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) Marcocapelle (talk) 04:52, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Parkhotel Valkbenburg Continental Team to Category:Parkhotel Valkenburg Cycling Team

Nominator's rationale: C2A + C2D; Parkhotel Valkenburg Continental Team is ambiguous. LittleWink (talk) 21:25, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support (did you intend to post to CFDS?). Should the two season articles be renamed too? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 04:31, 6 November 2021 (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.

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 Category:Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. bibliomaniac15 06:24, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania to Category:Mecklenburg-Vorpommern

Nominator's rationale: This cat and about 200 others with Mecklenburg-Vorpommern in their name were renamed when the main article was moved without discussion. It has been moved back. Now the redirect cats need to be removed, and the cats moved back. Dicklyon (talk) 15:41, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Mecklenburg-Vorpommern is certainly the commoner term.Rathfelder (talk) 21:46, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:31, 3 November 2021 (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.

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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 05:02, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Venezuelan protests (2014–present) to Category:2014 Venezuelan protests

Nominator's rationale: More specific title, prevents ambiguity. NoonIcarus (talk) 15:00, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly Oppose Venezuelan protests (2014–present) is the main topic of this category. Charles Essie (talk) 04:41, 4 November 2021 (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.

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: convert to container categories. – Fayenatic London 22:08, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Australia
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in New South Wales
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Queensland
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in South Australia
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Tasmania
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Victoria (Australia)
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Western Australia
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Canada
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Alberta
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in British Columbia
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Manitoba
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in New Brunswick
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Newfoundland and Labrador
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in the Northwest Territories
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Nova Scotia
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Ontario
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Quebec
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Saskatchewan
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Yukon
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in the United Kingdom
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in England
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in London
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Northern Ireland
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Scotland
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Wales
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in the United States
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Alaska
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Arizona
• Propose containerizing Category:Disease-related deaths in Arkansas

Nominator's rationale: containerize, without specification of disease it is an indiscriminate and trivial characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:17, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Query: I guess I am not understanding the "Container"... Wouldn't these be the Parent category for the various "COVID related deaths" categories? Personally, I don't split out the disease specific (child) until there are at least 3 of the same disease? - Mjquinn_id (talk) 17:38, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Containerization means they will only serve the purpose of being parent category of disesase specific subcategories. but will not contain articles directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:30, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:03, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @WilliamJE: the nom didn't suggest deletion. Grutness...wha? 22:58, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    ...making the commenter suggest that the nom's argumentation would speak for that outcome. ~~~~
    User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 04:27, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Containerise per nom. Grutness...wha? 22:58, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Containerize per nom. Hiddenstranger (talk) 01:12, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Containerize per nom. --InPursuitOfAMorePerfectUnion (talk) 19:58, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Containerize per nom. Most of these categories contain articles about people who died at the age of 86 without even mentioning any disease. I think there are quite a lot of similar categories to follow. Rathfelder (talk) 21:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Containerize per nom. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 00:41, 7 November 2021 (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.

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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 05:06, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Khmer women singers to Category:Khmer-language singers

Nominator's rationale: None of the other Category:Singers by language are divided by gender. Category:Khmer-language singers is not really a viable category as Chhom Nimol is the only article in either, and though she is now in the USA she was born in Cambodia. We dont generally categorise people by language if they use the official language of their country. Rathfelder (talk) 09:21, 31 October 2021 (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.

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. – Fayenatic London 22:20, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Lua String-based templates to Category:Templates based on the String Lua module
• Propose renaming Category:Lua-based citation templates to Category:Templates based on the Citation/CS1 Lua module
• Propose renaming Category:Lua-based infobox templates to Category:Templates based on the Infobox Lua module
• Nominator's rationale: The current title is vague and ungrammatical. The templates aren't written in Lua, and they aren't any more "string-based" than any other—all templates take strings in and output strings, and always have done. This category gathers templates that are documented as ((Lua|Module:String)) so its title should reflect that. I say "directly" because tens of thousands of templates use Module:String so an indirect transclusion really isn't worth noting. User:GKFX^talk 20:45, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Notes: Some notes on the general fact of this categorisation by ((Lua)) (now here's another misname btw...).

I can agree on the bad language quality. I note the category is automatically populated by ((Lua)) to the documentation; four more modules have predefined categories (see module:Lua banner; the better name btw...), otherwise the template ends up in their parent Category:Lua-based templates (4,211)). I think at least all these (five) categories should be aligned in their title.

I do have a question about the usefullness of these categories. What do they do, except for listing some filtered WLH?

OTOH, to me more useful some listing/categorisations would be "Cat:Direct implementations of Module:Foo" (i.e. Template:Foo); and maybe "Cat:Implementation of metamodules" (with subcategories "Cat:... of module:Math) to easily find code examples.

In general the uselessness of these 5 categories is promoted because adding ((Lua)) to a template /doc is not governed by a guideline (why mention each and every module used, and then why categorise them automatically?). -DePiep (talk) 07:24, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @GKFX: could you respond to the above notes? Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Marcocapelle: I agree with a lot of what DePiep has said. I've looked at the parent category and I think that standardizing on names of the form "Templates based on the [Module name] Lua module‎" would be best; this is already used by two of the five relevant categories and describes quite well what the category is for in plain English. "Based on" clearly implies that the template gets most of its functionality from that module, which is the distinguishing feature between e.g. Template:Str sub (a wrapper of Module:String) and any random template that uses Module:String directly or indirectly to achieve some other purpose.

  I don't think that "Direct implementations of Module:Foo" is a good name because it is backwards: the implementation happens in the module not in the template. As for the usefulness of the ((Lua)) template on documentation pages, I think it should only be used where a module is providing most of the functionality of a template (or is specific to that template). It is a useful template for introducing people to the fact that some templates are backed by Lua, but should only appear on a template page if someone interested in that template might reasonably need to look at the linked modules.

  What I would do is relist this and add

  • Propose renaming Category:Lua-based citation templates‎ to Category:Templates based on the Citation/CS1 Lua module
  • Propose renaming Category:Lua-based infobox templates‎ to Category:Templates based on the Infobox Lua module

  User:GKFX^talk 08:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Support the new name pattern proposed. -DePiep (talk) 09:00, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @GKFX: Shouldn't the initial name (OP) here be changed too? "Propose renaming Category:Lua-based infobox templates‎ to Category:Templates based on the String Lua module"?

   Done User:GKFX^talk 09:15, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry for my mistake in the "X implements Y" logic; clarified now. I support the proposed categorisation principle rules ("most of the functionality", also list all modules used on the documentation but do not categorise automatically). That is changing current autocategorisation in ((Lua)). I assume we will start a separate XfD for this, for simplicity. -DePiep (talk) 09:00, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting with additional categories.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, User:GKFX^talk 09:13, 31 October 2021 (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.