Knowledge (XXG):Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 25

2232:

Beyonce, any cat that that includes Mary J. Blige, A. Keys, and Ashanti (style-wise is like apples, oranges and plums). And only nine members. finally hip-pop is not a widely used term, dirty pop is pop music with hip-hop and/or R&B influences. Fans of "authentic" R&B (note the quotes) wouldn't respect Ashanti being in the same cat as say Teena Marie. This should be speedy-ed

1968: 1936: 253: 1451:, and then those guys should be categorized by team. And "historical" divisions seems to contain current divisions as well, so we should lose the "Historical." And is the introduction of the Art Ross Trophy a good enough reason for a time-sensitive break in the scoring leaders category? I'm not saying it's wrong. Just weird, is all.-- 155:

for "People associated with X", that's a parent category, for universities which have both an Alumni and an Academics category. One of these days, I'll get round to proposing a standardisation for the UK university categories but, in the meantime, I'm concentrating on getting a reasonable structure for the Cambridge ones.

782:- The "Ships by country" category classifies ships by the country operating them, not the country that manufactured them, which is what these aircraft categories are for. "Ships of Canada" for example, includes British and US-built ships operated by Canadians. The aircraft categories are for aircraft 198:

Isn't "St."/"St" recognised across the (majority of if not the whole) English-speaking world as an abbreviation for "Saint"? When English-speaking people (other than hagiographers, I suppose) write about saints by name, do they write (say) "St Paul" or "Saint Paul"? Other than on signs outside some

154:

A while back, we had a discussion on how to name Faculty/Lecturers/Professors of UK Universities, and came to the decision to use "Academics of X". In order to match this, I would recommend standardising on "Alumni of X" (a quick browse suggests that this is also the more common category name). As

894:. Also, I imagine that these days a growing number of craft are actually assembled from componentry manufactured offshore, at least in part- so would (or should) "manufacture" be synonymous with "assembly" in this case? Perhaps the more literal expression of the categories' intended meaning would be 3407:

to have a category for singers who can sing in the seventh octave? I see it as a straightforward (even more so than the whistle register category, with all the bickering about whether the note is an E or an F above Soprano C, only restricted to whistle voice (which can be sung below E6), or allows

2283:

It is R&B. The genre has evolved. Some songs (and singers) are more R&B than others. Ciara and Chris Brown and even JT are R&B vocalists. Dirty pop really is a sungenre of R&B (and pop), much like rap and say gangsta rap. All save Britney really do qualify for R&B. But its

4885:

I don't know about that. Having any people in the ubercategory seems to encourage many editors to attempt to put ALL people in the ubcategory and its subcategories. I'd prefer to avoid that if possible. So I'm okay with the "unspecified method" category. (Alternatively, we could just make sure all

3958:

I take it there are no ornithologists here. I'll have to do my own research. Other suborders, families etc. amongst the birds occur in plural form but when things get down to genera (which they don't often for cats), singular appears to be the order of the day. In the absence of more authoritative

3839:

if a proper group of these animals can be found and the cat sufficiently fleshed out. For example, think of all the different types of roses. A catgory of roses makes sense. How many different types of asparagus are there. A cat for asparagus wouldn't make sense. If only one type of Scops owl

2250:

All of the people you named (except Britney Spears and, arguably, Justin Timberlake) are indeed R&B singers. Whether they are good or not, or whether fans of "authentic" R&B like them, is entirely beside the point. They should indeed be in the same category as Teena Marie (after all, it'll

2231:

deleted, since it mixes popular singers in a ridiculous matter (Mary J. Blige, a soul alto with Alicia Keys, neo-soul, and Ashanti & Beyonce (dirty pop). Wow! While dirty pop is a valid subgenre of music, probably inclusive of Justin Timberlake, Chris Brown, Ciara, Jojo, Britney, Ashanti and

3143:

per Vegaswikian. I think most of the NHS categories should keep their unexpanded abreviation as it has become a standard in everyday life to refer to the "NHS" rather than "National Health Service", especially given that the service is considered to be in the top five largest organisations in the

3122:

because of the naming convention of avoiding abbreviations. Personally, I think that using "National Health Service" in full in categories will cause readability issues which ought to be considered. Secondly, there's a Catch-22 "Major Major" issue around here too. One of the other new categories

855:

makes a good point, in fact its even worse than he said ... if we include usage, I suspect we would find that many of the popular ones are used worldwide, in which case it is pointless to classify them by country. I prefer that either we restrict it to manufacture only, or failing that, create a

133:

etc, as per all others", but then I had a look in the UK university categories. Some are "X alumni", some are "Alumni of X", yet more are "X Alumni" or "Former students of X". Some don't have separate categories - they're listed as part of "People associated with X" or "X people". It's a complete

3231:

fannish. Calling someone a wonder is a matter of opinion - some people may be able hit notes in a technical sense, even may have recorded a song, but whether someone else likes it, or thinks they are a "wonder" is a matter of pure opinion. I googled the term and only found it used in Knowledge

