631:(1)"Are you really going to start a separate RfC about every article". No. This is a test case. (2)"not finding consensus at CfD". CFD is about categories. This is about an individual article. (3)"the "Austria" category is a daughter of the two others". It can only be a daughter after it is born. It was born in 1918. (4) You had your opportunity to talk above. This is now the space for others. please allow them the time and space in a non aggressive way. Thank you.
74:
53:
84:
22:
840:(1) This is not forum shopping. See my comments indented below. (2) What's wrong with adding those categories? I did not create those categories. They are long-standing categories. (3) How is Austria a proper category? It was created in 1918 and did not exist in 1782. (4) The Holy Roman Empire and the Habsburg Monarchy by contrast did exist and ruled those territories at that time.
753:
Your comment makes no sense. If "Austria" was a proper child, there would be no need for this RfC. We need the RfC to discuss the whether or not it is a proper child. Please advance arguments that it is a proper child. Re "the
Habsburg and Holy Roman Empire categories as superfluous", that is not the
724:
Came here from ANI. None of this makes any sense really - this was just at CfD, and a proper child category applies to this article, so the correct course of action is to actually delete the
Habsburg and Holy Roman Empire categories as superfluous. Since these were added 1 April 2021 by the nom, this
434:
If you agree that no categories for the
Republic of Austria should exist for 1782 ("That's why no categories are created for the Republic of Austria in those years."), then why persist with an ambiguous name that can only lead to the conclusion that it does in fact refer to the modern state? There is
645:
If you start an RfC with "should this article" etc, then it is invalid for other articles, no matter what the outcome. And you have to make up your mind; at the ANI discussion, you claimed "it's a pity that the nominator chose not to engage in a meaningful way with it", but here, you want me to shut
606:
Are you really going to start a separate RfC about every article where you are editing to impose your preference despite not finding consensus at CfD just weeks ago? What a completely impractical way to proceed. In any case, the "Austria" category is a daughter of the two others, so instead of those
485:
Nope. You tried a CFD, it had no consensus for your proposed deletions. Multiple people have asked you at your talk page to stop implementing that failed proposal anyway. For some reason, you don't react at your talk page but at this article talk page, which is weird. You are free to start an RfC of
449:
If you had succeeded in convincing people that it was an "error", the CfD wouldn't have closed as it did. Relitigating the discussion here won't change the outcome. You disagree, that's clear, but sometimes one has to accept that their position, even if it is the "correct" one and the consensus is
664:
is not meaningful engagement. It's just designed to bully disinterested third parties from participating. In the case of a RFC, the best engagement that you could have done would have been to have quietly logged your vote with a simple rationale and then withdrawn. You have done neither of these
679:
My vote is "procedural close". How this would "bully" third parties isn't clear, it's not as if people participating here face any consequences over ignoring (or supporting) my proposal. The only one bullying here is you, with your repeated comments that I should leave this discussion.
393:
And the CfD did not "recommend" anything, the CfD ended in "No consensus" plain and simple. If a CfD ends in "no consensus" to delete cats, and the very next thing you do is empty those cats anyway and proceed with your own rejected recommendations, then you are being disruptive.
812:. You added these categories to the article this month, it's been at Austria since at least 2012, and Austria is a proper sub-categorisation of the two parent categories. I have no idea why there's conflict here or why all the forum shopping is going on.
418:"There certainly was an Austrian Empire, since 1867 as one of the constituent parts of Austria-Hungary. As we allow year categories for constituent parts in general (e.g. for Wales) there is no reason why we should not do that for Austria as well."
887:
I thought that disputes on articles were supposed to go to the talk page in the first instance. No? This is what happened here. The next escalation step is RfC. No? Please indicate what is the proper escalation procedure if not these.
378:
That's why no categories are created for the
Republic of Austria in those years... Your definition of "more precise" seems to exactly match the rejected result you wanted at the CfD, and is "more broad", not "more precise".
