Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 June 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion‎ | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by HanzoHattori (talk | contribs) at 21:57, 10 June 2007 (→‎Several ninja categories). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< June 6 June 8 >

June 7

Category:Primates of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria and of All Africa

Propose rename Category:Primates of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria and of All Africa to Category:Orthodox Patriarchs of Alexandria
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Rename - The title "Orthodox Patriarch of Africa" "Orthodox Patriarchs of Alexandria" is much more commonly used for these people, and the corresponding Wikipedia article is List of Orthodox Patriarchs of Africa List of Orthodox Patriarchs of Alexandria. The category should be renamed accordingly. Dr. Submillimeter 23:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Did you mean List of Orthodox Patriarchs of Alexandria? If so, rename so category name matches lead article and common use. Bencherlite 09:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree to either solution - "Primate" is redundant. Over-long category names are to be deplored. The full title can easily be given in the cateory's main article. Peterkingiron 09:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Exotic matter

Propose delete Category:Exotic matter
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Doesn't match the article Exotic matter. And bona fide exotic matter has not enough articles to be usefull as category. --Pjacobi 23:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Like Carbon nanotube?
Also Exotic matter should strictly speaking be a disambig between [[]]Non-baryonic matter]] and Non-positive-mass matter, the latter being the common usage in physics. And even articles belonging to one of these should be not lumped together, because they are vastly different.
--Pjacobi 09:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Read the article Exotic matter
☺▬█ ♪♪♫ I M Kmarinas86 U O 2¢ 18:19, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church metropolitan bishops

Propose merge Category:Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church metropolitan bishops into Category:Metropolitans of the Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Propose merge Category:Primates of the Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church into Category:Metropolitans of the Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Merge - Both the "metropolitan bishops" and "primates" category refer to people who use the title "Metropolitan". Moreover, the "metropolitan bishops" and "primates" categories are redundant; they contain virtually the same articles. Hence, the two categories should be merged into Category:Metropolitans of the Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church. Dr. Submillimeter 22:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on this and several following items. I am no expert. However these are relatively small churches, and probably do not require extensive categorisation; certainly duplication is to be deplored, as are over-long titles. Peterkingiron 09:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Assyrian Church of the East Christians

Propose merge Category:Assyrian Church of the East Christians into Category:Assyrian Church of the East
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Merge - Category:Assyrian Church of the East Christians only contains Category:Bishops of the Assyrian Church of the East, so it is effectively an unnecessary layer of categorization between Category:Assyrian Church of the East and the bishops category. The extra layer of categorization should be removed to streamline navigation. (Also, "Assyrian Church of the East Christians" is a strange phrase.) Dr. Submillimeter 22:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems sensible Peterkingiron 09:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC) Merge per nom Johnbod 15:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Primates of the Assyrian Church of the East

Propose merge Category:Primates of the Assyrian Church of the East into Category:Catholicos Patriarchs of the Assyrian Church of the East
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Merge - The "Primates" category is basically an extra layer of categorization between the Catholicos Patriarchs category and the parent categories. The "Primate" category should be merged into the "Catholicos Patriarchs" category. Dr. Submillimeter 22:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Syriac Orthodox Church Patriarchs

Propose merge Category:Syriac Orthodox Church Patriarchs into Category:Syriac Orthodox Patriarchs of Antioch
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Merge - These two categories are both being used for the Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch. One of the categories is a subcategory of the other. The two categories are not needed and could be merged together. Dr. Submillimeter 22:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree merge - it looks like they are the same thing. Peterkingiron 09:37, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Primates of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kievan Patriarchate

Propose rename Category:Primates of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kievan Patriarchate to Category:Patriarchs of Kiev and All Rus’ - Ukraine
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Rename - The title used by the two people in this category is "Patriarch of Kiev and All Rus' - Ukraine", not the title that begins with "Primate". The category should be renamed to not only use the common name for these people but also to avoid the confusions that could be caused by the alternate title. Dr. Submillimeter 21:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Primates of the Church of Greece

Propose rename Category:Primates of the Church of Greece to Category:Archbishop of Athens and All Greece
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Rename - The primary title used for all of the people in this category is "Archbishop of Athens" or "Archbishop of Athens and All Greece", not "Primate of the Church of Greece". The category should be renamed accordingly. Keeping the "primate" name will probably just confuse people. Dr. Submillimeter 21:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Primates of the Romanian Orthodox Church