4157:

to me). "American" is the standard adjective for people who are citizens of the US (as has been discussed previously ad nauseam). BTW, if they're people who are resident in the US but whose political activities are primarily concerned with non-domestic issues (as is the case with many political

2101:

would be a case in point. In a culture with a cult of celebrity that has become a potent economic force in its own right, people whose livelihoods are dependent and indetachable from this aspect of media should be categorized as such. Categories are binary in nature, and as far as I can see any

2260:

Hehehehe, you are wrong :-) lol. Yeah, Ashanti does make Teena Marie look awfully good nowadays. But seriously, the point is with dirty pop (pop music with hip-hop and/or R&B influences), the above singers could fit. Britney isn't an R&B singer (oh no never), but her music does have

2261:

R&B influences. Justin Timberlake and Ashanti are middle-ground dirty pop singers while Beyoncé is more straight R&B, but she could fit dirty pop as well. But Nelly, Mary J. Blige, A. Keys, and Ashanti in one cat is ridiculous. Unless one merely wants a musical fruit punch :-)

3319:

my intention to declare such singers "wonderful". the title was simply a play on the seven wonders of the world. But its purpose is to separate the singers like Minnie Riperton (who sang in 7th octave) from say Kathleen Battle who regularly executes a High F (whistle register, but an

834:

If the category was used for aircraft operated in a particular country the scope would be enormous, especially bearing in mind the number of countries that buy American aircraft. A successful plane like the Spitfire or the Boeing 747 would probably be in 20 or 30 categories.

3232:(XXG) and it's mirror sites. Since a whistle register category already exists, it appears this category is seeking to distinguish artists who regularly and capably sing in this register from persons who can simply hit the notes. Thus, the title needs to reflect 3422:- I see nothing wrong with this cat, other than there is nothing "wonderous" about high octave singing. Simply 7th octave singers would be more appropriate. As I stated on the other cfd log, we have other cats like Elvis Presley, mezzo-soprano, etc... 213:

Digging into the history of these categories, it appears that they were originally "Former students of St X College, Cambridge" (without the full stop), and were moved to "Alumni of St. X College, Cambridge" (with the full stop) as a result of

230:

According to the previous debate "Alumnus" is a term used by Cambridge University; with the regard to comments above about the standardisation of UK univerist cats, I would express scepticism that "alumnus" is used very widely in the UK.

4872:(adding note to this category that any articles in it are about individuals whose means of execution is unknown or unspecified). If no objections or better ideas by the time this debate closed, I undertake to make this move. Regards, 3948:

is in the plural (one Strigida, two or more Strigidae). Of course, if the common English name were used the problem that most people don't know Latin plurals could be avoided! Is there some special exemption for zoological cats?

800:

But, as the highest level Aircraft by country category, its scope should allow for containing aircraft operated within a country that were not built in that country. Otherwise, these categories should be named for example

1732:

The name for Category:The arts is incorrect. The addition of the article "the" adds nothing to the subject and defines it no more than Category:Arts. This is being proposed as part of the categorization project for

2093:. Not everybody who has ever written about celebrity "gossip" should be categorized as such as the category would be bloated and meaningless, and conversely people would end up overcategorized. But some people 1409: 1100:

is a redirect to that article). Also, the category currently contains both theme songs (as defined by the primary topic article, compositions with lyrics) and theme music (compositions with without lyrics).

3144:

world. However, in this particular case I think the full title is less ambiguous as the "Defunct NHS organisations" category might be accidentally used to group organisations that used to be called "NHS".

4868:

It's meant to be a "catch-all" category for all those individuals whose articles state they were executed but do not include how. However, I agree and realise that its population could be moved to

3282:

The purpose of this category is to distinguish the rare singers who can sing in the seventh-octave from the singers (even coloratura) who can sing in whistle register, but not that high. C7 is an

1859:

I looked at some of the subcategories under The Arts and saw that back in 2004 this category was called 'Arts'. When and why did that change? Is there a reference to that discussion available?

2274:

indeed ridiculous, but removing Nelly from that equasion doesn't seem disasterous. What is it about Ashanti's music that makes it "not R&B" (aside from her, er, technical shortcomings)? --

1976:

That is also on my list. I was gonna wait and see what happens here before proposing the change, but since this appears to be going smoothly, we can consider throwing in out here as well.

3408:

head voice as well. All those things are more subjective unlike this where it is simply C7 and above. Nearly everybody in the cat is known and notable for their efforts in the octave.

3249:

I agree but it shouldnt be called - "Whistle range recording artists" as this can easily be confused with the "whistle register" category. Simply "Seventh-octave singers" would be better.

177:. It is unambiguous, avoids any country-to-country stylistic conflicts, and alphabetizes correctly. I must have edited thousands of "St." articles to sort properly under "Saint" so far.- 2913: 2816: 1416: 2284:

just the way this cat tries to mix sings that makes me go, What was that? :-) Ashanti, Mariah, Aretha, and Minnie Riperton are R&B artists. (I'm dying of laughter as I type this)

3140: 3091: 3075: 3059: 2999: 1639: 96: 3024: 1777: 706: 42: 37: 1871:

It looks as though between Dec 22 2005 and Dec 31, 2005 the category went from 'Arts' to 'The Arts' and then shortly thereafter went to 'The arts'. What is going on please?

