Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 December 13

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
< December 12 December 14 >

December 13

Category:Logos of the United Kingdom Government

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) 02:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The new name would more accurately reflect that these logos are for agencies as well as government departments. Cloudbound (talk) 21:51, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking executive agencies. Cloudbound (talk) 17:18, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Logos of United Kingdom Government departments and Executive Agencies might work. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:20, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support to match the daughter category; there seems to be a difference of meaning in "government" on the various sides of the pond: apparently, in the UK the government means a slew of ministers of high station in parliamentary majority and not the state apparatus, where in the US the government is whole lot on the federal payroll: president, congress (majority and minority), the FBI, CIA, FDA, IRS, HUD, DOE, National Park System, Veterans Affairs, air traffic controllers, etc. What is the British English equivalent to the encompassing view of "government", which does seem to include agencies: the National Crime Agency for one. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:43, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The term used in Britain for police, schools, hospitals, councils etc (things paid for out of taxes) is "public sector". DexDor (talk) 19:48, 14 December 2015 (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:Arab socialist politicians

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) 02:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OVERCAT. P.S. Much the content hear could also fit into the categories for socialists in individual Arab states (such as Category:Algerian socialists, Category:Egyptian socialists, Category:Iraqi socialists, Category:Lebanese socialists, Category:Sudanese socialists, Category:Syrian socialists, Category:Tunisian socialists, Category:Yemeni socialists, ect.). Charles Essie (talk) 21:47, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree of course, my proposal was based on that logic. I guess I should've made that more clear. I'm just hoping that the content in this category finds it's way into the other categories I mentioned. On that note I think it's safe to say that this one is a closed book since it's been over a month and no objections have been raised against deleting/merging this category. Charles Essie (talk) 15:44, 31 January 2016 (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:Political party alliances in Republika Srpska

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. I've also merge it to Category:Political parties in Republika Srpska. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:03, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Both categories are very small to some extent overlap with one another. The seems to me like classic WP:OVERCAT. Charles Essie (talk) 21:12, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Then this category should be merged into both of them. Charles Essie (talk) 17:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • But these are not political parties, they are alliances of parties. Putting them in the "parties" categories is an inaccuracy we should be avoiding (and why these categories exist). It's not as if this is a category that will never have any more articles added to it. For all we know, three more alliances could be formed for the next elections – it will only grow in size. Number 57 21:38, 9 February 2016 (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.

Monarchies

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: listify, then delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: a number of countries have evolved from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy, so putting them in one category is too black-and-white. A list can provide more nuance by incorporating historical comments. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:55, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep the notes in each category says 'current' and current is what is populating the categories. There can be no confusion here. This is their current type of government so they are appropriately categorized. Hmains (talk) 04:38, 17 December 2015 (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:Association football strikers

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:38, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per related CFM here with a rationale of "not needed". Carried by consensus of 2 to 1 on the basis that soccer strikers are indivisible from soccer forwards. SevcoFraudsters (talk) 08:53, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. SevcoFraudsters (talk) 09:12, 13 December 2015 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_December_13&oldid=1074814451"