Propose delete Category:Primates of the Romanian Orthodox Church
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: *Delete - This is redundant with Category:Patriarchs of the Romanian Orthodox Church. All of the people in the Primates category are also in the Patriarchs category. The term "Patriarch" is much more frequently used to refer to these people. The redundant "Primate" category is not only unnecessary but could cause confusion. Dr. Submillimeter 21:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Football/Basketball nominations

Propose rename Category:Grambling Tigers men's basketball players to Category:Grambling State Tigers men's basketball players
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Propose rename Category:Grambling Tigers football coaches to Category:Grambling State Tigers football coaches
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Propose rename Category:Grambling Tigers football to Category:Grambling State Tigers football
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Propose rename Category:Grambling Tigers football players to Category:Grambling State Tigers football players
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Rename, university's proper athletic reference is Grambling State, not Grambling. It's close, but it's still wrong. fuzzy510 21:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Several ninja categories

Propose rename Category:Ninja to Category:Ninjas
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Propose rename Category:Historical ninja to Category:Historical ninjas or Category: Ninjas (depends on final results)
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss or Template:Lcss (depends on final results)
Nominator's rationale: Rename, recently fictional ninja was up for deletion. Now it's time to take care of rest of the related categories. Click here for the old discussion.

TheBlazikenMaster 21:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge historical ninja to ninja. "Historical" is pretty much a synonym for "dead" and we don't categorize people based on living or dead status. Otto4711 22:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Category:Living people is maintained for WP:BLP purposes. To be more precise regarding dead people, we do not categorize people by living status and occupation. Notice the absence of such subcats of Category:Dead people. We have deleted categories for dead Playboy Playmates, dead rappers and the like. So, since this is categorization by living status and occupation, it should be merged into the general category. Otto4711 23:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And this what I protest. This should be "Fictional ninja". See: all the serious sources (practicioners, dedicated books, magazine articles not from the 1980s). Google Books example: "ninja" 880 [1], "ninjas" only 692[2] (and look at them listed - most on page one already are just a children books, and several on the page two by the unrelated "Ninjas" death squad in Indonesia - AND the number one, Ninjas: Masters of Stealth and Secrecy is described as "Written in easy-to-understand language and uses consistently familiar vocabulary to encourage reluctant readers." - in other words, "ninja for dummies"). And actually, that's it - "Ninjas" should be the death squad, Japanese ninja warriors should be "ninja" (like the samurai warriors are "samurai"). And actually, the "ninja" word itself is a colloqualism enough (famous "historical ninja" were probably not called "ninja" even once in their lives, but it's an another thing). --HanzoHattori 06:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the Category:Ninja is much more than a mere list of the "historical ninja" - it's everything ninja-related. --HanzoHattori 07:21, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • NO on both - Leave the Category:Historical ninja AND Category:Ninja (which is more than this - click and see). "Ninjas" is an American popculture colloqualism with no place in the encyclopedic titles. Category:Fictional ninjas was JUST renamed (after years), and I STRONGLY[3][4][5][6] disagree with this. Why "historical"? Because of this.[7] Historical=documented. (But if you really need, you would also consider changing into the Category:Shinobi or alike - just NOT "shinobis" or anything this style.) What I stand for, simply, is the continued use of the encylopedic language vs the English-language colloqualisms - in encyclopedia. --HanzoHattori 06:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'd like to note that the search on the "historical ninja" (oustide wikipedia) returns 1,470 hits[8], while "historical ninjas" only 462[9] Morever, in the example of Oniwabanshu from the category (a ninja group, meaning plural by default), it's 2,380 for "ninja" and only 1,320 for "ninjas".[10]

