Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 October 24



Category:Devourment compilation albums

 * 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, as in the case of live albums on the previous day's CFD log page. – Fayenatic  L ondon 15:38, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Devourment compilation albums to Category:Devourment albums
 * Nominator's rationale: There appears to be only 1 compilation album Rathfelder (talk) 22:44, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep – per WP:SMALLCAT: part of the "large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme" Category:Compilation albums by artist. Oculi (talk) 23:31, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The whole (compilation album) scheme seems quite redundant, there can't be a lot of artists that have produced so many albums that this type of diffusion is necessary. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:26, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * This is not a vote, because while I am in favor of upmerging, I understand the procedural objection. It should become a batch nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:45, 27 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Oppose per WP:SMALLCAT. Part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme. Armbrust The Homunculus 00:52, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Upmerge There is no small cat exception for specified types of albums, just for the albums by creator scheme. As long as all albums are categorized by a creator things are working, we do not need more precise categories in all cases.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:46, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Upmerge Per JPL's analysis. Subcategories of albums by artist are not immune from WP:SMALLCAT. RevelationDirect (talk) 04:24, 27 November 2016 (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:Jimmy Gilmer and the Fireballs songs

 * 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 (non-admin closure) . Marcocapelle (talk) 06:28, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Jimmy Gilmer and the Fireballs songs to Category:The Fireballs songs
 * Nominator's rationale: Per the article The Fireballs, it is noted that the band has been credited as Jimmy Gilmer and the Fireballs, so there should be no need to have 2 distinct categories for the same band. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 21:23, 24 October 2016 (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:United States presidential election in Colorado, 2004

 * 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: triple upmerge (non-admin closure) . Marcocapelle (talk) 06:33, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting united states presidential election in colorado, 2004


 * Nominator's rationale: Small category (2 articles) with little possibility of growth TM 11:40, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Upmerge (not delete) – to the parents Category:United States presidential election, 2004, by state, Category:United States presidential elections in Colorado and Category:Colorado elections, 2004. Oculi (talk) 14:27, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Upmerge as proposed by - there is no reason to single out Colorado for this category, although the contents of this category do belong in the category trees of all its parents. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:15, 30 October 2016 (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:Mundaring, Western Australia

 * 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: split. – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose splitting Category:Mundaring, Western Australia to Category:Mundaring, Western Australia and Category:Shire of Mundaring
 * Nominator's rationale: For consistency with other Perth / Western Australian suburbs and local government areas, the suburb (Mundaring, Western Australia) and the LGA (Shire of Mundaring) should be separate categories. Mitch Ames (talk) 02:25, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Question - are you asserting that all western australian LGAs are in separate categories from the localities they are synonymous with in the event of a category existing ? If so please explain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Albany,_Western_AustraliaJarrahTree 02:51, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * What I was asserting was that (Shire of) Mundaring appeared to be an exception to the general rule expressed by the subcategories of . Possibly should also have  split out from it; I notice that  is not currently under  and there is nothing in the description of  that says it covers the LGA as well as the port city. Perhaps we need to first state what, if any, general rule we should follow for categorizing these things, then make the hierarchy follow that rule. It's possible that the general rule might be different for Perth suburbs/LGAs vs small country shires (eg, which might have towns rather than suburbs) and large regional centres such as Albany or  which have their own suburbs.
 * (For what it's worth, I noticed this because Railway Reserves Heritage Trail is in both and, but the latter is a subcategory of the former. If nothing else changes, WP:SUBCAT says Railway Reserves Heritage Trail ought to be removed from .)
 * Mitch Ames (talk) 05:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I can only see two pages that would stay in the current category after a split, in which case it would become a WP:SMALLCAT. How about simply renaming to Category:Shire of Mundaring? – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd put at least The Loose Box, Kattamordo Heritage Trail, Mundaring, Western Australia, in the suburb category. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:54, 3 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep or rename to Category:Shire of Mundaring, per Fayenatic london. As I would disagree with having the trail in Category:Mundaring, Western Australia when splitting, the latter category would only consist of the eponymous article, a restaurant and a subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:35, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - there are enough exceptions throughout the western australian local government areas and bodies to make this singular tortuous event the more so. In effect the whole of australian local government system of articles may well have similar issues that make this singular example of creation odd (why not a check of all australian itemss). I fail to see why one specific item has to be dealt with like this, I'd like to see examples of other states of australia where such category distinction is either followed or not.

As for subcat issues where something passes through more than one locality, surely the rule/procedure needs to be changed, thrown out or ignored. Otherwsise the editor who does the edit makes a very stupid distinction - the trail actually in real life runs through a lot more suburbs/localities. One way to deal with this is to see how wikidata has any patterns on this matter - whether contiguous localities with a recurring pipeline or trail are dealt with in what manner.JarrahTree 07:51, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:IAR it for now, yes commonsense says there should one for the shire and one for the locality but thats what WP:BOLD is for just do it if you bring such move to places like this it just wastes everyones time as we know these discussion pages almost never promote being bold or using commonsense. Gnangarra 10:45, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - I think this discussion is really a bit silly. So I've been bold and created a new Category:Shire of Mundaring.  It is now populated by the eponymous article, a list of shire presidents article, and each of the articles on the suburbs in the shire.  There should be similar categories for all of the lgas in the Perth metro area, if not also the rest of WA. Bahnfrend (talk) 09:39, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The discussion isn't as silly as it looks because while creating the new category, the original category becomes almost empty. I would recommend merging back while I'm neutral on the name of the merged category, either Category:Mundaring, Western Australia or Category:Shire of Mundaring. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:02, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * while creating the new category, the original category becomes almost empty — Not necessarily. For example I disagree with this edit moving Kattamordo Heritage Trail from to . The trail has end-points or passes through the suburbs of Mundaring, Kalamunda, Bickley. It's currently categorized in the shire Mundaring, suburb Kalamunda, and Bickley not at all. I suggest that it should consistently categorized in all three suburbs (and no shires). Mitch Ames (talk) 00:35, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * comment Category:Mundaring, Western Australia is not Category:Shire of Mundaring one is a place one is the third tier of government on Australia, Federal, State, Local being in Mundaring doesnt automaticly make it part of the Shire of Mundaring and being part of the Shire of Mundaring doesnt mean its in Mundaring.  Gnangarra 00:41, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Possibly ought not be in, as it currently is, in which case some articles could be in both categories. For comparision (looking only under , we also have  in ,  in  and  in  in . Possibly those suburbs/towns/localities should also be removed from the shire/city categories. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:41, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * This is totally irrelevent to this particular CFD - if you are going to get carried away - go somewhere like the wa noticeboard and agonise over it there with the current road directory references (or if you dont do that - current up to date road directory with the appropriate up to date boundaries that is - ) JarrahTree 09:04, 16 November 2016 (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.