Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 May 4

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 22:57, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:A24 Films films to Category:A24 films

Nominator's rationale: Last year, the company A24 Films was renamed "A24". I would like to update the category to reflect said rebranding. DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 23:03, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Support The main article is A24 (company) and specifies that the company no longer uses "Films" as part of its name. Dimadick (talk) 07:55, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Irrespective of whether they rebranded to simply "A24" or are still "A24 Films", the title of A24 FIlms films is redundant. DA1 (talk) 16:45, 22 May 2017 (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 23:02, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming "Category:Defunct organizations of Foo" to "Category:Defunct organizations based in Foo"

• Full nomiation list can be found at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 May 4/Defunct organizations by country

Rationale: per the subcats of Category:Organizations by country and most of its subtrees. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 19:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename All per nom. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 10:05, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename all per nom. Oculi (talk) 10:06, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Can a defunct organisation have a base? Tim! (talk) 07:17, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • It wasn't always defunct; it definitely was, at some point, based in some location. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 18:32, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename all per nom. I would also really hope to see either "organization" or "organisation" nominated across the board as per consistency in the near future as well. Cheers! Savvyjack23 (talk) 15:34, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • As to the spelling of this word, see WP:ENGVAR; the most we can expect is national-level consistency - and I'm working on that, wit 4 currently open discussions. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 03:05, 10 May 2017 (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: delete (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:19, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Southern Lady Jaguars basketball (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Unpopulated, and unclear what would populate. —swpb^T 14:43, 4 May 2017 (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: delete (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Manhattan Lady Jaspers basketball (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Unpopulated, and unclear what would populate. —swpb^T 14:43, 4 May 2017 (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: delete. – Fayenatic London 23:23, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Leeds University Library collections (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  
• Propose deleting Category:Designated collections Brotherton Library, Leeds (added 19 May)

Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT - recreate if and when more collections have articles. —swpb^T 14:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:Designated collections Brotherton Library, Leeds. According to the one article, there are five collections designated by the Museums Council, which is enough for a viable category. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:58, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per WP:SMALLCAT, and also delete its copy Category:Designated collections Brotherton Library, Leeds that I added to this nomination. Note that Brotherton Library doesn't even mention the five collections. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:16, 19 May 2017 (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: delete (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:21, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:People from Holland, Netherlands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Deprecated and ambiguous country subdivision; overlapping with categories based on modern provinces: Category:People from North Holland and Category:People from South Holland. —swpb^T 14:40, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete (or convert to a dab-category). The one article needs to be reassigned to one of the others, but I cannot tell which it should be. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:03, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. We categorize Dutch people on the contemporary provinces and not on deprecated archaic terms for the former regions. The only person filed here has an article that fails to specify whether he's even from North Holland or South Holland at all, so he frankly shouldn't be filed in either of them until we can properly verify which one is right — and this is not necessary as an alternative holding tank for people in this "unclear whether North or South" situation. (For example, if we knew that an American citizen was from either North Carolina or South Carolina but couldn't find proper verification of which, we would not create an extra "People from Carolina" to hold him.) He's already in other Dutch people categories as it is, so it's not like this is carrying the weight of being the only thing that's getting him categorized as Dutch. People are not required to be subcategorized by province or city — if we don't know which province or city to file them in, then we should just wait until we do rather than creating extra holding pens for people we're only semi-sure about. Bearcat (talk) 22:07, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Bearcat. 2001:569:70DD:7500:39EA:19D8:DF90:EF4D (talk) 04:17, 9 May 2017 (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.