Misplaced Pages

:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 August 10: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion | Log Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:25, 18 August 2009 editXdamr (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,517 edits →Category:Northern Irish association football clubs← Previous edit Revision as of 16:28, 18 August 2009 edit undoXdamr (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,517 edits →Category:Northern Irish association football clubsNext edit →
Line 34: Line 34:
:''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Rename ] to ]'''. :''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Rename ] to ]'''.


:Rename to follow conventional form in parent category (]). No consensus on the elimination of 'Northern Irish' as part of the category name. ::Rename to follow conventional form in parent category (]). No consensus on the elimination of 'Northern Irish' as part of the category name.


:Whether one agrees with the movement to eliminate 'Northern Irish' or not, the ] was clear in that it created no precedent viz the wholesale elimination of the term as part of category names. That decision was specific to the area of categorisation-by-nationality. ::Whether one agrees with the movement to eliminate 'Northern Irish' or not, the ] was clear in that it created no precedent viz the wholesale elimination of the term as part of category names. That decision was specific to the area of categorisation-by-nationality.


:--]<sup>]</sup></b> 16:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC) ::--]<sup>]</sup></b> 16:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


:'''Propose renaming''' ] to ] :'''Propose renaming''' ] to ]

Revision as of 16:28, 18 August 2009

< August 9 August 11 >

August 10

Category:Songs overdubbed as duets

Category:Songs overdubbed as duets - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: I'm not sure if this is a truly defining criterion. For instance, the overdubbed version of "When You Say Nothing at All" is an unofficial remix made by a DJ and was never officially released. Other duets are often recorded in different studios and mixed. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 16:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Hmm - on the one hand I tend to agree with the nominator that in general this is not defining of the song. But in some cases, e.g. Unforgettable (song), it's likely that this is defining of the song. I haven't reviewed all of the articles so I don't know if there are enough such songs to warrant a separate category. If so, the category should be renamed and restricted to songs along the same lines. Not sure what the best name would be. Otto4711 (talk) 16:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Looking through the articles it doesn't look to me like this is a defining characteristic for the other songs so delete as a small category with little or no growth potential along with being trivial. Otto4711 (talk) 23:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Rename The category sounds as if it is about recorded songs. A song can be performed in many ways. I do not have an obvious rename target. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep and Prune The characteristic is defining for many of these songs. There certainly are some overdubbed duets included here where the characteristic is not defining and this should be addressed at the article level. Alansohn (talk) 18:59, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Category:Memorial Days

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 01:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Category:Memorial Days - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Superfluous category already covered by Category:Remembrance days. Gilliam (talk) 13:51, 10 August 2009 (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:Northern Irish association football clubs

