretzel knot" gets 751 hits in Gscholar and "pretzel link" gets 276 hits; this agrees with my impression that pretzel knot is the more familiar term, even within mathematics. Thus I'd prefer Category:Pretzel knots and links (mathematics). --Mark viking (talk) 03:37, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Since there is nothing to go at "Category:Pretzel knots and links" to be confused with "Category:Pretzel knots and links (mathematics)" is unnecessary. Notice that an article is at Bill Clinton, not Bill Clinton (president) and that a category is at Category:California, but not Category:California (state). Hyacinth (talk) 04:17, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Background I recently created Category:Pretzels and there is no main article for pretzel knot. That may or may not sway your opinion but that's where this nomination is coming from and I should have mentioned that in the nomination. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:16, 1 October 2014 (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.