364:. I have also done the same for states of the Holy Roman Empire prior to 1867. As a result, this and other articles are now correctly categorised. I would remind you that the Republic of Austria did not exist in 1782.
359:
The CFD decided no such thing. Each individual article stands on its own merits. The CFD recommended the creation of categories that were more precise in terms of geography and time period. this i did with
361:
182:
486:
course, but until then, please stop your disruption and accept the advice you have received on your talk page. Worse, you tried the same two years ago, and didn't get consensus then either
803:
584:
755:
330:
On the contrary, the
Austria category should be kept, as decided at the CfD you started but where consensus was against you: and the two other categories should be removed,
311:, it was not disestablished during the existence of the Republic of Austria since that republic was only established in 1918. Perhaps the category was intended to cover the
234:
230:
216:
183:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110723130413/http://www.mom.findbuch.net/php/main.php?ar_id=3263&action=.&kind=t&id=7&be_id=1&source=rechter
140:
186:
935:
130:
106:
307:. It is already categorised to the Hapsburg and Holy Roman Empire categories. While it is located in territory that is currently situated in the
754:
question here. They are long standing categories not created by me. Nobody, until now, has suggested that they are superfluous. See related CFD
646:
up? That's not how this works, and that's not for you to decide. I'll not even engage with your points two and three, as they don't make sense.
940:
807:
588:
607:
two it just can have the one for
Austria, which means adding more information in the category tree with less category clutter in the article.
930:
826:
739:
527:
471:
It may be useful to seek a
Request for Comment at this time as we just seem to be talking at each other without really listening.
580:
304:
97:
58:
33:
551:
917:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
315:; if so, the category should be renamed for that purpose. Meanwhile, the article is manifestly in the incorrect category.
561:
277:
487:
187:
http://www.mom.findbuch.net/php/main.php?ar_id=3263&action=.&kind=t&id=7&be_id=1&source=rechter
866:
233:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
39:
901:
845:
818:
787:
731:
670:
636:
596:
476:
440:
425:
369:
320:
268:
174:
21:
710:
I don't see the point in discussing this here. This is a general problem of a whole class of categories.
761:
252:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
240:
166:
173:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
312:
207:
308:
897:
874:
841:
813:
783:
777:
726:
715:
666:
632:
592:
472:
436:
421:
365:
316:
237:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
253:
769:
411:
557:
614:
408:
There was a sensible recommendation from an editor with wide experience in these matters -
260:
685:
651:
622:
494:
455:
399:
384:
339:
219:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
89:
259:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
226:
924:
891:
870:
711:
905:
878:
849:
831:
791:
744:
719:
689:
674:
655:
640:
626:
600:
572:
566:
498:
480:
459:
444:
429:
403:
388:
373:
343:
324:
282:
225:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
79:
73:
52:
765:
681:
647:
618:
490:
466:
451:
395:
380:
350:
335:
294:
583:? It is already parented to the Hapsburg and Holy Roman Empire categories (
420:. Nobody contradicted him. I took that as a mandate to put it into effect.
101:, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles about
802:
It is already parented to the
Hapsburg and Holy Roman Empire categories (
354:
298:
102:
613:, this is happening on many articles, has been at CfD, and is now at
15:
105:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please
362:
Category:Establishments in the Empire of
Austria (1867-1918)
192:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
177:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
808:
Category:1782 disestablishments in the Habsburg Monarchy
804:
Category:1782 disestablishments in the Holy Roman Empire
589:
Category:1782 disestablishments in the Habsburg Monarchy
585:
Category:1782 disestablishments in the Holy Roman Empire
170:
617:. A single-article RfC about the same is not helpful.
526:
The following discussion is an archived record of a
548:as the broader issue is being discussed elsewhere.
536:
No further edits should be made to this discussion.
229:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
489:. This is looking worse and worse by the minute.
435:an easy way to avoid that error by the way...
215:This message was posted before February 2018.
539:A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
8:
774:Please advance arguments for this position.
