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.
Nominator's rationale: Malaya as an entity existed for about 6 years, over half a century ago. Any foreign relations it had were simply continued when it changed to Malaysia. This category will offer nothing more than a tiny duplication of
Category:Bilateral relations of Malaysia. In addition, none of the current entries are correct. The three subcategories all relate to Malaysia and not Malaya, and none of them are about bilateral relations. Even before Malaysia, any relation with these entities would have been part of a relationship with the British Empire, these all being part of it.
Merge/rename according to outcome of recent discussion. I would have expected this category to be about the relations of Malaysia with other countries not about the internal relations between easter and penninsula states.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
18:31, 5 October 2012 (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:Football in Spain 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 target is a redirect, so the action needs to be a rename, not a merge.
I think that you make a good point about the wider convention, and a broader nomination may be a good idea. I would love to standardise all the categories on "Association football" rather than the mix of football/football (soccer)/association football ... but that would probably be too controversial. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
18:48, 5 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment -- In countries that do not play (much) American, Austrialian-rules, or Gaelic football, do we need to specify "association"? If not, reverse merge. Rugby will always be so called.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
18:46, 5 October 2012 (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:Falkirk
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.
I think they do, to some extent. Much like mainspace redirects are at times used to discourage article creation, category redirects can discourage category creation. In addition, they make it harder to detect the absence of town-specific categories: for example, an editor who adds an article to the category and sees a blue link will not know (unless s/he clicks on the link) that s/he just placed the article in a redirected category. -- Black Falcon(
talk)05:26, 6 October 2012 (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:Politics of Madiera
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.
Nominator's rationale: The above title seems preferable to me, but I am open to correction if the alternative category title Politics of the Madeira is a preferred local usage.
Hugo999 (
talk)
12:16, 5 October 2012 (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 associated with U2
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete per
WP:OC#ASSOCIATED. WP:OC#ASSOCIATED warns that the fuzziness of the term "associated" means that the inclusion criteria for any such category are inevitable either
WP:OC#SUBJECTIVE or
WP:OC#ARBITRARY. This category illustrates the point well: it includes
Daniel Lanois, whose most notable career achievement is producing lots of successful
U2 albums; but it also includes the broadcaster
Dave Fanning, whose lengthy career is primarily notable for the rest of his broadcasting. Association with U2 is a defining characteristic of Lanois, but not of Fanning. Relationships such as these are better handled in the text of the relevant articles. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 12:03, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
12:03, 5 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. "Associated with" is a weaselly term (any band/person who toured with U2 would qualify, depending on whether an attendee of that concert associates the two).
Carlossuarez46 (
talk)
16:39, 5 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom and Carlossuarez. If a person's association with U2 is so defining as to merit categorization, his or her article could be placed directly in
Category:U2. There is no need for a separate category with ambiguous inclusion standards. -- Black Falcon(
talk)17:43, 5 October 2012 (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 associated with beverages
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete all per
WP:OC#ASSOCIATED, which says The problem with vaguely-named categories such as this is determining what degree or nature of "association" is necessary to qualify a person for inclusion in the category. The inclusion criteria for these "associated with X" categories are usually left unstated, which fails
WP:OC#SUBJECTIVE; but applying some threshold of association fails
WP:OC#ARBITRARY.
These beverages are widely-consumed, so the categories are likely to be populated with people mentioned solely for non-defining characteristics such as enjoying drinking them. The impossibility of defining any clear inclusion criteria leads to disputes between good faith editors about whether to add particular biographical articles in the category.
Note that this nomination does not include the 4th sub-category
Category:People associated with wine, because it consists solely of sub-categories which are neither arbitrary nor subjective. I have just tagged it as a {{container category}} to remind editors to keep it that way.
I did consider whether the nominated categories should be tagged and restricted in the same way, but only
Category:People associated with beer has any sub-categories. The others have no sub-categories to diffuse to.
do not delete Instead spend the necessary time and thought to create proper subcategories such as those of
Category:People associated with wine. Delete is just a destructive action that loses the content association of these articles with the beveerage--unhelpful to WP and wasting the editors' time who populated these categories.
Hmains (
talk)
00:48, 7 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment - These should at least be listified per Hmains. While the "associated with" needs explaining, which cannot be done in categories due to technical limitations, a list would allow for that. - jc3704:41, 30 October 2012 (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:Irish politicians by century
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.
