Knowledge:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 May 4

3522:. And we do indeed know why that doesn't extend to people: we categorise people by nationality, and an archipelago is not a nationality. The rulers of one country in the archipelago have spent over 800 years trying to make the archipelago a nation, and while they came close for 121 years, they never even got as far as even establishing a commonly-accepted demonym. Ninety-five years after the end of that era, it is disappointing to see some editors of a NPOV encyclopedia trying to extend that notion of an archipelagic nationality outside of its actual period of historical existence. -- 3483:. Nearly five years later there are 91 painters in those 2 Scottish/English categories, and zero in the British category. So you set up a test which has run for nearly five years, and in that time nobody has found a single 17th-century painter whose nationality defaulted to British because they have been unable to distinguish them Scottish or English. 3024: 2911: 1910: 2112:. Although some editors opposed deletion, I find that their rationales have been successfully refuted. It does not make sense to keep occupational categories where the parent nationality category for the relevant century was deleted by a stronger consensus. As for the stubs, their templates have already been edited to add the stub pages to 3969:. A non-standard, out-of-process, one-off administrative category, created in error. Totally non-controversial action to delete, here. I cry when I think of the sheer volume of man hours that have been wasted on this one non-controversial action. To see what this simple request devolved into is truly unbelievable, and flies in the face of 3429:

Your argument that nationality isn't always cut-and-dried is obviously true. People move between jurisdictions and may have have close ties in several nations. So as with any other attribute, we make editorial judgements about which nationality or nationalities to categorise by. We do that whether

1891:

per Johnbod. England Wales and Ireland were all ruled by the English crown. In this period Parliaments were much less important than later. I agree that the independence of Scotland makes the use of British anachronistic and the suggestion of using "British Isles" broadens the scope. However the

6445:

I am split on the first 3 because its fairly standard that we have categories for each name a team has gone through for player categories as it is inaccurate to state a player played for a team with a different name than the one they actually played on. In sports the teams actual name matters. I do

3349:

Your usual tactic, BrownHairedGirl, of rubbishing anyone who disagrees with you. It's your assertion that these categories are about nationality and not identity. Where exactly were these documents that proved someone's nationality? There weren't any. If you were born elsewhere but lived and worked

3316:

The book you cite doesn't help much. A title "Painting in Foo" does not assert a common "Fooian", style and in this case the "Foo" is "Britain" rather than the "British Isles" which you want. Your description of the book's coverage of Ireland does little to support your assertion of a British Isles

2651:

Hmmm - I've just looked at that discussion for the first time. I note " Navigation to the century sub-cats for English, Welsh & Scots will still be easy via Category:British people by century." from Fayenatic London, to which you replied "... Fayenatic's solution ensures that the English, Scots

5867:

which perhaps should be discussed as a whole first. There are a lot of individual graph articles to leave them completely unsubcategorised and number of vertices is probably the most common and obvious split (i.e. I think the nominated may the main ones we should keep, out of a whole mess of graph

5928:. To the closing admin. After some reflexion, it could be better to (1) rename --as proposed-- the vertices-categories to "graphs with xxx vertices"; (2) retaylor these categories in order to have say 10 members at least ; (3) delete the edges/girth/etc. categories. Since the proposition (3) was 1835:

probably. Also better as many were continentals. Ireland was under English rule (rebellions apart) for the whole of the 16th century, so if there is a difficulty with this grouping it relates to the Scots not the Irish. But this is certainly a valid grouping, to which the Irish doctors should be

1273:

all per nom. "Location of origin" seems a clumsy and troublesome wording. "_ by locality in England" provides too much scope for anyone temporarily working in England to get added. Even though most are indeed split by county, I agree with Sillyfolkboy that the more vague wording is sure to solve

6065:'s desire for subcategorisation; if so, what purpose would it serve? Surely the most likely categories to need branching out would be ones based on logical or typological (dare I say, categorical?) criteria, rather than on perceived similarities arising by coincidence in dependent statistics? 3551:

probably. Also better as many were continentals. But these are certainly valid groupings ..." and I have subsequently expanded on that. Has it ever occurred to you that strict "nationality" may not be the only or even best way to group visual artists, especially for a period when they mostly