519:RfC about the categorisation of this article
450:wrong, is not an accepted one, and move on.
303:I propose that this article be deleted from
581:Category:1782 disestablishments in Austria
305:Category:1782 disestablishments in Austria
288:Category:1782 disestablishments in Austria
165:I have just modified one external link on
47:
19:
615:WP:ANI#Emptying categories out of process
332:as the Austris cat is a daughter of both
49:
801:
579:Should this article be categorised to
204:to let others know (documentation at
7:
95:This article is within the scope of
758:. Pinging contributors to that CFD
115:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Austria
38:It is of interest to the following
544:There is consensus to give this a
14:
169:. Please take a moment to review
913:The discussion above is closed.
82:
72:
51:
20:
936:Low-importance Austria articles
135:This article has been rated as
1:
941:All WikiProject Austria pages
118:Template:WikiProject Austria
931:Stub-Class Austria articles
283:14:06, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
957:
906:08:03, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
879:21:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
850:13:15, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
832:12:03, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
792:08:03, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
745:20:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
720:15:50, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
690:15:51, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
675:15:42, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
656:15:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
641:14:55, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
627:14:35, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
601:14:05, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
499:13:59, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
481:13:54, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
460:12:06, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
445:11:25, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
430:11:22, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
404:10:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
389:10:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
374:10:38, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
344:08:05, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
325:08:45, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
246:(last update: 5 June 2024)
162:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
141:project's importance scale
660:Boisterously demanding a
134:
67:
46:
915:Please do not modify it.
725:shouldn't be a problem.
533:Please do not modify it.
800:Not really. You wrote:
573:05:32, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
158:External links modified
28:This article is rated
167:Aggsbach Charterhouse
32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
313:Archduchy of Austria
227:regular verification
528:request for comment
309:Republic of Austria
217:After February 2018
196:parameter below to
98:WikiProject Austria
271:InternetArchiveBot
222:InternetArchiveBot
34:content assessment
706:
705:(Summoned by bot)
555:
552:non-admin closure
247:
155:
154:
151:
150:
147:
146:
948:
895:
867:WP:FORUMSHOPPING
863:Procedural close
829:
821:
781:
773:
762:Fayenatic london
742:
734:
704:
662:Procedural close
611:Procedural close
569:
549:
546:procedural close
535:
470:
415:
358:
302:
281:
272:
245:
244:
223:
211:
123:
122:
121:Austria articles
119:
116:
113:
107:join the project
92:
87:
86:
85:
76:
69:
68:
63:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
956:
955:
951:
950:
949:
947:
946:
945:
921:
