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The result of the discussion was:rename (C2B/D), original objector at CFDS has de facto withdrawn objection here -
The BushrangerOne ping only 22:46, 4 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename. An opposed speedy. The article is at
Aswad (band). Standard practice is to use the same name of the band in categories for songs or albums. Adopting this general practice avoids having to debate each of the hundreds of cases individually to determine if the category is sufficiently unambiguous.
Good Ol’factory(talk) 22:58, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose: not necessary for disambiguation purposes as sufficient clarity is achieved by the word "songs", since there are no other musicians called
Aswad, and Aswad would not be understood as a subject matter about which songs are written. –
Fayenatic London(talk) 13:06, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. At first, I thought that this was an alternative spelling of '
Azawad', though of course that's my mistake. Still, maintaining consistency between the category and article titles makes categorization and navigation more predictable. It removes the need for editors and readers to be forced to guess whether the standard, as reflected in criterion C2.B, is or is not applied in a particular case. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 23:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. Standard practice is indeed to use the article name in all band categories.
Oculi (
talk) 23:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename to match parent article.--
Lenticel(
talk) 01:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment: I was thinking that a newbie editor creating an article about a song would have more trouble finding the category for it, since
Category:Aswad songs would be the intuitive guess, especially as there are no other musicians called
Aswad, and there is no other likely interpretation of "Aswad songs", e.g. as a cultural term or a subject matter for songs. However, I suppose one outcome of the advantage explained by Black Falcon is that an experienced editor, at any rate, may realise that since the band article is at
Aswad (band), the song category should match that. I can accept this as long as we don't have to rename
Shine (Aswad song) as
Shine (Aswad (band) song) !
–
FayenaticLondon 19:13, 1 June 2012 (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:Knights of the Order of Ojaswi Rajanya
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.
Delete this is an award category, and we try to avoid such.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 01:30, 1 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. and do not delete This is an order of knighthood, which I guess could be construed as an "award", but not the sort of award we avoid. We have many well-established such categories, such as
Category:Order of the British Empire.
LeSnail (
talk) 19:39, 1 June 2012 (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:Bus trip songs
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete Impossible to define clearly and objectively. Any song that is sufficiently simple and sufficiently well-known by the specific group inside a specific bus can become a bus trip song.
Pichpich (
talk) 14:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Indeed, while there are certainly a few songs that are widely recognized as archetypal "bus trip songs", the nominator is entirely correct that many songs can be one — I can personally vouch for having been on bus trips where the songs included "
American Pie" (albeit just a constant repetition of the chorus rather than the whole song), "
Me and Julio Down By the Schoolyard" and "
Mony Mony" (complete with the, er, mofo parts), but I'd hardly suggest that any of them should be categorized as such. A bus trip might certainly be a venue where a group can have a mass singalong, but that doesn't constitute a defining characteristic of the songs that the passengers happen to choose. Delete.
Bearcat (
talk) 04:55, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete. Although the "wheels on the bus" should count for such.
Benkenobi18 (
talk) 11:10, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete. There can be no objective and non-arbitrary criteria for whether a song fits in a category like this. Furthermore, I see no evidence that the sort of songs which are sung on bus trips are notably different from those sung in other places where groups of people gather, such as on trains, or around campfires. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 17:43, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete there is not an objective inclusion criteria.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 01:31, 1 June 2012 (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:20th century children's songs
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete We don't categorize songs by century so it's probably unwise to categorize children's songs that way. Moreover, many children's songs are atemporal so this sort of classification is less meaningful.
Pichpich (
talk) 14:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete the fact that it has no sister cats for children's songs from other centuries shows this is not part of a regular schema and not wisely thought out.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 01:32, 1 June 2012 (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:Wikipedians who are hopped up on Mountain Dew
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:speedy delete (
CSD G7: creator consents to deletion). -- Black Falcon(
talk) 18:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Delete user category that is not useful for collaboration.
Pichpich (
talk) 14:19, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Category creator's reply: I support this proposal. I am the only member of the category. I just thought I would toss it out there to see if there was anyone else that enjoys being hopped up on Mountain Dew as much as I do. That is all.
Reverend Lee (
talk •
contribs) 16:52, 30 May 2012 (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.
Trans-Mississippi Theater of the American Civil War
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.
For convenience, I have placed in this section all nominations related to the
Trans-Mississippi Theater of the American Civil War. I chose to nominate each category separately because the reasoning in each case is slightly different and in order to allow any relevant campaign-specific information to be noted and considered. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 07:14, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
I mostly agree, except as noted below. At the least get rid of all the "Battles of/Battles of the". Add (American Civil War) or similar where appropriate to address the objections of 70.24.251.208.
Mojoworker (
talk) 20:04, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
To elaborate, I prefer the (American Civil War) suffix rather than (American Civil War campaign) since the word "campaign" is redundant as pretty much synonymous with Operation/Expedition, etc. As for deletion of single item categories, I'm OK with that. As someone mentioned in a previous deletion discussion, such battles are already adequately interpreted though the campaignbox and a single item category really adds nothing.