5981:) has not been notified until now. As it appears that the sub-categories were fully populated solely by that one user, it may be that (unusually) this nomination can be accepted as valid without having to tag them, but we should wait a week to give the category creator a chance to comment. – 3188:

As far As I'm concerned the point is that in the 17th century a particular style of painting emerged in the British Isles which was essentially shared by all the constituent nations of the 18th-century UK. Also artists moved a lot between these nations. This deserves a distinct grouping.

576:). However, the rename was only patchily implemented across the hundreds of subcategories. I have tried to finish this process via speedy, but a single user always removes them, saying the 2010 discussion is not enough, and the whole process must be gone through. This is a small start. 1225:

A number of categories in the locality tree use the name "location of origin". The use of "locality" is deliberately vague to allow inclusion of anyone strongly associated with a locality (regardless of origin), which prevents edit warring. Was going to speedy rename this with parent

3015:

All of these issues could be easily resolved if we didn't have some editors trying to use this discussion to make an end-run around a clear existing consensus which is that: a) we don't categorise topics as "British" before Britain was created as a nation in 1707; b) that

614:

Even though, from looking at these categories' parent, it seems installations is a minority in US state articles, when looking across the global category tree it appears installation has been standardised everywhere except the US and Afghanistan (where "bases" is the

6464:

It is tricky. Czech Extraliga teams very often change their official name according to their main sponsor. This way you have easily many players who, technically speaking, were playing for a team with, say, 4 different names, although it is still the same club. -

2871:. This is a recognisable subset of Europe. The alternative would be to merge to a Europe category, but that would lose clarity. Splitting a stub category is to be avoided. Stub types need many more articles than ordinary categories before they are allowed. 3283:

would be the book (it also covers Ireland, when there is anything to say about it). Cfd isn't the place for this sort of discussion though, with a long history of being at best indifferent to art-historical considerations, and often actively hostile to them.

1406:

Unclear what exactly qualifies people for this category. A lot of people on here have only done a single Broadway show, and this is clearly not defining for those people. We have plenty of other more appropriate categories for people who work in theater.

3603:

Yes, of course there may be ways other than nationality to group people by occupation. This isn't unique to visual artists: similar issues arise with clergy, writers, sportspeople and many others. Some groupings exist by location, by genre, by style

5868:

cats). I no longer have a copy sadly, but from memory I believe vertices then edges was the primary categorisation method in the book "An Atlas of Graphs" which could be considered something of an authority for its time on categorising graphs. --

3255:

Whatever - are you asserting there was an Irish or Scottish (let alone Welsh) style of painting in the 17th century? There certainly wasn't. Your touching faith that we would have an article on any style that existed shows you've never looked at

4361:

Shouldn't we go by what these writing systems are called by notable sources or by experts in the field? By google results "dead writing systems" seems the most widely used phrase, although google scholar gives a slight advantage to "obsolete".

6241:. Too many of the notable individual graphs have no other notable graphs with the same counts to make this a useful way to categorize things, but that wouldn't be a problem if this were arranged as a list rather than as a category hierarchy. — 4263:. It is a useful category to have. "Obsolete" is easier to understand than "Defunct"; "Archaic" is not a good choice as the definition of "archaic" is open to dispute, and some obsolete writing systems may be quite recent. Therefore support 3486:

So all you have done is to create a container category which is both anachronistic and un-needed. After a five-year test which has shown that the problem you describe doesn't exist, I am unable to see any plausible rationale for your

1450:, we have numerous categories of people by company that they have worked for, so the category is alright for owners and employees of Broadway, but should not be used for people who performed at Broadway. Suggestion for renaming: 212:

that does not subcategorise by location. This simply suggests a missing part of the categorisation tree, rather than an issue with the category at hand, which is clearly defined and well-populated. At the very least, a rename to

3650:. But even that uses the same geographical division in each case; it doesn't create a new set of geographical divisions. Such a scheme would need some planning and some structure, but I see no sign of either in this case. 2652:

and welsh categories will be correctly parented." but of course these centuries have now disappeared from the "by century" category! Pointy was probably not the right word, si I withdraw that, but there is an agenda here.