920:
919:
918:
889:
825:
817:
775:
759:
738:
730:
575:
567:
531:
521:
464:
409:
348:
292:
290:
275:
270:
238:
231:have permission
221:
205:
175:this simple FaQ
160:
120:
117:
114:
111:
110:
88:
83:
81:
61:
29:
12:
11:
5:
954:
952:
944:
943:
938:
933:
923:
922:
912:
911:
910:
909:
908:
882:
881:
859:
858:
857:
856:
855:
854:
853:
852:
835:
834:
795:
794:
748:
747:
722:
701:
700:
699:
698:
697:
696:
695:
694:
693:
692:
608:
578:
576:
543:
542:
541:
522:
520:
517:
516:
515:
514:
513:
512:
511:
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
504:
503:
502:
501:
391:
289:
286:
265:
264:
257:
190:
189:
181:Added archive
159:
156:
153:
152:
149:
148:
145:
144:
137:Low-importance
133:
127:
126:
124:
94:
93:
90:Austria portal
77:
65:
64:
62:Low‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
953:
942:
939:
937:
934:
932:
929:
928:
926:
916:
907:
903:
899:
898:Laurel Lodged
893:
886:
885:
884:
883:
880:
876:
872:
868:
864:
861:
860:
851:
847:
843:
842:Laurel Lodged
839:
838:
837:
836:
833:
830:
828:
822:
820:
815:
814:SportingFlyer
811:
809:
805:
799:
798:
797:
796:
793:
789:
785:
784:Laurel Lodged
779:
778:SportingFlyer
771:
767:
763:
757:
752:
751:
750:
749:
746:
743:
741:
735:
733:
728:
727:SportingFlyer
723:
721:
717:
713:
709:
703:
702:
691:
687:
683:
678:
677:
676:
672:
668:
667:Laurel Lodged
663:
659:
658:
657:
653:
649:
644:
643:
642:
638:
634:
633:Laurel Lodged
630:
629:
628:
624:
620:
616:
612:
609:
605:
604:
603:
602:
598:
594:
593:Laurel Lodged
590:
586:
582:
574:
571:
570:
563:
559:
553:
547:
540:
537:
534:
529:
524:
523:
518:
500:
496:
492:
488:
484:
483:
482:
478:
474:
473:Laurel Lodged
468:
463:
462:
461:
457:
453:
448:
447:
446:
442:
438:
437:Laurel Lodged
433:
432:
431:
427:
423:
422:Laurel Lodged
419:
416:. He wrote,
413:
407:
406:
405:
401:
397:
392:
390:
386:
382:
377:
376:
375:
371:
367:
366:Laurel Lodged
363:
356:
352:
347:
346:
345:
341:
337:
333:
329:
328:
327:
326:
322:
318:
317:Laurel Lodged
314:
310:
306:
300:
296:
287:
285:
284:
279:
274:
273:
262:
258:
255:
251:
250:
249:
242:
236:
232:
228:
224:
218:
213:
209:
203:
199:
195:
188:
184:
180:
179:
178:
176:
172:
168:
163:
157:
142:
138:
132:
129:
128:
125:
108:
104:
100:
99:
91:
80:
78:
75:
71:
70:
66:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
914:
862:
824:
816:
770:Marcocapelle
737:
729:
707:
661:
610:
577:
565:
545:
538:
532:
525:
417:
412:Marcocapelle
331:
291:
269:
266:
241:source check
220:
214:
201:
197:
193:
191:
164:
161:
136:
96:
40:WikiProjects
208:Sourcecheck
925:Categories
278:Report bug
30:Stub-class
261:this tool
254:this tool
892:Mathglot
871:Mathglot
712:MarioGom
708:Comment:
665:things.
267:Cheers.—
865:– per
768:, and
194:checked
171:my edit
139:on the
112:Austria
103:Austria
59:Austria
568:buidhe
202:failed
36:scale.
902:talk
875:talk
846:talk
806:and
788:talk
766:Fram
756:here
716:talk
686:talk
682:Fram
671:talk
652:talk
648:Fram
637:talk
623:talk
619:Fram
597:talk
587:and
495:talk
491:Fram
477:talk
467:Fram
456:talk
452:Fram
441:talk
426:talk
400:talk
396:Fram
385:talk
381:Fram
370:talk
353:and
351:Fram
340:talk
336:Fram
321:talk
297:and
295:Fram
198:true
591:).
355:Liz
299:Liz
235:RfC
212:).
200:or
185:to
131:Low
927::
904:)
896:.
877:)
869:.
848:)
790:)
764:,
718:)
688:)
673:)
654:)
639:)
625:)
599:)
564:)
560:·
530:.
497:)
479:)
458:)
443:)
428:)
402:)
387:)
372:)
342:)
334:.
323:)
248:.
243:}}
239:{{
210:}}
206:{{
900:(
894::
890:@
873:(
844:(
827:C
823:·
819:T
810:)
786:(
782:.
780::
776:@
772::
760:@
740:C
736:·
732:T
714:(
684:(
669:(
650:(
635:(
621:(
595:(
562:c
558:t
556:(
554:)
550:(
493:(
475:(
469::
465:@
454:(
439:(
424:(
414::
410:@
398:(
383:(
368:(
357::
349:@
338:(
319:(
301::
293:@
280:)
276:(
263:.
256:.
143:.
109:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
