Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 May 19

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< May 18 May 20 >

May 19

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:People by drama school 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: Keep. Jafeluv (talk) 09:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:People by drama school in the United States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: This should be deleted as
WP:OVERCATEGORIZATION, as well as its subcat. It is the only "People by (school type) in the United States" type category and I think it is a bad precedent to set. Tavix |  Talk  22:16, 19 May 2011 (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:People from Tuvalu

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. We don't split country categories this way. In our categories, country residents are all "(X) people," and lower-level administrative division residents are "People from (X)." I'm not sure we have a compelling reason to do it this way, but if we're going to change it, it likely won't be started with Tuvalu.--Mike Selinker (talk) 06:49, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:People from Tuvalu to Category:Tuvaluan people
Nominator's rationale: Merge I can see how one might perhaps make a distinction between Tuvaluan people in Tuvalu and members of the diaspora but Category:Tuvaluan diaspora already exists. Pichpich (talk) 22:00, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Completely redundant to Category:Tuvaluan people. Merge is unnecessary since all the articles are already categorized in appropriate subcategories of Category:Tuvaluan people. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:40, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Creator's rationale: Category:Tuvaluan people implies the person is either born in Tuvalu or is a citizen of Tuvalu (entitled to a Tuvaluan passport). Category:Tuvaluan diaspora addresses Tuvaluans who live in other countries. In my opinion Category:Tuvaluan people is not appropriate for nationals of other countries (palagi) who live/lived in Tuvalu. The use of “Immigrants to __” has a specific connotation, which may not be appropriate. The use of ‘from’ is a neutral term that, in my opinion, does not imply nationality or intention to migrate. I created the category because I noticed that “People from __” categories existed in relation to other Pacific countries. The use of a category of “People from __” allows both Category:Tuvaluan people and other people who live/lived in Tuvalu to sit in the same category. MozzazzoM (talk) 11:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Creator's rationale: permanent residence in a country (without being born there or acquiring citizenship) can reasonable qualify a person to be described as "People from _". While all of the people currently in Category:People from Tuvalu are of Tuvaluan nationality, there are other categories of "People from_" that list nationals (islanders) and Europeans (palagi) who, at some point in time, were permanent residents on a Pacific Island. MozzazzoM (talk) 11:34, 31 May 2011 (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:Scientists of Medieval Islam

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, though delete the empty chemists category. I'll close this as something of a continuation of my earlier close in this regard. There does not seem to be enough desire to overturn this at this time, though certainly there's room for more debate on this name. Deletion doesn't seem likely to be endorsed, though. (The "rename" proposal below endorses the concept of these categories, but argues for "of the countries of medieval Islam," which is something that could easily gain traction. Or maybe, "of medieval Islamic countries.")--Mike Selinker (talk) 06:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found one person who was a Jew born in Barcelona more than 200 years after the Christian reconquest of that place. The creator of these categories seems to be POV pushing for Spain to be considered part of "Medieval Islam" even long after areas were under Christian kings. The notions behind these categories are suspect.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The Jewish person you are referring to is Abraham bar Hiyya. Contrary to your claims, the medieval Islam science categories were not introduced by me, rather the article was already tagged with Category:Islamic mathematics and Category:Islamic astronomy. My only work was to replace those with Category:Mathematicians of medieval Islam and Category:Astronomers of medieval Islam.
Besides, these categories contain hundreds of scholars that lived in a scientific culture that spanned many centuries across great regions so I don't think using the debatable categorization of one person as a valid argument for the claim that it's a "POV pushing" agenda. Al-Andalusi (talk) 22:53, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this means "Scientists in Medieval Islamic civilization" than we should name the category "Scientists in Medieval Islamic civilization".John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the Islam referred to is Islamic civilization, not the Islamic religion. The category names are consistent with corresponding article names.-Aquib (talk) 18:11, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is an unjustified use of Islam, Islam refers to the religion. This is a confusing and not easily justified method of categorizing people. This is especially true because medieval culture in Timbuctu and Delhi is very different.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:49, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per the "Proposal to reach consensus" in the Cfd on Category:Physicians of medieval Islam, which also affects these categories. (I have also added a further category (Chemists) to this discussion, as indicated above.) Davshul (talk) 10:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Al-Andulusi went and deleted the Cfd banners from all these categories. This is part of a consistent set of actions that violate wikipedia policy on his part. I would also note that the "keep" vote above my last comment is unsigned.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • If we do keep this category we ought to at least rename it so it is obviously not limited to people who are Muslims if that is the intent. Even Al-Andulusi admits that the category means something that can be expressed more correctly in another phrase.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete there are far too many of these categories William M. Connolley (talk) 21:49, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • What do you mean by too many of these? Your comment suggests merging to some target but what would you suggest? Category:Scientists of medieval Islam is also nominated for deletion so I'm guessing this is not what you favour. Pichpich (talk) 10:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment I just removed a living person from one of these categories. When exactly does "Medieval Islam" end? These categories seem to be not well defined.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:21, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Islamic mathematics and Arabic mathematics are modern historical terms for the mathematical sciences in Islamic civilization from the beginning of Islam (A.D. 622) until the 17th century." That you are ignorant of its definition does not mean it is ill defined. —Ruud 22:25, 25 May 2011 (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:Danish Ministers of Clime and Energy

