Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 June 4: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
revert closure by involved editor |
|||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
==== Category:Articles to be split ==== |
==== Category:Articles to be split ==== |
||
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' |
|||
:''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Rename''', ignoring [[WP:POINT]]y change of opinion [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ACategories_for_discussion%2FLog%2F2009_June_4&diff=296342490&oldid=295954597 here], all three editors including my self are in favour of the alternative rename. ''[[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich]] [[User talk:Rich Farmbrough|Farmbrough]]'', 13:27, 14 June 2009 (UTC). |
|||
---- |
|||
<!-- To closing editor. If a rename will be decided the appropriate closure, I'll be happy to carry it out (including the categories added by all maintenance templates). This is one of my projects on Wikipedia, and I know all the ins and outs of it. Alternatively, feel free to to ahead. :) Debresser. --> |
<!-- To closing editor. If a rename will be decided the appropriate closure, I'll be happy to carry it out (including the categories added by all maintenance templates). This is one of my projects on Wikipedia, and I know all the ins and outs of it. Alternatively, feel free to to ahead. :) Debresser. --> |
||
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Articles to be split]] to [[:Category:Wikipedia articles to be split]] |
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Articles to be split]] to [[:Category:Wikipedia articles to be split]] |
||
Line 93: | Line 86: | ||
::--[[User:William Allen Simpson|William Allen Simpson]] ([[User talk:William Allen Simpson|talk]]) 12:30, 14 June 2009 (UTC) |
::--[[User:William Allen Simpson|William Allen Simpson]] ([[User talk:William Allen Simpson|talk]]) 12:30, 14 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
*'''Comment''' this editor previously was ''in favor of'' the alternative. Just today, after he came back from a 3rr block to whch I sent him, he changed his mind. More to the point: the issue is not the word "Wikipedia" perse, but uniformity, which will allow easy template programming. [[User:Debresser|Debresser]] ([[User talk:Debresser|talk]]) 12:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC) |
*'''Comment''' this editor previously was ''in favor of'' the alternative. Just today, after he came back from a 3rr block to whch I sent him, he changed his mind. More to the point: the issue is not the word "Wikipedia" perse, but uniformity, which will allow easy template programming. [[User:Debresser|Debresser]] ([[User talk:Debresser|talk]]) 12:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
---- |
|||
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> |
|||
==== Category:Images of Long Island Rail Road stations ==== |
==== Category:Images of Long Island Rail Road stations ==== |
Revision as of 12:14, 16 June 2009
June 4
Category:Shipping containers
Category:Articles to be split
- Propose renaming Category:Articles to be split to Category:Wikipedia articles to be split
- Nominator's rationale: To match the dated subcategories. Debresser (talk) 23:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- Comment The category was deleted per discussion here. However, that discussion contains no arguments that pertain to the present nomination. Debresser (talk) 23:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Alternatively we could consider deleting the word "Wikipedia" from the dated subcategories. However the reason I made my nomination this way is because 1. it is the easier of the two 2. it conforms with the guideline here. Debresser (talk) 23:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- Support the alternative. Because I have proposed removing the requirement for the Wikipedia prefix. And as far as "easier" goes most administrative categories don't start with "Wikipedia" - the word is superfluous except when there is a subject matter category which would naturally have same name (Tools - Wikipedia tools for example):- I would submit this is an extremely rare event and the "Wikipedia" prefix can be used then. In general "Pages", "Articles", "Templates", "Categories", "Redirects", "Users" and "User pages" (just for a start) make it clear that they are not subject matter categories and the addition of "Wikipedia" is superfluous. Rich Farmbrough, 17:34, 7 June 2009 (UTC).
- Keep -- it has been previously decided. I do not support the alternative, especially as those "dated" subpages were renamed out-of-process. There have been cases where a word like Pages et alia would be confusing, but this is not one of them.
--William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:11, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- N.B. others in the same Category:Wikipedia maintenance categories sorted by month include:
- Category:Articles containing potentially dated statements
- Category:Articles lacking in-text citations
- Category:Articles lacking reliable references
- Category:Articles lacking sources
- Category:Articles needing additional categories
- Category:Articles needing additional references
- Category:Articles needing coordinates
- Category:Articles needing expert attention by month
- Category:Articles slanted towards recent events
- Category:Articles that may contain original research
- Category:Articles that need to be wikified
- Category:Articles to be expanded by month
- Category:Articles to be merged
- Category:Articles to be pruned by month
- Category:Articles with broken or outdated citations
- Category:Articles with dead external links
- Category:Articles with disputed statements
- Category:Articles with invalid date parameter in template
- Category:Articles with minor POV problems
- Category:Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases
- Category:Articles with topics of unclear notability
- Category:Articles with trivia sections
- Category:Articles with unsourced statements
- Category:Articles with weasel words
- --William Allen Simpson (talk) 12:30, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
- N.B. others in the same Category:Wikipedia maintenance categories sorted by month include:
- Comment this editor previously was in favor of the alternative. Just today, after he came back from a 3rr block to whch I sent him, he changed his mind. More to the point: the issue is not the word "Wikipedia" perse, but uniformity, which will allow easy template programming. Debresser (talk) 12:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Category:Images of Long Island Rail Road stations
Category:Chowder
Category:Archived image and media for deletion discussions
Category:Full Motion Video
Drug categorization: consensus sought
- Should the 2nd, 3rd and 4th levels of the Category:Drugs by target organ system mirror the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification System exactly, or be consolidated when possible?
- Please read the more thorough description of this issue at WT:PHARM:CAT and post your comments there. You're comments would be much appreciated! Thanks. ---kilbad (talk) 01:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)