814:

There are no other planets in any of these "planet disambiguation pages", and no real purpose served by grouping these pages together, any more than there would be to collect the 50 American states into one. Also delete

6084:: A fully sortable list could also be created as an article "List of ___" using a sortable table. A fully sortable list could also be created as a category "Category:All graph families" or "Category:All graphs". 3210:

I am surprised by that belated change of tack. Do you have any sources to support your assertion that there was a British Isles style of painting in that era? Do we have an existing head article about

5862:

As far as deleting: while I personally might prefer to use the sortable list, I have to say that these are among the more useful examples of a much larger categorisation scheme found in the children of

1434:

etc. Broadway is one of the commercial pinnacles of stage acting in the world and denotes a significant career achievement for an actor. I would put this in the same conceptual bracket as things like

6479:

Yeah that is why I am a bit split on the situation. Some teams still have non-sponsor generic names that could be used I like the one you propose. Not sure if that is the case for the others. -

5947: 6221: 2615: 573: 6034:. There might be further ones like this, and my gut says these should probably be deleted, but I don't really have a good enough sense of what "defining characteristic" really means – 3660:

has pointed out below, the by-nationality categories could simply be linked by hatnotes. So why not just adopt that simple solution, instead of making a mess of the category tree? --

392: 6116:

does the same job as is more convenient as you can easily look multiple characteristics, say finding graphs with 20 vertices and 30 edges. (If kept agree wit hproposed renaming). --

4402:

Extinct implies that they are not used at all, but some historic writing systems still have limited modern usage, and so are not extinct. Therefore I think "obsolete" is better.

3847: 1191: 6505: 3843: 3643: 1722: 388: 4203:) seems to have just recently made up this very awkwardly named cat. "Obsolete" is etymologically a better choice than "Defunct writing systems" or "Archaic writing systems". 593:

The whole category tree is horribly inconsistent, and unless there has been a more recent discussion which overturned it, installations seems the best place to consolidate. --

3447: 2623: 2518: 2476: 312: 2946: 1949: 42: 37: 2733:. It is a pity that an experienced editor chooses to resort to various forms of ABF whilst asserting a falsehood. I'm getting a bit sick of this; knock it off please. -- 5857:

The new names are the correct grammar and how the graphs would be described by graph theorists (and in fact already are, in the leads of many specific graph articles).

3855: 3647: 1796: 4281:

Agreeing that the proposed category name is better. And the category itself is probably useful, though establishing membership in individual cases might be tricky. –

2921:

there is no need for merger to a Europe category. Deletion leaves no orphans, because all subcats are already adequately parented. Look e.g. at the parent cats of

2673:

The "agenda" here is simple, and as stated in the nom: anachronism, viz applying the concept of "British" as a nationality to an era before "Britain" was a nation.

2618:, and I see no way in which this nomination can be read as disruptive. As far as I can see the only pointiness here is a) the creation of an occupational subcat of 6781:

whereas international is simply between multiple nations. Very very few organisations can lay proper claim to the former title (I'm thinking UN etc). I'm nomming

3320:

As you say, CfD isn't the place for this sort of discussion. Which brings us back to my point that "British" was not a nationality until the 18th century and the

2454:

Many Scots came to England in the train of James I & VI. British is thus a meaningful concept from 1603. Furthermore, there was political union 1649-1660.

512: 368: 6716: 3410:; we just follow what the reliable sources say about nationality. So your denial that this is about nationality is plain nonsense. (If you want to claim that 2922: 1925: 6372: 6321: 636:, this nomination merely causes an increase of the inconsistency in the tree of the US. All US military facilities categories should be renamed in one batch. 2850:

per nom. Scotland and England had not yet merged and it does not make sense to invent parent categories suggesting that they had 'sort of' merged after all.

