Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 September 7

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< September 6 September 8 >

September 7

Category:Sitcoms

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) 07:31, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Sitcoms to Category:Situation comedies
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the lead article
talk) 23:28, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
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:Skimo

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. Kbdank71 13:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Skimo to Category:Skimo characters
Nominator's rationale: Rename. All of the articles are for characters.
talk) 23:24, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Because being Skimo characters is the single most defining characteristic of these articles, thus the most appropriate possible category. See
    talk) 23:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
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:2009 Canadian federal election templates

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 as empty. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:2009 Canadian federal election templates (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: The government moved the election to 2008. There is nothing in this category. What was here was moved to Category:2008 Canadian federal election templates Nfitz (talk) 22:35, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete — the election is schedule 14 October 2008 (see main page "In the news") — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 07:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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:Highways and Expressways in the Czech Republic

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. Kbdank71 13:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Highways and Expressways in the Czech Republic to Category:Motorways in the Czech Republic
Nominator's rationale: Rename. While this category and the matching template use highways and expressways, the common term from all other sources appears to be motorways. Motorways appears to be the common name for this class of roads in Europe. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would rather depend on the translator - according to
    talk) 08:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
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:Highways with full control of access and no cross traffic in Canada

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:Highways and autoroutes in Canada. Kbdank71 13:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Highways with full control of access and no cross traffic in Canada to Category:Freeways in Canada Category:Highways and autoroutes in Canada
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Use a more commonly used name for these roads. In reading the various Canada road articles, there seems to be some overlap between freeway and expressway. But freeway appears to be the dominant description for roads that meet the super long category name. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:00, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a quick, non-rigorous "Google test" from website in the Government of Canada domain (.gc.ca):
You can review the kinds of results returned by these searches. The roads we are discussing, at least based on the article names, seem to be largely just "highways" and "autoroutes"; see Category:Provincial highways in Canada (and subcatgs) and Category:Limited-access roads in Canada (and subcatgs). After viewing all this, I suggest renaming simply to Category:Highways and autoroutes in Canada. Once this CfD is done, I might take on the task of organizing the (seemingly) messy Category:Roads in Canada. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 00:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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:Indonesian Ambassador

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: has been speedily deleted in conversion to list process. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:29, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Indonesian Ambassador (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete as
Suro 13:38, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
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:Thai film lists

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) 07:26, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Thai film lists to Category:Lists of Thai films
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To comply with the standard for categories of film lists, particularly Category:Lists of films by country of production. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 12:33, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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:Singaporean film lists

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) 07:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Singaporean film lists to Category:Lists of Singaporean films
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To comply with the standard for categories of film lists, particularly Category:Lists of films by country of production. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 12:31, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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:Cornwall lists

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) 07:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Cornwall lists to Category:Cornwall-related lists
Nominator's rationale: Rename. The convention is to append "-related", as per the parent category Category:England-related lists Tim! (talk) 09:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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:Researchers (nationalism studies)

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:Scholars in nationalism Category:Scholars of nationalism (sorry, my initial mistake here). The risk that this name will be interpreted to mean that the scholar is a nationalist is minimal—nationalism is not exactly an intellect-based movement that one gets into because one is convinced after a lifetime of study that it's the right political stance to take. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Researchers (nationalism studies) to Category:Researchers in nationalism studies
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Unnecessary dab. Any other options work better? E.g. Scholars of nationalism studies? Upmerge, possibly? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:19, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that this name is needlessly cumbersome, and I would suggest renaming to
    subst:cfd-notify}} Cgingold (talk) 10:38, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • I'm the creator (thanks for contacting me), and I agree that Category:Scholars of nationalism is probably better than the original name. – SJL 04:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. I don't particularly mind if scholar or researcher is used here, but I do think that the word "studies" is needed here. For me, a "Scholar in physics" suggests the person is a physicist, and thus a "Scholar in nationalism" could be construed to be a nationalist. That mistake should be avoided. Deamon138 (talk) 01:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree, but the suggestion is "Scholars of nationalism" rather than "in". – SJL 01:11, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well yes it is, me saying "in" was a bit of a Freudian slip on my part. I meant "of". "In" or "of", either way, I think my argument applies to both. Deamon138 (talk) 19:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm an academic who specializes in nationalism studies, and it is common to see people like myself described as a "Scholar of nationalism" in the literature on the subject. I probably would have used that name for the category in the first place if I hadn't been creating a set of categories explicitly centred around nationalism studies. – SJL 15:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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:Highways with full control of access and no cross traffic in the United States

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. Kbdank71 13:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Highways with full control of access and no cross traffic in the United States to Category:Freeways in the United States
Nominator's rationale: Rename. These are freeways. I think this name goes back to some old edit wars. Shorter and accurate. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:40, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
--
☑ SamuelWantman 22:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Yes, I did look at the history and the involvement of one editor who seemed to be working to confuse the issue. The poposed rename seems to be the best solution. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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:The College of Wooster

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. (Could always be moved back if the article name changes, though.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:The College of Wooster to Category:College of Wooster
Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia
category naming conventions make no mention of the subject. - Eureka Lott 01:59, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Incidentally, aside from the signs such as the one that Occuli pointed out, the College refer to themselves as "The College of Wooster" religiously, and in the wider world it isn't uncommon to see them known as "The" rather than "the". This would be relevant per
    WP:THE where it says, "On the other hand, some universities religiously refer to themselves as "... The University of X..." even in running text. If such usage is prevalent on university press releases and press kits, contact information, "about" pages, and internal department websites, and it is reasonably common in external sources (try a Google search), then it is more appropriate to name the Wikipedia article The University of X". Of course, currently renaming the category makes sense, however I'm just wondering whether it would make more sense to rename the article instead? Deamon138 (talk) 04:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
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.