TheBlazikenMaster, what is your problem with version of "ninja"? It's both gramatically correct and just more commonly used. In addition to mentioned before: more professionally (for example, the Ninja: Warriors of the Night episode of the Ancient Warriors series by the Discovery Channel). --217.97.233.30 10:18, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My problem? I don't have a problem with that, the only reason I nominated was because "fictional ninjas" was recently renamed. I have no problem at all. TheBlazikenMaster 12:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Propose rename Category:Ninja to Category:Ninjas" No. Axl 18:19, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Propose rename Category:Historical ninja to Category:Historical ninjas or Category: Ninjas" No. Axl 18:19, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mega comment What "previous discussions"? What are your arguments? Whatever some silly American films or badly-dubbed CHINESE kung-fu movies and comedies (quote:"[11] "3 Ninjas, Surf Ninjas, Ninjas and Superspies, New Haven Ninjas, Teen Ninjas, Ninjas in Pyjamas, Five Element Ninjas, Cheerleader Ninjas, Monkey Ninjas in Space, Ah! A Goddess's Love Can Save the Ninjas!...") are to do with the category of "historical ninja"? Because these were the arguments in the original discussion - so, anything else? Because mine are: "ninja" is (100%) grammatically correct AND much more encyclopedic, as this is exclusively used by experts on the subjects. So why even changing this at all? Seriously, because of some stupid unrelated movies? Like what the HECK 3 Ninjas has to do with Sanada Ten Braves? I have no idea - you tell me. Or maybe you just write: "Ninjas are totally sweet mammals who flip out and kill people... Monkey Ninjas in Space!", be like http://www.encyclopedia-obscura.com/genninjas.html and get over this. Just stop pretending you write a serious encyclopedia by doing this.
But, this was only ONE discussion.
However, (IMPORTANT) TheBlazikenMaster just lost and "withdrew" his nomination - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_May_27#Category:Fictional_ninja (after he was told the form of "ninja" is in fact fully correct) - and then he just kept trying (all the time quoting about these unnamed movies for the reason) until he eventually won. Now, maybe we should use this one of the "previous discussions", eh? It was just 13 days ago. Seriouly, TBM, what is your problem? And still also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_June_13#Category:Fictional_ninjas (yes, it got renamed from the form of "ninjas" two years ago) "Per previous discussions", you say?
Could you please be polite? Asking "what is your problem" isn't very polite. Please keep your cool, I withdrew it, someone else re-nominated it, I didn't "keep trying", it isn't my fault if someone else renominated it, I did NEVER make the person re-nominate it. And again the only reason I'm nominating this was because of the change of category:fictional ninjas change. TheBlazikenMaster 21:06, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't answer still. What were these seemingly authoritative movies you kept quoting in TWO different "previous discussions" which were just mentioned? Were these a dubbed Hong-Kong movies from the 1970s, or the English-language Phillipino movies from the 1980s? According to Mike Selinker, these are highly revelant to the subject now named "historical ninja", so possibly some documentary biographies I guess. --HanzoHattori 21:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, how is it "Fictional ninjas" even got restored just like this, after being already deleted? Shouldn't be the deleted articles and categories NOT restored? Why one can try repeatedly to promote "ninjas" (until eventually succeeding, so this ONE becomes "previous discussions"), while my attempt at review of the "ninja" deletion is immediatelly arbitraly closed[12] (by the very same "previous discussions" person, by the way - that is Mike Selinker)? This is very fair, I see.
TBM: What are these authoritative movies of yours? And documentary among them, at least? Already mentioned here was Ninja: Warriors of the Night - and actually, here you can see this yourself:[13] What's better source: Discovery Channel or Cheerleader Ninjas?
Oh, and btw the bad translation and something else - mentioned as a source (I didn't do this) Ah! A Goddess's Love Can Save the Ninjas! is a Japanese movie (not US or Chinese or Phillipino, like the rest of them) and actually used "shinobi" (Aa! Megami no ai ha shinobi o sukuu!) - I already proposed the title of the "historical ninja" may be substituted by the category of "shinobi", because according to my knowledge this how they were called and called themselves when they lived (there was probably no term of ninja until the XXth Century, if you didn't know - there was ninjutsu, but no ninja).
On a sidenote, I should write or expand some articles in this category, because it's quite pathetic (silly things like Ninja Burger have better articles, but this is typical, as seen from this very discussion too). --HanzoHattori 19:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • No rename. From my perspective ninja seems to be a more respectable plural than ninjas. I have no opinion on merging Historical ninja into Ninja. -- Lilwik 20:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pages monitored by bots

Propose rename Category:Pages monitored by bots to Category:Wikipedia pages monitored by bots
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Per the convention that categories related to the encyclopedia begin with the term "Wikipedia". If individual articles at some point become monitored by bots, a metadata category may be added to the talk page of those articles. Iamunknown 19:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Category:The Andy Griffith Show

Propose delete Category:The Andy Griffith Show
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Delete - absent the several dozen improperly categorized actors, the remaining handful of articles for such things as guest stars and cast list don't need a category for navigation. Otto4711 18:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mixed-gender musical groups

