- 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 ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:32, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: This category contains articles for six venues that have served as the home stadium for the two participants in the Rocky Mountain Showdown, a college football rivalry. The Rocky Mountain Showdown rivalry is not a defining characteristic of these stadiums. Jweiss11 ( talk) 22:27, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom & per WP:PERFCAT Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 18:46, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Per WP:OCVENUE. This would be fine if these were purpose built for this event but they are certainly not. Fine to list in the article. RevelationDirect ( talk) 23:46, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- DElete -- Not enough to need a category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:07, 4 August 2018 (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.
- 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 ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Category:Apple Cup venues contains the articles for six venues that have served as the home stadium for the two participants in the Apple Cup, a college football rivalry. The Apple Cup rivalry is not a defining characteristic of these stadiums. Category:Apple Cup contains Category:Apple Cup venues and three articles: Washington Huskies football, Washington State Cougars football, and the eponymous Apple Cup. The Apple Cup article is already properly categorized under Category:Washington Huskies football and Washington State Cougars football. The articles for the two football programs don't need to be categorized under the Apple Cup rivalry, as a rivalry is not defining to a program. Rivalries are elements of program, not the other way around. Once Category:Apple Cup venues and the two program articles are removed from Category:Apple Cup, that would leave only the eponymous Apple Cup. That one article does not need it own category. Jweiss11 ( talk) 22:19, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; the first cat also is a WP:PERFCAT, the second one is both WP:SMALLCAT and non-defining. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 18:47, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete The venue one suffers from WP:OCVENUE and the parent one from WP:SMALLCAT with no room for growth. RevelationDirect ( talk) 23:47, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- DElete -- Not enough to need a category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:07, 4 August 2018 (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.
- 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 category to Category:Artsakh stubs, Category:Asian building and structure stubs and Category:European building and structure stubs. The church ones are already in Asia and Europe church stub categories.
- Rather than place 3 stub templates on each article, I have retained the stub templates for now. – Fayenatic London 22:48, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Too small. Propose deleting category, and merging templates to Category:Artsakh stubs. Even with these additions, the parent category will still be underpopulated. Dawynn ( talk) 12:23, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon ( talk) 19:58, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon ( talk) 19:58, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support since the stub category contains only 13 articles. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:45, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support -- Too small, but does it need upmerging to a buildings and structures stub-cat as well? Artsakh is a state existing in a sort of limbo, being de facto dependent on Armenia but de jure part of Azerbaijan. It is dubious whether it is in Europe or Asia. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:25, 4 August 2018 (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.
- 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. As noted in the discussion, there is not a sufficient amount of content here to justify the category at this moment, and there is no loss of categorization within the job articles.
ℯ
xplicit
01:26, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Whaling jobs to Category:Whaling
- Nominator's rationale: Only two of these are jobs, and I have added them into Category:Marine occupations. "Cooper" should be removed, as its relation to whaling is non-defining. – Fayenatic London 08:01, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- OPPOSE, mildly. The items are grammatically discongruent but thematically sound: Flensing, Boatsteerer, and Whaling-foreman are all occupations specific to the whaling industry. (I agree that Cooper (profession) is not specific to the whaling industry, but it was key to the voyages.) More importantly (in terms of numbers) are the whalers themselves. Confusingly, that term is legitimately used for people (both in the boats and behind the desks) as well as the ships. I've added Category:Whalers (the people) to Category:Whaling jobs. We don't yet have an article on the job of being a Whaler (occupation) but we should. So I think there's enough material to justify Category:Whaling jobs. Carbon Caryatid ( talk) 09:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Flensing seems to be a task rather than an occupation. The article refers twice to flensers but it's not clear whether that term refers to crew members assigned to do that task when it needed doing, or to a specialist occupation. – Fayenatic London 09:54, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Merge per nom. I removed cooper as it is no more about whaling than sailor would be. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 22:08, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- keep merging would lose the categorization of these jobs within the Category:Occupations where it most certainly belongs to properly help readers to navigate to these articles. Hmains ( talk) 02:51, 2 August 2018 (UTC)-
- Note that nominator already added the articles to Category:Marine occupations so there is no such loss. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:43, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:43, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Merge -- We do not have enough content to keep this. Even flensing is a process, not an occupation. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:11, 4 August 2018 (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.
- 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.
ℯ
xplicit
05:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Frankish warriors to Category:Frankish generals
- Nominator's rationale: rename and purge, remove all Frankish emperors, kings and vassals from this category. Obviously emperors and kings were involved in wars, but that is not what the category is meant for. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:57, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose. There are plenty of warriors in this category who were neither kings nor generals, for example Charietto, Saint Bobo, Roland and others. If there are kings in this category who were not themselves involved in warrior combat, then feel free to purge them from the category, but renaming the category into Frankish generals is not helpful. Krakkos ( talk) 13:11, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose per Krakkos' explanation of how problematic this rename is. Dimadick ( talk) 13:58, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Purging is not a solution: in medieval times, if there was a war, of course the monarch was directly involved, so we can 't remove monarchs from a warrior category if existing. However that does not define the monarch as a warrior. The solution is to limit the scope of the category, to have it better in line with its top Category:Military personnel. Marcocapelle ( talk) 18:26, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose - this is a subcat of Category:Germanic warriors. I don't agree that 'warrior' was not a defining characteristic of kings, eg Harold Godwinson was undoubtedly a warrior. Oculi ( talk) 19:15, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- That is pretty incomparable. Harold was elected as a king after a long career as a 'warrior'. In contrast, the Frankish kings were raised as princes at a court, much like high medieval to modern monarchs. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:14, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Childebert I appears to have lived and died as a warrior. Shakespeare made quite a deal out of the warrior tendencies of various English kings. Oculi ( talk) 08:38, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- That is exactly the issue: most kings were involved in wars, but there is no point in putting most kings in the tree of military personnel. It is like putting recent presidents of the USA in that tree because they led the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:10, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- It is completely different as kings then were trained as warriors, led their troops into battle and fought and died on the battlefield. Eg Richard III of England. Boudicca was also a warrior. Oculi ( talk) 16:31, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- We are discussing Frankish kings here. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:53, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose -- The scope of the present category is unsatisfactory. In this period almost every king was a warlord, hence a warrior. I would like to see this category purged of all monarchs and see what we have left. This might be done by making Frankish kings a subcategory.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:18, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Bad idea. The Frankish kings include people like Childeric III and Dagobert III, who are not recorded to have led any troops in battle. Dimadick ( talk) 17:12, 4 August 2018 (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.
- 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:
Relisted at
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 18#Category:Wikipedia articles with style issues.
ℯ
xplicit
05:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Very confusing names, not much of a substantive difference. — Mr. Guye ( talk) ( contribs) 02:57, 1 August 2018 (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.