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) 02:14, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Danish Ministers of Clime and Energy to Category:Danish Ministers of Climate and Energy
Nominator's rationale: typo -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 20:59, 19 May 2011 (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:French rock

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:French rock music. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:45, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:French rock (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Already covered by
(talk) 15:28, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Comment this needs more renaming, since it is unclear that this is not about French-language rock or French-ethnic rock, rather than French-national rock. 65.95.13.213 (talk) 04:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The current system is to distinguish these categories using the French/French-language distinction. For instance Category:French films versus Category:French-language films and this is also true of Category:English films versus Category:English-language films. I don't think it's a problem so long as the intro sentences of the category explain the distinction. Pichpich (talk) 02:37, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The current system promotes ambiguous names. 65.95.13.213 (talk) 05:07, 21 May 2011 (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:Jessica Lange

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:12, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Jessica Lange (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete Per numerous precedents, there's no need for an eponymous category. (See
the relevant guideline) Pichpich (talk) 12:14, 19 May 2011 (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:Famous body parts

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:Body parts of individual people. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:47, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Famous body parts to Category:Notable body parts

Nominator's rationale: Comparing the recent debate in Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_May_12#Individual_animals, the issues are that "famous" is an ambiguous term. Curb Chain (talk) 10:07, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Honestly, both choices are bad. I don't know who thought of the "Individual animals" solution but I thought it was a fairly clever way around the problem. Of course Category:Individual body parts doesn't really work. I'd love to have a third option but if we need to choose between "notable" and "famous", I think the latter is closer to the intended meaning. Pichpich (talk) 22:12, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Famous is a culturally loaded term: I don't think that would work at all.Curb Chain (talk) 02:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Notable is just as loaded though. Pichpich (talk) 09:29, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No it is not because notable means that it has be discussed in secondary sources. Famous means that certain person(s) considers it better than others for some reason.Curb Chain (talk) 01:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're confusing the Wikipedia meaning of "notable" with its
WP:GNG. If anything, famous is more objective than notable: you can sort of hope to measure how well something is known but establishing that something is remarkable inevitably requires subjectivity. Pichpich (talk) 02:31, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply
]
Our wikipedia culture does not use the word "famous". Notable is more common than the word famous; thus, renaming it to notable is more hamonizable than the other world "famous".Curb Chain (talk) 04:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is precisely my point. The last thing we want is to start naming categories based on common usage in the Wikipedia namespace. Using a specific term because it makes sense to Wikipedia insiders is a particularly bad idea. We're building this project for readers, not longtime editors. Pichpich (talk) 22:03, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But like I said, famous is cultural, notable means there is something that has been noted, not pandering to a specific culture.Curb Chain (talk) 07:32, 24 May 2011 (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:Wikipedians on Mars

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 deleted on creator's request (non-admin close). Pichpich (talk) 01:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Wikipedians on Mars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
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:Wikipedians of Swedish descent

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 08:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Wikipedians of Swedish descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Nominator's rationale - Delete - "Wikipedians by descent" category, which were all previously deleted here. VegaDark (talk) 05:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as cruft.Curb Chain (talk) 10:10, 19 May 2011 (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:Matiene

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 05:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Matiene (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Only one article after nearly three years. Mike Nassau (talk) 00:43, 19 May 2011 (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/2011_May_19&oldid=1138395495"