Mojoworker (
talk) 16:01, 5 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Mostly support all but in most cases "American Civil War" needs to appear, in order to make it clear what the category is about. I do not know enough of the subject to be sure whether this applies in all cases.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 22:58, 2 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Category:Battles of the Operations to Control Missouri of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale:Set categories might be useful if there existed categories about other aspects of these campaigns. There do not, however, and so these categories should be converted to
topic categories. The proposed changes not only shortens the titles considerably, but also makes them a more natural fit within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War.
'Operations to Control Missouri' and 'Operations in Northeast Missouri' are the names used in the
list of American Civil War campaigns published by the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC). -- Black Falcon(
talk) 22:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment weren't there Indian skirmishes in this area, as well?
70.24.251.208 (
talk) 12:55, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Not that I'm aware of, at least not in the traditional sense. There may have been skirmishes with Indians in the service of the Confederate States, but not what are considered "traditional" Indian skirmishes.
Intothatdarkness (
talk) 18:51, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
I mean if you take out all of the Civil War, and look at other periods of history.
70.24.251.208 (
talk) 05:23, 1 June 2012 (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:Battles of the Operations Against the Sioux in North Dakota of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale: A
set category might be useful if there existed categories about other aspects of this campaign. There do not, however, and so this category should be made a
topic category. The proposed change not only shortens the title considerably, but also makes it a more natural fit within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War.
Oppose there were operations against the Sioux before and after the Civil War in North Dakota.
70.24.251.208 (
talk) 12:49, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
That's a good point. I believe that disambiguation, as proposed below, would address the potential ambiguity. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 06:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Either of those sound fine, but I prefer the shorter version – I think the word "campaign" is redundant in this context.
Mojoworker (
talk) 15:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Support Mojoworker's idea. The current title is, in a word, hideous.
Intothatdarkness (
talk) 18:52, 31 May 2012 (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:Battles of the Operations to Blockade the Texas Coast of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale: A
set category might be useful if there existed categories about other aspects of this campaign. There do not, however, and so this category should be made a
topic category. The proposed change not only shortens the title considerably, but also makes it a more natural fit within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War.
Oppose I seem to recall Mexico trying to blockade Texas during its war of independence.
70.24.251.208 (
talk) 12:47, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment What about Operations to Blockade the Texas Coast during the American Civil War? If we're going to dredge up the Texas independence stuff that would make sense. But the current title has to go, IMO.
Intothatdarkness (
talk) 18:54, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Reply that works for me. The original proposed title doesn't take into account that history extends beyond the Civil War.
70.24.251.208 (
talk) 05:24, 1 June 2012 (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.
Marmaduke's Expeditions into Missouri
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.
'Marmaduke's First Expedition into Missouri' and 'Marmaduke's Second Expedition into Missouri' are the names used in the
list of American Civil War campaigns published by the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 07:05, 30 May 2012 (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:Battles of the Advance on Little Rock of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale: A
set category might be useful if there existed categories about other aspects of this campaign. There do not, however, and so this category should be made a
topic category. The proposed change not only shortens the title considerably, but also makes it a more natural fit within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War.
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:Battles of the Operations to Control Indian Territory of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale: A
set category might be useful if there existed categories about other aspects of this campaign. There do not, however, and so this category should be made a
topic category. The proposed change not only shortens the title considerably, but also makes it a more natural fit within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War.
I think you're right. It's asking too much of readers to rely only on the capitalization of the word 'Control' to discern that this is a proper name of a campaign rather than a descriptive title. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 17:55, 4 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment on disambiguation - I have no preference between the disambiguations "(American Civil War)" and "(American Civil War campaign)" except that we be consistent in our use of disambiguation across all of the affected categories. So, I request that the closer take into account the outcomes of related discussions on this page. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 06:05, 18 June 2012 (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:Battles of the Operations North of Boston Mountains of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale: A
set category might be useful if there existed categories about other aspects of this campaign. There do not, however, and so this category should be made a
topic category. The proposed change not only shortens the title considerably, but also makes it a more natural fit within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War.
Comment weren't there Indian skirmishes in this area, as well?
70.24.251.208 (
talk) 12:51, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Not that I'm aware of...unless they were raiders from Indian Territory and part of that conflict.
Intothatdarkness (
talk) 20:34, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
I mean if you take out all of the Civil War, and look at other periods of history.
70.24.251.208 (
talk) 05:25, 1 June 2012 (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:Battles of the Operations in the Indian Territory of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale: A
set category might be useful if there existed categories about other aspects of this campaign. There do not, however, and so this category should be made a
topic category. The proposed change not only shortens the title considerably, but also makes it a more natural fit within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War.
