Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SineBot (talk | contribs) at 01:50, 14 January 2018 (Signing comment by Jjhantsch - "added"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
< January 6 January 8 >

January 7

Category:Places on the Road of St James

Propose deleting:
Nominator's rationale: Being on these hiking trails is WP:NON-DEFINING for cities (e.g.  Mérida, Pamplona). We don't normally categorize towns/cities/districts etc by which (man-made) routes they are on (if we did then a city like Bristol would be categorized for 2 motorways, railways, canals, LEJOG ...).  Relevant previous discussions include  Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_October_1#Category:Way_of_St._James and Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_December_30#Category:Camino_del_Cid.  Note: Some of these categories contain an eponymous article that may need to be upmerged to Category:Hiking trails in Spain.  Note: Currently this categorization is in rather a muddle (e.g. there are articles about trails under the places-on category). DexDor (talk) 21:40, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: This is inane. The EC recognized the unique nature of the Camino de Santiago in 1987 as it's First European Cultural Itinerary. Bristol is not unique being on motorways, roadways and canals. However, there are dozens of towns which have been on a unique pilgrimage path which has been walked by a billion people over the last 1200 years. While no one would say the A3 was unique among roadways, the Camino de Santiago (Road of St James) has determined the location, population, economic and spiritual life of dozens of towns for the past millenia and does so uniquely to this day. Three hundred thousand people walk this path every year and a million did annually during the middle ages. The towns of Hornillos del Camino, Sarria, Castrojeriz, Arzua and Puente la Reina all are in distinct provinces and yet all have been intimately shaped for the past millennia because they are on the Camino de Santiago. These towns should be grouped under one unique category to identify the cultural, religious and economic affects of this unique path. The sub-categories as listed identify sub-pathways, both historic and modern which provide additional experiences for pilgrims. All should be retained. JJ Hantsch 01:14, 8 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjhantsch (talk • contribs)
  • There is a category for the Camino de Santiago. I have attempted to keep it as a super category with information about the historical, cultural and religious aspects of the pilgrimage (as well as the modern and medieval paths). Since this pilgrimage involves walking 800 plus kilometers and has affected dozens of towns along the way, I created a category to identify all those towns and include other specific sites associated with the different paths. Each specific subpath also has a subcategory to identify those along that path specifically. These towns were located where they are because of the path. The religious life of this region was defined by the Camino. The European Community recognized the uniqueness of this path and specifically marked the different paths in 1987. Unlike the A3 through Bristol, the Camino de Santiago was named as the EC's First European Cultural Itinerary. It is insipid to claim that permitting a category for towns who's foundation and entire life is dependent on the Camino should not be grouped together. JJ Hantsch 02:32, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Compare Bristol to Hornillos del Camino JJ Hantsch 02:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjhantsch (talk • contribs)
  • @Jjhantsch: Please use four tildes to place your signature, see WP:SIGNATURE. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom as WP:NONDEF, and per many precedents that we do not categorise towns by whatever hiking trail, pilgrimage route, cycle path, road, railway line, air corridor or shipping route they happen to be located on. This applies even to places like Holyhead, whose existence is due almost entirely to its centuries-old role as the main seaport for passenger journeys from the island of Britain to the mainland of Ireland. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:36, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another illegitimate comparison to a category which would have only a single member. JJ Hantsch 01:49, 14 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjhantsch (talk • contribs)


Category:Wikipedia users who received an invite to edit Wikipedia

Nominator's rationale: This category is populated by substitutions of {{User:Subha WMF/Invite}}. It contains the user talk pages of 100+ users who received the "Do you need help?" notice during a single run on 24 April 2012. While the category may have served a purpose in the past, it is no longer useful to continue grouping these users based on a nearly 6-year-old notice. If kept, then rename to the shorter form, Category:Wikipedians who were invited to edit Wikipedia. (Pinging User:Psubhashish as the category's creator.) -- Black Falcon (talk) 19:14, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Brunson, South Carolina

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Small one-county community with just 1 entry. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:03, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians in Northeast Tennessee

Nominator's rationale: This is a non-standard and ambiguous way to segment Tennessee; see Grand Divisions of Tennessee. Alternatively, rename to Category:Wikipedians in East Tennessee. -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:30, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tenured Wikipedians

Nominator's rationale: There is no such thing as "tenure" on Wikipedia, and thus no need for a grouping of "tenured" editors. I am concerned this could mislead newer editors into thinking users in this category have a privileged status. -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:25, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:IP addresses used by Wikipedia users

Nominator's rationale: More concise names. These categories are populated by {{IP address}}, {{ISP}}, {{Shared IP}}, {{Shared IP address (public)}}, {{Mobile IP}} and {{Static IP}}. The issue at hand here is not the type of page being categorized but rather what it represents (various types of IP accounts). I prefer option A, consistent with the use of "accounts" in Category:Alternative Wikipedia accounts. -- Black Falcon (talk) 04:01, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Static IP addresses

Nominator's rationale: This is an unnecessary intermediate layer between Category:IP addresses used by Wikipedia users (parent) and Category:Wikipedia user talk pages of static IP addresses (child). There was a note in the template documentation of Template:Static IP stating the template places pages in this category; however, while this may have been the case at one time, currently the template only populates the child category. (Pinging User:Ronhjones as the category's creator) -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:55, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Long time ago, looks like I copied the layout of Category:Shared IP addresses and it's subcategories. I've no objections to a tidy up. Ronhjones  (Talk) 14:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Alternative Wikipedia accounts

Nominator's rationale: Consistency with Category:Wikipedians with alternative accounts (parent) and Category:Wikipedia doppelganger accounts (child). Also, per Wikipedia:Category names#Special conventions, Wikipedia is typically a prefix at the start of a title, used to denote the category is used for Wikipedia administration. -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:54, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_7&oldid=820288763"