< March 17 March 19 >

March 18

Category:Takehold Records 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 result of the discussion was: delete; move contents to Category:Tooth and Nail Records artists. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:49, 25 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category for a record label without an article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:39, 18 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[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:Sichuanese-language films

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:54, 25 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Sichuanese Mandarin is just a dialect of Mandarin and I believe these so-called "Sichuanese-language films" are all understood by Mandarin speakers without the need for captions. We don't have categories like Category:Ebonics-language films or Category:Singlish-language films. Timmyshin (talk) 20:21, 18 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment Not a linguist either but apparently the claim that the differences are mostly in tone is probably incorrect. this page gives some examples of differences between Standard Chinese and Sichuanese.--Prisencolin (talk) 21:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Based on my totally unscientific personal estimation, Chengdu-Chongqing dialect is 95+% intelligible with standard Mandarin for newscasts/documentaries and maybe 80+% for films (depending on the amount of noise and slang). I believe most Mandarin speakers will consider it a Mandarin dialect. Pinging the creator of the category, User:本本一世. Timmyshin (talk) 03:09, 30 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If it's a newscast, then it's probably going to be in Sichuanese Standard Mandarin and designed to be more understandable to non-Sichuanese speakers. Based on my experience with Sichuanese speakers (I don't know specifically where they were from) I'd say it's at most 70% at best, but that would be for more colloquial speech. That being said, I looked up some of the films in the category, and it seems like the soundtrack was mostly in more comprehensible Standard Sichuanese Mandarin, but occasionally it could be difficult.--Prisencolin (talk) 18:33, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[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.

Theatres in Italy by city

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) 01:56, 25 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nominator's rationale: double merge per WP:SMALLCAT, too little content to keep a separate category for each medium-sized Italian city. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:21, 18 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The other question is how does this affect Theaters by city categories?Rococo1700 (talk) 17:58, 18 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Background WP:SMALLCAT is the relevant policy here but it doesn't give a strict cutoff so you can prefer as few as 2 articles while I prefer 5. In practice, most editors in most nominations want 5 articles, but there are several exceptions to that policy. I may not be the best one to give you a neutral background here since I feel strongly SMALLCAT is too subjective and proposed a strict cutoff here, but most editors prefer the current flexibility.RevelationDirect (talk) 04:39, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[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:Water ice

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. – Fayenatic London 20:56, 26 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge as it is not clear how the two categories distinguish from each other, they have the same main article Ice. There has been a previous discussion long time ago with not too convincing arguments (I think). While in theory "ice" is broader than "water ice", as pointed out in that discussion, the content of both categories is about the same, namely water ice. If there is really a need to keep "water" in the category name, we could also have a reverse merge, although that would not be my first preference. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:50, 18 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You may want to look at the first 2 and last 2 articles in Category:Ice - these are not about water ice. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 14:53, 18 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[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:Uninhabited villages

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, merging contents to Category:Former villages. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:59, 25 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is undefined and redundant to parent category Category:Defunct villages (which I have also proposed to be renamed to more standard "former" version, see related discussion). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:24, 18 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jahaza:Is that the case with any of these articles? RevelationDirect (talk) 16:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • For one of the villages, German WP seems to suggest it has been abandoned due to the land reform of around 1920, as a result of which a lot of Germans left the new-established country. Marcocapelle (talk) 00:31, 26 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[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:Defunct villages

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. (non-admin closure) SSTflyer 14:43, 26 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category:Former populated places has Category:Former cities, Category:Former towns - and this oddly named category. Let's standardize it. There is also a bunch of child categories that should be renamed; I am not listing them here because there's probably a script someone can use to list/fix them; I don't have time to list them manually. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:18, 18 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[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.

SNCF regions

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, as that late proposal gathered a head of steam, with persuasive arguments, and there were no objections to it. Moreover, the contents all seem to be otherwise adequately categorised, so no merger is necessary. – Fayenatic London 21:16, 26 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Région Est to Category:Région Est (SNCF)
  • Propose renaming Category:Région Nord to Category:Région Nord (SNCF)
  • Propose renaming Category:Région Ouest to Category:Région Ouest (SNCF)
  • Propose renaming Category:Région Sud-Est to Category:Région Sud-Est (SNCF)
  • Propose renaming Category:Région Sud-Ouest to Category:Région Sud-Ouest (SNCF)
Nominator's rationale: These category names for regions of SNCF—which are just French compass-direction names—seem to be sufficiently ambiguous that they should be disambiguated. There are no articles for these regions that we could match the names to; I propose just adding a "(SNCF)" for each. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:50, 18 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Aren't these effectively subsidiaries? I guess main articles for each region would be helpful here. RevelationDirect (talk) 17:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • If they are at all, only at such a low level that it isn't notable, the SNCF website doesn't mention it and the French WP article doesn't mention it either. The five main divisions are: SNCF Réseau; SNCF Voyageurs; SNCF Logistics; SNCF Immobilier; SNCF Keolis. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:26, 20 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, I'm favoring deletion too then. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:53, 20 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[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