The article about the campaign is titled
Trail of Blood on Ice, and the category should follow it. I am nominating this here rather than that
WP:CFD/S because criterion C2.D does not apply to set categories and converting a set category into a set category is not a minor change. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 06:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Propose Simply fold in with
Indian Territory in the American Civil War. Makes no sense to have it sitting like this, especially since this really doesn't look like a formal campaign name and more something someone came up with.
Intothatdarkness (
talk) 19:02, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename to
Category:Trail of Blood on Ice, since this represents a related series of battles in a certain geographic area in a limited time span for military control of that geographic area, so this meets the definition of a military campaign.
198.252.15.202 (
talk) 16:29, 14 June 2012 (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:Battles of the Confederate Occupation of New Mexico of the American Civil War
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.
Unlike the other cases nominated above and below, the name 'Confederate Occupation of New Mexico' appears to be unrecognized by CWSAC—at least, there is no mention of it in its
list of American Civil War battles by campaign. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 23:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Yes, these were all very minor engagements. The major attempt at Confederate control of New Mexico was
Sibley's New Mexico Campaign. I don't think these minor engagements were part of Sibley's campaign, but rather this category (and the similar campaignbox
Template:Campaignbox Engagements in Confederate Arizona) are categorizing the engagements geographically and not by campaign.
Mojoworker (
talk) 20:04, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
DeleteConfederate operations in New Mexico were short-lived and never really constituted a full occupation. It makes sense to keep it with New Mexico in the American Civil War.
Intothatdarkness (
talk) 18:57, 31 May 2012 (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:Battles of the Operations Against Galveston of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale: A
set category might be useful if there existed categories about other aspects of this campaign. There do not, however, and so this category should be made a
topic category. The proposed change not only shortens the title considerably, but also makes it a more natural fit within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War.
'Operations Against Galveston' is the name used in the
list of American Civil War campaigns published by the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC).
Oppose there were military operations by Mexico against Texas at Galveston.
70.24.251.208 (
talk) 12:54, 31 May 2012 (UTC) (Texas War of Independence)
70.24.251.208 (
talk) 05:26, 1 June 2012 (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:Battles of the Operations to Suppress the Sioux Uprising of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale: The 'Sioux Uprising', or the 'Operations to Suppress the Sioux Uprising', refers to the
Dakota War of 1862. The current title and scope is problematic for three reasons: (1) it follows a naming standard that is being replaced; (2) it does not reflect the name of the war used by the article and main category; and (3) six of the seven articles in this category also are in
Category:Dakota War of 1862, resulting in unnecessary overlap.
Option A:Rename to
Category:Operations to Suppress the Sioux Uprising, thereby converting the current
set category into a
topic category that fits more naturally within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War. The name would continue to reflect the classification system of the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC), although it is worth noting that CWSAC's
list of American Civil War campaigns lists as part of this campaign only the battles of Fort Ridgely and Wood Lake. The category contains five additional articles, so it seems odd to follow CWSAC's scheme. This option addresses the first problem but not the second or third.
Option B:Rename to
Category:Battles of the Dakota War of 1862, thereby making this a natural subcategory of
Category:Dakota War of 1862 and reflecting the
common name of the war. Articles about individual battles would, then, be removed from the main category, thereby eliminating the issue of overlap. This option addresses all three problems but deviates from CWSAC's naming scheme.
My preference is for Option B. We already deviate from CWSAC's naming scheme in some cases, such as
Category:Vicksburg Campaign, so I do not consider that to be a significant drawback. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 05:43, 30 May 2012 (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:Battles of the Operations Near Cache River, Arkansas of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale: A
set category might be useful if there existed categories about other aspects of this campaign. There do not, however, and so this category should be made a
topic category. The proposed change not only shortens the title considerably, but also makes it a more natural fit within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War.
'Operations Near Cache River, Arkansas' is the name used in the
list of American Civil War campaigns published by the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC).
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:Battles of the Operations Near the White River of the American Civil War
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.
Nominator's rationale: A
set category might be useful if there existed categories about other aspects of this campaign. There do not, however, and so this category should be made a
topic category. The proposed change not only shortens the title considerably, but also makes it a more natural fit within the structure of
Category:Campaigns of the American Civil War.
'Operations on the White River' is the name used in the
list of American Civil War campaigns published by the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC).
Oppose among other things there was the
White River War, not to mention "White River"s not in the US at all that featured battles.
70.24.251.208 (
talk) 12:57, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete As it's a single-member category, get rid of it.
Intothatdarkness (
talk) 18:59, 31 May 2012 (UTC)reply
I fully agree. Having seen some of the issues that have been raised in the discussions above, I'm leaning heavily toward the idea that we should eliminate most of these lightly populated 'campaign' categories, keeping only those that correspond to clearly defined campaigns consisting of multiple notable battles (e.g.
Category:Appomattox Campaign). -- Black Falcon(
talk) 18:05, 4 June 2012 (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 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.