< September 3 September 5 >

September 4

People from Chester Heights, Pennsylvania

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:19, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Has only two entries....William 15:16, 4 September 2013 (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.

People from Bethel Township, Delaware County, Pennsylvania

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:18, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Has only one entry....William 15:16, 4 September 2013 (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:Rhodes scholars

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) 22:17, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: the proper capitalisation is Rhodes Scholar. The Rhodes Scholarship is a named scholarship, and "Rhodes Scholar" is a title and a proper noun. Thus, it requires capitalisation of the 'S' in 'Scholar'. Accordingly, categories containing 'Rhodes scholar[s]' should be renamed to 'Rhodes Scholar[s]' for a rationale similar to this.
I understand any reasonable opposition and that there must be a considerable deal of inertia or momentum against which I am pushing against; but, for what it is worth, and I should hope to think a considerable deal, University of Oxford documents, for internal and external distribution, widely and consistently refer to recipients of this award, or scholars (and please duly note that I use this in the generic sense) who have received this award, as "Rhodes Scholars" or "Scholars". --Qwerty Binary (talk) 13:33, 4 September 2013 (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:Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia

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: Withdrawn by nominator. WP:NAC ~ Cgingold (talk) 23:14, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category has only one member (which is in plenty of other categories) and no parent categories. DexDor (talk) 05:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
CFD withdrawn by nominator. DexDor (talk) 18:12, 5 September 2013 (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:Sangguniang Panlungsod

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 "City councils in the Philippines" and "Provincial boards in the Philippines". Despite the lack of consensus at Talk:Sangguniang Panlungsod to move that lead article, the other one uses an English name, and there are good arguments below for using the English name in categories. The new names will be a better fit within Category:City councils and Category:Legislatures of country subdivisions. – Fayenatic London 19:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Sangguniang Panlungsod to Category:Philippine city councils
  • Propose renaming Category:Sangguniang Panlalawigan to Category:Philippine provincial boards
Nominator's rationale: Categories of state-based topics should include the name of the country in their generic, neutral, english forms in line with the general naming convention of country categories. Their individual member pages are titled city councils and provincial boards respectively, hence the need to rename to match those pages. --RioHondo (talk) 05:41, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sangguniang Panlungsod as title of the main article is still being debated (see Talk page). But regardless, the main rationale behind creating this category in the first place is to group all the different City Councils in the Philippines whose articles are titled nowhere near Sangguniang Panlungsod. A good analogy would be the German Landtag. Although it could be the main article or topic for German state legislatures, they are all to be found and categorized under Category:State legislatures of Germany following the general naming convention that is intelligble to English-language readers. -- RioHondo (talk) 08:05, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I support matching the category names to the main article names whenever possible, so as long as the article is at Sangguniang Panlungsod, I support the category being at that name, regardless as to whether it's being debated or not. If and when the article name changes, then I would support a name change for the category as well. (I would prefer that Category:State legislatures of Germany be at Category:Landtag of Germany. It's not a perfect analogy, because Landtag is not solely about the state legislatures of Germany. Other countries have Landtag.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 17:47, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so concerned with it matching the other subcats of Category:Legislatures of country subdivisions, nor am I saying that category names must match the main article name. I'm just saying that is my preference and across most categories in WP, the overwhelming practice. I would oppose Category:Sangguniang panlungsod in the Philippines as being inherently redundant.. Good Ol’factory (talk) 16:50, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Agreed on all counts. We are not touching the articles in their vernaculars. But you are right in saying that the categories that would lead us to these foreign articles should be comprehensible to us English language readers, otherwise it defeats the purpose of categories (that which helps readers locate articles and navigate through the world directory that is in english as this is the EN WP). --RioHondo (talk) 12:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cgingold, I don't think it impedes navigation. All a user has to do is click on the category (i.e., navigate) and then click on the corresponding main article to find out what it means. Also, category definitions can easily be added if you want to lessen navigation by one click. In my experience, having a main article be a different name from a corresponding category name almost always causes more confusion amongst readers than having an "unfamiliar" term being used that is the same as an article name. Good Ol’factory (talk) 16:52, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Peter, I am so very glad that we are in fact in agreement on this issue. This is the very same principle I have been arguing for with regard to Category:Haskalah. Would you please be good enough to revisit your initial comment in that CFD (which is still open), and make it known that you actually do support renaming to Category:Jewish Enlightenment, rather than keeping the current name? Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 12:27, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Excuse me, but "Haskalah" is hardly a "standard English phrase". It's Hebrew, for goodness sake. Cgingold (talk) 10:49, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is the accepted English phrase for a cetain phenomenon, which is used in English with very specific meanings that are not directly controlled by its Hebrew meaning.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:00, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the side issue, that regarding the renaming of "Category:Haskalah", I concur, as the term is not as well known in English as, say, the terms "kosher" or "Tanakh" are. To simply rename it simply because it isn't English is utterly offensive to all decent people, however.
As a faithful translation with no significant loss of meaning and nuance, "Jewish Enlightenment" could pass as a valid and reasonable category for Haskalah and Haskalah-related articles. --Qwerty Binary (talk) 10:10, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
With regard to Sangguniang Panlungsod article, perhaps it would be better if this were moved to something more searchable; the Sangguniang Panlungsod page were made a redirect to that more-searchable page; and this equivalence were explicitly stated in the lead section. This would be consistent with the established principles of Wikipedia, would it not? --Qwerty Binary (talk) 10:13, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's the order I would have thought things would have been undertaken here: rename the articles, then get the categories renamed to match. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:17, 17 September 2013 (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:Agricultural terraces

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: withdrawn. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary category - just the eponymous article (which is in other categories) and no parent categories. DexDor (talk) 05:38, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn by nominator. DexDor (talk) 18:18, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • A couple of side-points: It's always good for the Category creator (in this case, User:Jarble) to identify him/herself when they post a comment at CFD. Also, when I come across a recently-created category (like this one) that only has one or two things in it, I usually try to ask the Category's creator directly (on their talk page) if they will be adding more to it in the very near future, before I take the step of starting a CFD discussion. Not required, to be sure, but sometimes it has saved me/us the bother of an unnecessary CFD discussion. Cgingold (talk) 12:14, 5 September 2013 (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:Order of the Solomon Islands

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 Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:16, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Currently, we have only three articles about orders, decorations, or medals of the Solomon Islands, and there is no need to split the parent category by type (Orders of..., Decorations of..., Medals of...). If there is no consensus to merge, then rename to Category:Orders of the Solomon Islands. -- Black Falcon (talk) 04:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator....William 10:55, 4 September 2013 (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.
More