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 Category:Northern Irish association football clubs to Category:Northern Irish football clubs.
Rename to follow conventional form in parent category (Category:Football (soccer) clubs by country). No consensus on the elimination of 'Northern Irish' as part of the category name.
Whether one agrees with the movement to eliminate 'Northern Irish' or not, the January 7th closure was clear in that it created no precedent viz the wholesale elimination of the term as part of category names. That decision was specific to the area of categorisation-by-nationality.
--Xdamr 16:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Propose renaming Category:Northern Irish association football clubs to Category:Association football clubs of Northern Ireland
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per parent category and precendent set in January and throughout this year. See multiple discussions here, here and here. Also includes all sub categories.
  • Comment, as discussed in the CfD's linked, Northern Ireland is a special case. There is no such nationality as "Northern Irish" either legally or ethnically. The people of Northern Ireland do not generally consider themselves "Northern Irish" - and the term is politically loaded, highly POV and can be offensive as it can imply political or sectarian allegiance. The use of "from Northern Ireland" eliminates that.--Vintagekits (talk) 20:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - the existence or otherwise of a Northern Irish "nationality" is irrelevant; the link merely demonstrates that most people's preferred identity is British or Irish - it does not demonstrate any rejection of Northern Irish; the link is to a footnote giving the opinion of a single author who amusingly indicates in the footnote his own ignorance (in relation to British nationality). Mooretwin (talk) 20:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment, its a highly contencious description to enforce on anyone and any institution relating to Northern Ireland. It is purposefully never used in the Good Friday Agreement for that very reason. To decribe an authors analysis as an indication of "his own ignorance" just proves you care little for WP:RS, WP:OR and WP:NPOV and only subscribe you your own POV.--Vintagekits (talk) 20:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment It's not "highly contencious ". It's not being "enforced" on anyone. My mention of the author's ignorance proves nothing other than I was able to identify that the single author whom you rely on was ignorant about British nationality and citizenship. Mooretwin (talk) 23:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose rename It is one thing to claim that 'of course Misplaced Pages Category names = Legal nationalities, and therefore people placed within these Categories will be offended', and therefore justify borking the whole naming convention system just for this single use, throwing out one of the only reasons the structure exists (and bizarrly, it still remains as a child Category of the People by Nationality tree), it is quite another to start claiming that nationality can be conferred to inanimate objects such as football clubs. Nobody should be voting 'per precedent' here at all, because the people by nationality discussion closure was explicit - it confers no precedent. My view on standardisation is unchanged from the People debate, it should be the same as whatever is used as the standard, be that -ish or -of/in, and if there is no standard, create one by consensus, instead of filing single purpose requests. MickMacNee (talk) 21:36, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related page moves. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 08:55, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Agree, though not from a political point of view (frankly I don't see what the fuss is about, but then again I'm an outsider looking in). I'm agreeing with this from a logical point of view - as Andrwsc has already stated, it makes more sense to list clubs by their actual location rather than their 'nationality'. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 08:55, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose - There's nothing wrong with the term "Northern Irish". – PeeJay 12:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
    • Comment, whats wrong with it is that it is not a term used by the majority of the people of Northern Ireland to describe themselves, it is avoided by all instituations in Northern Ireland, its not a legal nationality, its not an ethnic group, it is POV and politically loaded and "from Northern Ireland" is a far more accurate and less POV term - but apart from that, yeah there is nothing wrong with it.--Vintagekits (talk) 16:22, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
      • Granted, I don't know any Northern Irish people so I don't know how they would identify themselves, but the term is used by a very large majority of the rest of the population of this planet, so why should we pander to you over something this petty? – PeeJay 16:43, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
        • Why? For the FIVE reasons I have outlined above.--Vintagekits (talk) 22:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
          • If your reasons were any good, I wouldn't be arguing with you over them. Almost the entire world uses the term "Northern Irish", so why shouldn't we (and try to keep your arguments to a global scale, not just within your own tiny sphere)? – PeeJay 08:11, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
            • Well what I have done it provide evidence that it is politically loaded and not used in Northern Ireland and provided a "0 loss" alternative - you have just said "the world use it" - which is completely WP:OR. Anyway - I will let other decide.--Vintagekits (talk) 10:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Agree, but under the caveat that every other "nationality" should also be changed. (ie Scottish -> from Scotland, Italian -> from Italy, etc.) Otherwise it looks like Northern Ireland is being singled out for whatever political motivation. I think it makes sense because there are some clubs who are based in a certain territory but would describe themselves as being of another country (eg Berwick Rangers are based in England, but would perhaps describe themselves as Scottish given the league they play in). Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Rename to Category:Northern Irish football clubs to match corresponding subcats in the parent Category:Football (soccer) clubs by country, which uses "Fooish football clubs" as a standard. Alansohn (talk) 19:16, 17 August 2009 (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:Skitzo Metal 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: Keep until resolution of parent article Afd. May be re-nominated on conclusion of that debate. --Xdamr 16:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Category:Skitzo Metal albums - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Non-notable band. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 07:40, 10 August 2009 (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:Erupting volcanos

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:
--Xdamr 14:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


Suggest merging Category:Erupting volcanos to Category:Active volcanoes
Suggest merging/renaming Category:Erupting volcanos in the Philippines and Category:Active volcanoes in the Philippines to Category:Active volcanoes of the Philippines
Suggest renaming Category:Erupting volcanos in Indonesia to Category:Active volcanoes of Indonesia
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Defined as "Volcanos which are currently erupting, or have erupted in the last 12 months, or which are giving indications they may erupt in the immediate or near future." These are recently-created "current"-type categories that requires updating (and some speculation, in the case of "may erupt") based on the current eruption status of a volcano. Categories of these types that measure a current status are generally avoided. Suggest merging to Category:Active volcanoes and subcategories. Note that as a natural landform, naming conventions state that categories for volcanoes should use the form "of FOO", not "in FOO". Good Ol’factory 02:28, 10 August 2009 (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:Ethiopian inspirational people

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. --Xdamr 14:46, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Category:Ethiopian inspirational people - Template:Lc1
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Subjective, POV category. Good Ol’factory 02:15, 10 August 2009 (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:Documentary television series 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, for now—for consistency to current convention. This is without prejudice to a future nomination to change the convention of all of these. Good Ol’factory 01:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Propose renaming Category:Documentary television series in Canada to Category:Canadian documentary television series
Nominator's rationale: Rename to match other country categories in Category:Documentary television series by country. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:05, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Rename - per nom, every sibling category uses the "Fooian doc TV series" formulation so for now change this to match as this reflects how media by country of origin is categorized. If there is disagreement over this format then a broad nomination encompassing not only this category set but the many other category sets that use the same formulation (films, books, other TV series, plays, etc.) would be needed. Otto4711 (talk) 04:53, 13 August 2009 (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.