Propose delete Category:Mixed-gender musical groups
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Too trivial, not a defining characteristic. Lugnuts 18:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But that's only in relation to vocalists. What about bands like Sonic Youth or The Corrs? Totnesmartin 22:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sonic Youth and The Corrs in the same sentence?! What about Swans or STEPS... ;-) Lugnuts 05:21, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom & per Otto; if sex (if kept this ought to be renamed per Otto) were a defining characteric then all bands would be put in any of 3 categories: All male, all female, and mixed; and how would that help? And as a band went though different incarnations, added members, lost them, or if any of their members changed sexes, they get put in multiple categories; like that helps even more... Carlossuarez46 17:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Mowsbury 19:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I think that categorizing singers by gender makes a certain amount of sense, but for musical groups, I think it's exessive, and too prone to ambiguity. Groups often hire backup singers for a particular recording session or tour: should Pink Floyd be considered a mixed-gender group? Many, many groups have had multiple line-ups, some of which were mixed gender and some of which weren't. Would the Grateful Dead or the John Coltrane Quartet be considered a mixed-gender group? What about orchestras and other classical musical groups? At most, I could see a case for Category:Musical groups with both male and female lead singers, and even that I'm pretty dubious about (most opera companies and choirs would qualify, for one thing). I think this is a non-defining characteristic in general, even if you can point to a few specific cases and say, "I think it's defining for them!" (Which is a subjective judgment.) Xtifr tälk 11:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It's precisely becuase we have categories such as boy bands and girl groups that we don't need a mixed-gender category. Similarly we have a category for black and white films but there is no need for a category for films that are in colour. Mallanox 14:26, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Mallanox and Otto4711. Pavel Vozenilek 20:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pre-statehood territorial delegates to the United States House of Representatives

Propose rename Category:Pre-statehood territorial delegates to the United States House of Representatives to Category:Delegates to the United States House of Representatives
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Rename, "Pre-statehood" is too much. This category should include all non-voting delegates even for those territories that did not (or may not in the future) become states, such as Minnesota Territory (became Minnesota); District of Columbia (current, but has not become a state); Phillipines (obsolete, never became a state). I think we don't need "non-voting" in the category name because that would excessively long. This should also include Puerto Rico's delegate even though he/she is a Resident Commissioner; and I think we don't need to add "Resident Commisioner" to the category name either.—Markles 17:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sounds like a good idea to me. – Quadell (talk) (random) 20:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • rename to 'Territorial delegates to the United States House of Representatives'. Just 'delegates...' does not show where they are from and we lose the category connection to the 'officials from territories' category if non-territorial delegates end up in this category. Hmains 03:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Some delegates are from non-territories such as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Simplification is better, I believe. "Territorial" would just make a long category name even longer.—Markles 10:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Then there should be two categories: 'territorial delegates..' so it can still be a subcategory of 'officials from territories', and 'delegates...' as as a super cat containing the 'territorial delegates...' category as well as all other delegates such as those from D.C. etc. and which would be inclusive. Length of category names is not an issue; clarity and good organization is Hmains 14:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]
        • What is this 'officials from territories' cat you're talking about? Maybe it doesn't even need to be a sub-cat of 'officials from territories'? Why is this becoming difficult? —Markles 14:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename as last item - present title is unnecessarily wrong, even Territorial Delegates to USA House of Representatives. Mind you, I am an Englishman and know little of the matter. Peterkingiron 09:50, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories:Football (soccer) families of note

Category:Kappa Sigma

Propose delete Category:Kappa Sigma
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Similar category to many prior deletions. —ScouterSig 17:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kaun Banega Crorepati?

Propose delete Category:Kaun Banega Crorepati?
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Delete - category not needed for these two articles. Otto4711 14:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Kath & Kim

Propose delete Category:Kath & Kim
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Delete - this material doesn't require a category. All linkable through the show's article. Otto4711 14:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:African curators

Propose delete Category:African curators
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Delete There was only one article in this category, and it was about an American. Biographical articles are sorted by nationality, not by continent. Osomec 14:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete categorization by continent is this? Bulldog123 16:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete as empty cat and per nom. Carlossuarez46 17:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I'm a little dubious about speedying this, since it seems to have been emptied during the course of the discussion. And I have to wonder if it wasn't intended as an ethnic category ("African American" could be seen as an intersection of ethnicity and nationality). But if so, the name is too ambiguous. And it raises a host of other issues that I don't want to get into here (like the great genetic diversity of African peoples). Xtifr tälk 21:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mister Rogers' Neighborhood

Propose delete Category:Mister Rogers' Neighborhood
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Delete - minus the improperly categorized performer articles (and the categorized redirects), the remaining articles for the show and aspects of the show are heavily interlinked and don't need the category for navigation. Otto4711 13:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Phua Chu Kang