464: 2483:. Please can you explain why believe that "17th-century British" is an appropriate way to group painters and medical doctors, but not people as a whole? -- 4388:

and associated tree which gave me the idea, and it appears to have the most relevant hits in both google scholar and google, for whatever that is worth. --

3851: 2933: 1936: 1718: 1104: 548: 524: 508: 500: 488: 452: 416: 380: 364: 356: 3313:

thing is your belated change of tack. You decided to make assertions about style, so you need to prove your case. Don't try shifting the burden onto me.

3875:

seems like a simple administrative move to me and matches the naming convention and process of other similar programs that are maintained by the team at

1235: 536: 428: 344: 3607:

But where such other groupings exist, they need to be implemented in ways which mesh consistently with wider category trees. So for example, renaming

2585:

probably. Also better as many were continentals. But these are certainly valid groupings, and the nom seems rather pointy. The Irish categories like

1179: 560: 3376:. I didn't "rubbish" anyone; I rebutted an argument and rejected an attempt by an editor to make me prove a case I had never made and don't support. 1187: 1155: 544: 520: 496: 484: 476: 412: 404: 376: 352: 6384: 6325: 3995: 3587: 3472: 532: 440: 424: 340: 21: 2994:

What we have here is an existing anomalous and un-needed semi-orphan category. It is disappointing that instead of supporting its removal, both

3900:

Huh? What are you talking about? Nobody's suggesting renaming it. They're suggesting deleting it. And this isn't a program, it's a conference.

2954: 2303:

in 1603. And Britian has existed long before Great Britain. I'd hesitate to go further back than the 17th century though, for these categories.

1957: 1888: 1832: 3591: 3478: 2561: 1215: 1203: 1167: 1143: 556: 234: 214: 94: 3820: 792: 6782: 6526: 6220:

Of these, girth and radius (as well as the above-mentioned diameter and chromatic index) have the virtue of being grammatically sensible. --

3675: 3537: 3339: 3245: 3178: 3043: 2821: 2748: 2641: 2543: 2498: 2433: 2355: 2284: 2023: 1817: 1784: 1748: 1632: 1376: 922: 472: 400: 3812: 1997:

What we have here is an existing anomalous and un-needed semi-orphan category. It is disappointing that instead of supporting its removal,

784: 6113: 5837: 5790: 3141: 3100: 2712: 2708: 2586: 2251: 1608: 218: 209: 201: 6712: 3914:

I meant that most other programs at the current level do not have this level of granularity, that's all. Not proposing a rename at all.--

2981: 1984: 676:

Could you please list all US categories to be renamed (and tag them as well), then I'll withdraw my opposition and relist the discussion.

135: 3706:

per nom. Hatnotes are a great way to link countries with similar artistic styles in a given era, not making a mess of the category tree.

3612: 3548: 3152: 2868: 2582: 2231: 1175: 127: 6043: 6010: 3160: 3133: 3122: 3110: 3093: 3009: 2985: 2803: 2721: 2718: 2227: 2222: 2196: 2188: 1988: 1581: 1573: 1227: 1151: 1131: 17: 3803: 3465:

And the great irony of all this is that you yourself have most clearly demonstrated that this works well. In November 2013 you created

2971: 1974: 1725:. Peterkingiron's desire to extend the geographical and political scope of the contested term "British" is deeply POV so I will notify 775: 3935:

while I believe Paul misworded his comment, he is correct that this is a simple administrative move in accord with standard practice.

2799: 2795: 2730: 2702: 2247: 1763: 1604: 1211: 1199: 1163: 1139: 174: 2975: 1978: 6596:

to Stadion Hradec Králové, which is the long-term name of the club (Mountfield is a sponsor which is typically a short term thing).

