Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 April 15
April 15[edit]
More medical schools[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.
- Category:Universities in China with English-medium schools of medicine to Category:Universities in China with English-medium medical schools
- Category:Schools of medicine in the United States by state to Category:Medical schools in the United States by state
- Nominator's rationale: followup to WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 April 8#Category:Schools_of_medicine, where the by-country categories were renamed. Per that nomination,
Medical school is by far the more common and natural term, and is used by the main Medical school article
. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:09, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- REname per precedent. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:55, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
- Support for consistency. Rathfelder (talk) 22:52, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
- 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:Mayonnaise[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 to Category:Sauces of the mayonnaise family (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:50, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: There is already a Category:Sauces of the mayonnaise family. There is no reason to have a Category:Mayonnaise as well. Macrakis (talk) 16:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. I agree the category is redundant with Category:Sauces of the mayonnaise family. Bishonen | talk 16:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC).
- Procedural comment: I have reverted the nominator's depopulation[1] of Category:Mayonnaise. As noted in the lede of WP:CfD,
please do not amend or remove the category from pages before a decision has been made
. If there is consensus to upmerge, then the CfD closer will instruct the bots to do the merge. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:44, 15 April 2018 (UTC) - Support, unless someone comes up with non-variety articles from somewhere. Cultural impact of mayonnaise, anyone? Grutness...wha? 01:35, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Per above. And it doesn't include the song either! Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 07:02, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- Merge to parent. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:57, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
- 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:Divine command theory[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. – Fayenatic London 21:41, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, even more so because it is very questionable whether the two other articles (other than the eponymous article) really belong in this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:33, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Delete, way too small, and only the eponymous article seems to be an actual theory. Bishonen | talk 16:43, 15 April 2018 (UTC).
- Delete Tiny category, unlikely to be expanded. Divine command theory is a highly disputed theological and philosophical theory, which equates morality "to the whims of God". Dimadick (talk) 16:32, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
- Delete -- The two items (apart from the main article) do not properly belong here. The main article is well-categorised, so that merger is not needed. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:00, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
- 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:L. Frank Baum[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: keep (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:53, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category for a person who doesn't have the volume of spinoff content needed to warrant one. As always, every writer does not automatically get one of these just to parent his existing "Works by..." category alone -- a writer gets an eponymous category only when there's a lot of spinoff content besides the standard stuff that already has standard categories for it (e.g. Category:William Shakespeare, where there's literally a metric tonne of stuff that needs Shakespeare categorization far beyond the scope of his works alone.) But besides the works category, the only other thing to file here is the eponym itself, which isn't enough. Bearcat (talk) 03:49, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. I know that WP:OTHERSTUFF is hardly a strong reason to keep, but comparing the category with Shakespeare - probably the most written-about author in English - is equally dodgy. Looking at Category:Wikipedia categories named after American writers it seems that many of the categories have a lesser raison d'être to this one. Given that a bit of a hunt managed to up the number of articles to eleven, it looks like it should be kept. If we say that one subcat is worth three pages, then 1C and 11P is more than what half of the writer categories have in that American writers category. Grutness...wha? 02:01, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Per Grutness' reasonable arguments. Also I think Baum has had more of an impact on literature than Shakespeare, as he was a pioneer in Mythopoeia. Dimadick (talk) 16:41, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep seems useful based on related content.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:33, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- 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.