Roman Catholicism

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: result. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:15, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Roman Catholicism in the United States to Category:Roman Catholic Church in the United States, Category:Roman Catholicism in Slovenia to Category:Roman Catholic Church in Slovenia, and Category:Roman Catholicism in Japan to Category:Roman Catholic Church in Japan
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per
Roman Catholic Church. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:48, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
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:Eikaiwa

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:English conversation schools in Japan. Kbdank71 13:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eikaiwa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

  • Thanks for linking to that, GO -- I was pretty rushed and didn't notice it when I set up the CFD. There's one comment that I think needs to be taken into consideration in our new discussion:
  • Rename to
    Snocrates 04:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
What I would like to know is, if we stay with the fairly narrow name suggested here, would there also be a need for a somewhat broader category along the lines previously suggested? Cgingold (talk) 05:34, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There may be a need for something like Category:English schools in Japan to cover schools which teach English (both written and oral), and then placing Category:English conversation schools in Japan into that category, but I don't see a problem with that. In fact, I support the idea. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:02, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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:Educators in Japan

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:Foreign educators in Japan. Kbdank71 14:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Educators in Japan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I didn't spot an article about a non-Japanese educator, Nihonjoe -- did I miss something? Also, the term "educators" by definition refers to people, so I'm not sure what you're referring to. In any event, the articles that are there look to me like they would do just as well -- if not better -- in Category:Education in Japan. Why do you think there's a need for this particular sub-cat? Cgingold (talk) 02:42, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are plenty of categories (I would guess at least half of the existing categories) which don't have corresponding articles, so that's not a valid reason to delete this one. I was referring to the companies Johnbod mentions below. And there are several articles about non-Japanese educators in Japan, but they apparently have not been categorized yet. I'll see what I can do about that. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:01, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep per Nihonjoe's rationale. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 02:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge (see below) per nom. We already have Category:Eikaiwa, and we don't have any articles yet, it seems, on foreign educators working in Japan, who could in any case go in "Japanese educators" I think. The rest can be merged up or down the tree. Johnbod (talk) 02:54, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing out Category:Eikaiwa, Johnbod. I didn't even realize what it was because the term is unfamiliar -- so I've added a new section immediately above to propose renaming that category. Cgingold (talk) 03:33, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep as a useful corollary/alternative to
    talk) 00:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Venn diagrams
.
keep: I'm not convinced that my contribution to this thread has been helpful. It did not occur to me that by simply mentioning Category:O-yatoi gaikokujin, I could be opening an entirely unanticipated can of worms. I'm not sure that it matters, but I would be wondering if Cgingold and others appreciate that, in terms of Venn diagrams as show at the right,
IF Category:O-yatoi gaikokujin = A
IF Category:Educators in Japan = B
TRUE -- A ∩ B (bottom Euler diagram)
When I saw Lafcadio Hearn on the list of Category:Educators in Japan, it was easy to think of several names which were obviously missing, and I knew at once how to find names which would not have come immediately to mind -- ergo, something about the current categorization system did function just as it should have done. In other words, reverse-engineering Cgingold's implied question:
J. R. Wasson
Similarly, when I spied Sugawara no Kiyotomo on the list at Category:Educators in Japan, I understood at a glance that
TRUE -- Category:Educators in Japan ⊂ Sugawara no Kiyotomo
FALSE -- Category:O-yatoi gaikokujin ⊄ Sugawara no Kiyotomo
What is really surprising, but which is beyond my ability to parse at present, is this:
Category:Educators in Japan ⊄ Category:Japanese educators
The fact that what one would assume were congruent categories are now like apples and oranges says a great deal about the intuitive assumptions of prospective users. Alternately, I conclude that the unexamined prejudices and assumptions of those editors who populated these categories with mutually exclusive names are likely to be mirrored in the thinking of potential users who will have never thought of contributing to Wikipedia. That said: Until I understood more about this unresolved and otherwise unexplained phenomenon, I'd be inclined to leave the categories exactly as they are, hoping to learn something in the coming months which will clarify what seems too foggy and vague now.
I hope that I've proposed a worthy foundation for further discussion about aspects of this subject which are perhaps too easily glossed over. --
talk) 20:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Wait -- I'm a bit concerned that my efforts to be helpful might have muddied the waters, betraying the best of intentions, obscuring whatever dinstinction
talk) 15:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Support
talk) 13:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_September_7&oldid=1138391625"