4264: 4154: 4122: 2113: 178: 118: 6364: 6360: 2939: 2893:, and it is perfectly fine to have an English and Scottish subcategory in here since their siblings are also by plain nationality. 2528:

with unanimous support of all 5 !voters. It would be perverse to keep this occupational subcat when its parent has been deleted. --

2262: 2179: 1942: 1564: 1127: 1103:. I note that this harmonises the British categories, but leaves them out of step with the rest of the world that uses "location" ( 6225: 1426:

I think the scope is clear: people who have worked in Broadway theatre. The specificity could be improved with subcategories like

4297: 4150: 3411: 3399: 2928: 2729:

So we do indeed have what was promised: navigation to the century sub-cats for English, Welsh & Scots will still be easy via

2153: 1931: 1367: 1253: 944: 3443: 3435: 3148: 3075: 2161: 2117: 460: 238: 205: 170: 158: 5887:, the two trees have way too many categories that contain only one or two articles. I agree that a list may work much better. 3994:. Also, I think it's worth pointing out that, in the unlikely event that this category is retained, it is currently misnamed, 448: 6376: 6317: 6061:, as a fully sortable list is much more useful than a host of tiny categories. But I could be missing something relevant in 5978: 4200: 3350:

most of your life in Scotland, for example, do you become Scottish? Things are not as cut-and-dried as you like to make out.

3280: 3129: 3082: 3061: 2890: 2410:. Sure, we don't take a legalistic view of nationality, but we do use nations as the basis of this. That is why we have no 2403: 1010: 957: 816: 6429:

The club changes their titular sponsor very often. Proposing to rename to neutral name to avoid CFR nominations each year.--

4300:, so whatever is done here, that will need to be harmonized. That page has been tagged to alert others to this discussion. — 3608: 3468: 3455: 2961: 2557: 2415: 2258: 2144: 1964: 1892:

alternative is to upmerge to a category for the whole of Europe. PLain deletion is liable to leave its children orphaned.

1451: 1231: 953: 4530: 3490:

Note too that the 3 editors who oppose deletion of these anachronisms have contradictory reasons for wanting to keep them.

2699:

Navigation to the century sub-cats for English, Welsh & Scots will still be easy via Category:British people by century

6166: 3451: 3439: 3265: 3068: 2965: 2763: 2619: 2514: 2480: 2411: 1968: 436: 1230:, but given number of categories thought it was worth opening discussion. Note that there is also the alternative to use 6415: 6398:

Both categories contain the players of the same clubs. Proposing to merge to the category with the club's current name.

6388: 6333: 6329: 6158: 6027: 5807: 5105: 4166: 4146: 3321: 1707: 1435: 5070: 5058: 5046: 5034: 5022: 5010: 4998: 4986: 4974: 4962: 3552:

inconveniently refused to stay in one country? And that we have plenty of other cross-national categories of artists?

2373:

They're based on identity, as is "English", "Scottish", "Welsh" etc. This isn't necessarily based on sovereign states.

1384: 6195: 6023: 5753: 4950: 4938: 4926: 4914: 4902: 4890: 4878: 4866: 4854: 4842: 4830: 4818: 4806: 4794: 4782: 4770: 4758: 4746: 4734: 4722: 4710: 4698: 4686: 4674: 4662: 4650: 4638: 4626: 4614: 4381: 4020: 3780: 752: 319: 6419: 6337: 5741: 5729: 5717: 5705: 5066: 5054: 5042: 5030: 5018: 5006: 4994: 4982: 4970: 4958: 4602: 4590: 4578: 4566: 4554: 4542: 940: 5749: 5693: 5681: 5669: 5657: 5645: 5633: 5621: 5609: 5597: 5585: 5573: 5561: 5549: 5537: 5525: 5513: 5501: 5489: 5477: 4946: 4934: 4922: 4910: 4898: 4886: 4874: 4862: 4850: 4838: 4826: 4814: 4802: 4790: 4778: 4766: 4754: 4742: 4730: 4718: 4706: 4694: 4682: 4670: 4658: 4646: 4634: 4622: 4610: 3515:, without explaining why painters need it, but every other occupation is categorised without such a subset. Bizarre. 6747: 6696: 6562: 6501: 6344: 6150: 6138: 6070: 5985: 5912: 5811: 5737: 5725: 5713: 5701: 5465: 5453: 5441: 5429: 5417: 5405: 5393: 5381: 5369: 5357: 5345: 5333: 5321: 5309: 5297: 5285: 5273: 5261: 5249: 5237: 5225: 5213: 5201: 5189: 5177: 5165: 4598: 4586: 4574: 4562: 4550: 4538: 4345: 4129: 3635: 3391: 2124: 1547: 1350: 1111: 995: 101: 6544:

