Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 June 8



Category:Cornelius Jansen

 * 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.  ℯ  xplicit  00:53, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting cornelius jansen


 * Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OCEPON, the second subcategory with later followers doesn't belong here and the remainder is too little to keep this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:48, 8 June 2017 (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:Lists of farms

 * 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 * The result of the discussion was: withdrawn (non-admin closure) . Marcocapelle (talk) 15:03, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Lists of farms to Category:Agriculture-related lists
 * Nominator's rationale: upmerge per WP:SMALLCAT, only two articles in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:45, 8 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment – I have populated the category. It now has six entries. North America1000 05:16, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep -- I suspect that are or could be further lists to populate it with. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:20, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep, since it has been more adequately populated. Has potential to assist readers with navigation. North America1000 08:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Withdraw the nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:03, 17 June 2017 (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:Infrastructure as Code

 * 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: soft delete (non-admin closure) . Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting infrastructure as code


 * Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated (two entries), one likely non-notable, little rationale for why this would be ever populated, seems spammy. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:08, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 18:34, 8 June 2017 (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:Montgomeryshire 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: no consensus. Insufficient support for any of the proposed actions to take place.  ℯ  xplicit  00:53, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Montgomeryshire Architecture to Category:Buildings and structures in Montgomeryshire
 * Nominator's rationale: Misnamed category. "Montgomeryshire" is not a distinct style of architecture -- what's intended here is simply buildings and structures that are located in the county, not buildings and structures done in a "Montgomeryshire style". So it should follow the convention "Buildings and structures in County". Bearcat (talk) 16:42, 8 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Montgomeryshire is one of the historic counties of Wales, and is not a current administrative district (it is part of Powys). Category:Buildings and structures in Wales by county is divided by the current, not former, principal areas (I think that is the term).  So while we have Category:Merionethshire (an historic county that's part of the current principal area of Gwynedd), for example, we don't have Category:Buildings and structures in Merionethshire and I don't think we ought to be putting buildings into a mixture of modern and former buildings-by-county structures, which is what would happen if we upmerge per nom.  So this category ought to be deleted, with manual selected upmerge to the appropriate sub-category of Category:Buildings and structures in Powys.  From a spot-check, most of them are there already. BencherliteTalk 19:21, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually I notice that Category:Buildings and structures in Glamorgan (a former county) not only exists, but I created it... I think I was probably wrong to do so, but at least it's only being used as a container category for categories for its various modern subdivisions (with the exception of Category:Cricket grounds in Glamorgan, which is anomalous but seems to be linked to Glamorgan County Cricket Club - that's for another day...) BencherliteTalk 19:25, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Please keep the Category:Montgomeryshire Architecture. Montgomeryshire still exists as a local government area within Powys. It was included as an Area committee in the 1996 Welsh Local Government  Re-organisation and Montgomeryshire, Radnorshire and Breconshire are referred to as Shire Areas within Powys. Many, if not most people, in Montgomeryshire still think that they are living in Montgomeryshire  rather than in Powys. Future changes that have been mooted by the Welsh Assembly may well see Powys being further re-grouped, as it covers such a large area of Wales- which will mean that a Powys category will have be split and regrouped in the future. Another problem is that there are numerous duplicate Welsh placenames within the three counties and it is far easier to designate them by the present Shire Area, which everyone knows, rather than place them all under Powys. Look at the Grade II* listed buildings in Powys entry listing which has become completeley unmanageable and very difficult edit- there may not be many people living in Powys, but it has over 2,000 listed buildings and it is far easier if they are split into the old shire areas. This why the new edition of  Pevsner’s Powys, published in 2013 (Scourfield R. and Haslam R. (2013), The Buildings of Wales: Powys; Montgomeryshire, Radnorshire and Breconshire, Yale University Press.), still splits and lists the entries by the old counties. Tyssil (talk) 17:23, 9 June 2017 (UT
 * To progress the discussion further may I point out that it has been necessary to divide the the Wikipedia listings for Scheduled Ancient Monuments in Powys into the Shire Areas. See List of Scheduled Roman to modern Monuments in Powys (Montgomeryshire) where it points out that There are 950 Scheduled monuments within the county (Powys), which is far more than can be sensibly covered in one list. Each of the 3 historic counties is therefore listed separately, and each of these has two lists - one for the prehistoric sites and one for the Roman, medieval and post-medieval sites. It should also be noted that the Shire Areas do not precisely correspond with the historic counties as some Community Councils such as Llangedwyn and Llansilin were transferred from the old Denbighshire to the new Montgomeryshire Shire Area. For a precise map of the Powys Shires and Community Council Areas see on the Powys County Council Web site. Tyssil (talk) 22:11, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom -- I see no objection to the use of the historic counties of Wales. The present administrative structure is the result of the low population of rural Wales and the concentration of population in industrialised areas.  However, this is a historical category, so that the use of historic counties is appropriate.  Peterkingiron (talk) 13:24, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to Category:Buildings and structures in Powys, we ought not be having building and structures by former administrative areas or no one will be able to find anything without knowing which part of the current area used to belong to the former one. There have been many changes in boundaries over the centuries and to classify basically long-lived items (such as buildings) by their former districts. Who would be looking for the Surrey race course Kempton Park Racecourse in a Category:Sports venues in Middlesex, where it once was located? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Rename as nominated per Peterkingiron. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:56, 16 June 2017 (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:Joey B

 * 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 21:03, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting joey b


 * Nominator's rationale: As the artist's article is at AFD, this appears to be SMALLCAT with no chance of becoming a category. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 12:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete - Every page in this category, and the cat itself are eligible for speedy deletion per WP:G5. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:22, 15 June 2017 (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.