Propose delete Category:Phua Chu Kang
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Delete - category not needed for the show article and ep subcat. Otto4711 13:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ron and Fez

Propose delete Category:Ron and Fez
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Delete - improper performer by performance categorization. Otto4711 13:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Opie and Anthony

Propose delete Category:Opie and Anthony
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Delete - the bulk of the categorized articles are either performer by performance which is improper or articles for radio stations which carry or carried this radio show, which strikes me as a very poor way to categorize as well given the fluidity of radio programming. Minus those article there are it looks like three articles other than the show article, on tours and the fan club, all of which are easily interlinked through the main show article. Category isn't needed for navigational purposes. Otto4711 13:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:German-speaking Community

Propose rename Category:German-speaking Community to Category:German-speaking Community of Belgium
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Rename for clarity. Based on the article German-speaking Community of Belgium, it seems that this term should be regarded as a proper noun and categorised accordingly. Haddiscoe 12:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Dog House

Propose delete Category:The Dog House
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Delete - category is for a radio show. Minus the improperly categorized performer by performance articles the remaining material does not require a category for navigational purposes. The show's article serves as a hub for getting to articles about the various stations. Otto4711 12:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional hillbillies

Delete for all the reasons we shouldn't have Category:Hillbillies either. It's an insultnig term with vague inclusion criteria. >Radiant< 11:55, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:DC Comics mutates

Propose rename Category:DC Comics mutates to Category:DC Comics metahumans.
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Rename, the orginal title did not fit the intended use, the new title was arrived at via consensus. --Basique 10:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anglican archbishops by diocese in the UK

Propose rename Category:Anglican archbishops by diocese in the UK to Category:Anglican archbishops by diocese in Great Britain
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Rename, like other churches in Ireland, the Anglican Church of Ireland covers the whole of Ireland, so "UK" is not an accurate description of this category. Renaming to "Great Britain" removes that anomaly, but since the category currently includes only England and Wales (omitting the Scottish Episcopal Church), it might be better called Category:Anglican archbishops by diocese in England and Wales.
Alternatively, upmerge to Category:Anglican archbishops by diocese.
Note that Category:Anglican bishops by diocese in the UK raises similar issues. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - No Scottish archbishops listed as they have a regularly elected Primus instead. Broadly similar in function, though not in style or status, to an archbishop. Neddyseagoon - talk 12:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Also a good idea as this squares the circle with regards to not being able to Category:Anglican bishops by diocese in Ireland in the UK, but could be put in Great Britain. Though rename a la "British Isles" perhaps? - "Great Britain" might (wrongly) be taken as still synonymous with "UK".Neddyseagoon - talk 12:24, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - It might be appropriate to divide this category into England and Wales subcategories. Dr. Submillimeter 19:17, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Is the Church in Wales not also independent? Since this is a small category of categories, the "British Isles" suggestion is sensible, and should include the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Armagh and the Primus of the Episcopal Church of Scotland. The object of categories is to facilitate navigation, and I would not have known that the Episcopal Church of Scotland has a presiding Primus; but then I am a mere Englishman, not a Scot!

Category:Transport in City of London

Propose rename Category:Transport in City of London to Category:Transport in the City of London
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Rename - The word "the" should be added to the category name, partly to improve the readability and partly to match the other categories in Category:City of London. Dr. Submillimeter 09:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Quantum Leap episodes

Propose merge Category:Quantum Leap episodes into Category:Quantum Leap
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Merge, Category is sparse, no reason to add an additional level. Should be upmerged. Oren0 06:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Quantum Leap characters

Propose merge Category:Quantum Leap characters into Category:Quantum Leap
Template:Lcss → Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Merge, Same as above. Additionally, since there are basically two characters on the show, it's unlikely that any other pages will ever be added to this category. Oren0 06:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chinese University of Hong Kong faculty

Propose renaming Category:Chinese University of Hong Kong faculty to Category:Academics of Chinese University of Hong Kong in order to comply with other Hong Kong university people categories. I created the category before I realised this. T@nn 02:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Keeping Up Appearances

Propose delete Category:Keeping Up Appearances
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Delete - category not needed for the single article and ep/character subcats. Otto4711 04:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Historical US Republicans

Propose delete Category:Historical US Republicans
Template:Lcss
Nominator's rationale: Every dead Republican could qualify as "historical", not a useful categorization. jwillburtalk 00:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_June_7&oldid=137327088"