4775: 4514:

per A Geek Tragedy's useful link. If/when kept, add this link with brief note to the effect that "Foreign Members" is correct capitalization to the category page? Regards,

1463:. Being the nimrod who came up with the GM category in the first place without checking elsewhere, I'd suggest we take this out as a category and set up something like the 130: 3236:

fact. This is verifiable. Being "wonderful" is not. The definition/clarification for this that already exists on the main page is decent, although it could be tweaked.

1263: 101: 5079:

per nom. Seems to be about a laptop music competition – perhaps called "Music Electronic" – for which an article would seem more appropriate. (Perhaps suggest this to

105: 3118:

because there are two issues to discuss first. There's an issue we've just bumped into here for the WikiProject in possibly renaming 5 other existing categories like

2524: 4433: 4847:: what is purpose of the "...by unspecified method"? Shouldn't encyclopedia refer only to what is known and simply ignore what is not known? Or should I start 2241:

More comment, R. Kelly and Usher are respected R&B vocalists (ok, new age R&B :-) ). Nelly is a rapper not even an R&B singer. Who did this?

1448: 996:

I don’t think sorting by sex is a useful subcategory for Nintendo characters, and if kept it should definitely be renamed “Female Nintendo characters”.

1653: 802: 2829:

Category is empty and unused. No need to distinguish between current and former teams in categorization; all teams are in unbrella QMJHL category.

920:

Perhaps the best thing would be to use the names as proposed, but specify it should only include aircraft strongly associated with the country for

696:

I'd say the benefits of the former outweigh the little work demanded by the latter – hope this preference doesn't come back to haunt me! Regards,

21: 4963: 4089: 1447:. These are some weird categories. We don't usually keep track of occupations by current status, do we? The GM one should probably be rolled into 4778:

that resulted in almost all of the categories changing into "People executed by...", but not these. I'm not clear whether this was intentional.--

433: 3286:

high note that requires training, dedication and skill to execute. Making it whistle register singers reduces the rarity of this subcategory.

5131:. I was going to suggest moving to an article, but after reading the content it would be a speedy delete for no context and external links. 1391: 244:

well enough known to justify its use for a category title. In fact, I would think that the plural "alumni" is doubly familiar to most people.

3124: 189:: in this particular case, the parent articles are in the short form (which is also the form used on the websites of the colleges concerned) 173: 4848: 2064:) in order to denigrate some writers he doesn't like, as only a handful of authors are listed there, including some reputed authors such as 4029: 2123: 1382: 92: 1373: 17: 3936:

I'm not big on zoology, but I would assume that normal naming rules apply for cats re: plurality. In which case the newer cats should be

3020: 4806: 4771: 4738: 4499: 336:

Note: If voting against this by country naming proposal, please consider commenting regarding a potential (not proposed here) move from

1400: 786:

in a particular country, not aircraft used in or by a particular country, which is why the categories aren't called "Aircraft of Foo".

4814: 4749: 4146: 2560: 595: 112: 4494:"Foreign Member of the Royal Society" is a title given to use after ones name and the Royal Society write it with a capital "M" (see 2632:

Hopefully this new name does not imply these historiographers are Muslim (if it does then the old name just needs to be pluralized).

2523:

conventions. Please see also a relevant discussion on the implementation of this set of categories at WikiProject Military History's

1405: 4891: 4760: 2848: 4429: 3023:

but, given the sheer size of the NHS, this proposal prioritises internal consistency for NHS information. There is a discussion in

1656:

article would likly be are more suiting since it could naturally (and easily) be linked to from within a specific artists article.

2212:

Rename to Dirty pop. That is the subgenre of pop that has Hip-hop and R&B influences, but isn't really of the genre itself.

1160: 4852: 2714:

per above, as I'd say "Islamic historiographers" suggests "Historiographers who are Islamic" before "Historiographers of Isalm".

429: 4193: 4150: 4093: 4063: 4025: 3016: 1638:

Possible precedent for the creation of countless other " performers" categories. A similar Coachella category was very recently

1194: 882:. However there still seem to be a couple of grey areas, such as for those manufactured by international consortia and JV's (eg 658: 4756: 2859:

recommended. It is valid to distinguish defunct from current teams: having them all undifferentiated in one category is messy!

4639:

Ambiguous. Was populated with an airplane, an arab terrorist, the Unabomber and 2 or 3 more. I re-categorized these properly.

3173: 4887: 388: 654: 640: 1387: 116: 4998: 4767: 2852: 2482: 2075:. The "Category:English celebrity biographers", also created by Wilkes with similar intentions, has already been deleted. 591: 451: 1734: 199:

cathedrals, I don't recall any instances of the latter. Re sorting, append "|Saint..." after the category name. Regards,

5308: 5239: 2974: 2765: 2748: 2727: 2711: 2619: 2564: 2486: 1378: 878:

If origin of manufacture is intended, then I'd support in general a rename convention such as suggested by David above,

337: 314: 5193: