mic_none

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 July 18 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_July_18

< July 17 July 19 >

July 18

[edit]

Category:Trade associations based in the Philippines

[edit]
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:Industry trade groups based in the Philippines‎ to Category:Trade associations based in the Philippines. MER-C 08:59, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is the only country with categories for both trade associations and industry trade groups. Industry trade groups is more common. Rathfelder (talk) 22:07, 18 July 2019 (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:Furniture manufacturers

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 August 2#Category:Furniture manufacturers

Category:Prince primates

[edit]
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: empty and disambiguate. All current members of the category are in one of the two targets already. – Fayenatic London 21:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:NONDEF. In contrast to prince-bishops who were the actual rulers of their own territory, prince-primate was merely a secondary title of the archbishops of Esztergom. They did not rule their own territory. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:05, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 18:39, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- With the possible exception of the Rhenish rulers, there should be no articles in this category, merely an Esztergom subcat. Alternatively, this should be a cat-redirect to Esztergom with an otheruses template for the Rhenish rulers. No decided view. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:59, 25 July 2019 (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:The Wack Pack

[edit]
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. MER-C 08:57, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Little more than a WP:PERFCAT --woodensuperman 13:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 08:53, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 18:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. These people are (strongly) associated with Wack Pack and as such are linked in both directions in a way that is much better (e.g. with an explanation and references) than category links. Categorization is for grouping similar articles (e.g. in Category:American female bodybuilders), but is not necessary to link together associated articles. DexDor (talk) 18:29, 19 July 2019 (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.

Yearly college football standings templates

[edit]
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. MER-C 09:31, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Bring categories in line with yearly parents categories, which don't specify "NCAA", per discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 22#Proposal to regionalize the pre-1956 NCAA football independents templates and elsewhere. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:36, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 18:37, 18 July 2019 (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:Mayors of Lodi

[edit]
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. MER-C 12:58, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Disambiguating; clarifying from mayors of Lodi, California or Lodi, New Jersey – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 16:22, 18 July 2019 (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:Freedmen

[edit]
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: do not merge. There is definitely scope for clarification of these categories per the comments below, but this nomination is not it, and a new proposal should be bought accordingly. MER-C 10:19, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: unclear distinction fgnievinski (talk) 12:28, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In the United States, the terms "freedmen" and "freedwomen" refer chiefly to former slaves emancipated during and after the American Civil War by the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment. Slaves freed before the war (usually by individual manumissions, often in wills) were generally referred to as "Free Negroes" or free blacks. In addition, there was a population of black Americans born free.
Marcocapelle (talk) 08:41, 21 July 2019 (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:Grawemeyer Award winners

[edit]
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. MER-C 12:57, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OCAWARD and WP:NONDEF, the award is not comparable to e.g. the Nobel prize, for most recipients it is just one of many prizes they got. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:22, 18 July 2019 (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.