Nominator's rationale: Ireland has been an independent state only since 1922, and the era of mass politics began only in the 19th century. Dividing Irish politicians in this way creates a pointless arbitrary split, and imposes a disruptive extra layer of categories which impedes navigation and complicates maintenance. Note that I have proposed deletion of these categories rather than upmerger, because so far they contain only pre-existing sub-categories. They have been tagged as {{container category}}, so even if more sub-categories are added, there should be no need to upmerge. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
10:34, 5 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment - I created these categories via AfC, and I'm not entirely convinced by this rationale. We have similar categories for, say,
French politicians, and examples of Irish politicians of the 19th, 18th and even 17th century exist - see for example
Category:Members of the Parliament of Ireland (pre-1801) and its subcategories. Now of course Ireland doesn't automatically need every category some other country has, but sorting people by century seemed a reasonable method to me which is hardly limited to just these examples. If it's considered arbitrary and useless here, why do we have
Category:People by century and its subcategories? Should we get rid of all of them, and if not, where does it cease to be arbitrary?
Huon (
talk)
12:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete - this is a pointless category, why dump all those cats into one big mess? Since when are we categorising politicians by century? I don't any other nationality done this way. We already have
Category:Political office-holders in Ireland and its sub-cats. If we need changes, we can start from there.
Snappy (
talk)
20:40, 5 October 2012 (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:Candidates for the Irish presidential election, 2011
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.
Comment - whatever else this category may be necessary for, navigation of
Category:Irish presidential election, 2011 isn't it. That category has a grand total of a single article. It would hardly become cluttered by adding half a dozen or so candidates if that were considered desirable.
Huon (
talk)
13:28, 5 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Merge per all of the above. One category is more than enough for 15 articles, and it's not as though any of them is going to grow in the future.
Scolaire (
talk)
13:41, 27 October 2012 (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:African Americans in film professions
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.
Furthermore, the general nature of the category seems to run counter to
existing guidelines pertaining to ethnicity–occupation intersection categories, which state that they "should be created only where that combination is itself recognized as a distinct and unique cultural topic in its own right". This category, though currently it contains only three subcategories, invites categorization of African Americans in any film profession, regardless of whether the combination represents a topic of academic or popular interest. -- Black Falcon(
talk)05:41, 5 October 2012 (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 Band of Blacky Ranchette 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. The nominator proposed merging, which was impossible because the target has never previously existed. The one comment does not appear to have noticed this, so I can't consider this category as having been sufficiently scrutinised to establish a consensus to do anything. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
15:24, 29 October 2012 (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:Children's albums by Canadian artists
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 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:Powderfinger side projects
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 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:Pink Floyd bootleg 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:delete. Per
WP:CAT#Overview, the primary purpose of categories is to facilitate navigation. Neither of the two editors who supported keeping this category identified any navigational purpose for this category, so the strongest case is made by those favouring deletion. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
03:59, 29 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Keep within reason. I tried AfDing
Pink Floyd bootleg recordings and consensus came back keep. The rationale for the AfD was that it was just a list, but thanks to
Yeepsi and others, we found
reliable sources for it. Some articles, such as
Yeeshkul, are known enough in fan circles to be a valid searchable term, but don't have notability in their own right. Others don't belong here. However, XfDing hundreds of redirects will be an admin ballache from which I predict a "no consensus" outcome. --
Ritchie333(talk)(cont)12:57, 5 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Response I don't know that you understood the nomination in the first place and this is now a category with one article and hundreds of redirects (out of potentially a thousand more), almost all of which are unlikely search terms for a single main article. This is a perfect example of a category to delete. —
Justin (koavf)❤
T☮
C☺
M☯18:51, 19 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete the fact that the article on the bootleg recordings is being kept is no reason to keep this category full of redirects. In general categories should have articles, not redirects, as most of their components.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
03:48, 18 October 2012 (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:Norteño
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 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:Ranchera music
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 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:Against All Will
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.
Keep - Against All Will has articles for its EP, two of its singles, and two of its musicians. The band is working on a debut full length album for 2012-2013. There is potential for articles about Jimmy Allen and Mark Bistany, since they both are members of at least two notable bands.--
Jax 0677 (
talk)
01:37, 6 October 2012 (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.