I read that HC Harirov went bankrupt after which AZ Havirov was established as a new club with a historical name.

5689: 5677: 5665: 5653: 5641: 5629: 5617: 5605: 5593: 5581: 5569: 5557: 5545: 5533: 5521: 5509: 5497: 5485: 5473: 5153: 5141: 5129: 5117: 3639: 1603:

Anachronism. "British" as a nationality began with the Acts of Union 1707 which united Scotland & England, so

6809: 6677: 6649: 6522: 6298: 6270: 6162: 6146: 5461: 5449: 5437: 5425: 5413: 5401: 5389: 5377: 5365: 5353: 5341: 5329: 5317: 5305: 5293: 5281: 5269: 5257: 5245: 5233: 5221: 5209: 5197: 5185: 5173: 5161: 4526: 4483: 4455: 4106: 4078: 3763: 3735: 3671: 3533: 3403: 3335: 3241: 3174: 3039: 2817: 2744: 2637: 2539: 2494: 2429: 2407: 2351: 2280: 2097: 2069: 2019: 1924:

Deletion leaves no orphans because all subcats are already adequately parented. Look e.g. at the parent cats of

1813: 1780: 1744: 1628: 1528: 1500: 1431: 1331: 1303: 1088: 1060: 918: 892: 864: 735: 707: 298: 270: 78: 6789: 6767: 6738: 6704: 6629: 6612: 6582: 6553: 6531: 6488: 6474: 6455: 6438: 6407: 6352: 6250: 6229: 6211: 6178: 6154: 6125: 6093: 6074: 6047: 6014: 5993: 5959: 5941: 5920: 5896: 5877: 5849: 5828: 5796: 5149: 5137: 5125: 5113: 4502: 4429: 4411: 4397: 4371: 4353: 4329: 4317: 4311: 4285: 4276: 4255: 4243: 4231: 4212: 4175: 4137: 4058: 4027: 4007: 3982: 3961: 3944: 3923: 3909: 3888: 3865: 3794: 3715: 3680: 3561: 3542: 3359: 3344: 3293: 3250: 3198: 3183: 3048: 2902: 2880: 2859: 2826: 2775: 2753: 2661: 2646: 2598: 2573: 2548: 2503: 2463: 2438: 2382: 2360: 2312: 2289: 2132: 2049: 2028: 1901: 1879: 1862: 1845: 1822: 1789: 1753: 1678: 1653: 1637: 1555: 1480: 1463: 1442: 1416: 1358: 1283: 1265: 1242: 1119: 1040: 1022: 1003: 927: 844: 828: 766: 685: 660: 645: 624: 602: 583: 332: 250: 225: 190: 109: 6246: 6199: 5785: 3970: 3627: 3227: 1714: 6191: 5101: 3573:

this is not complicated, but you are making very heavy going of something very simple. So I'll spell it out:

1427: 653:, if I have erred in this respect and need to add in additional categories to this nomination, I can do that. 572:

Back in 2010, the military bases and military facilities categories were merged into military installations (

6142: 6039: 6006: 5864: 2876: 2569: 2459: 1897: 1674: 1261: 246: 6786: 6734: 6609: 6549: 5955: 5892: 3919: 3884: 3790: 3017: 2898: 2855: 1858: 1459: 1439: 1239: 1037: 1018: 824: 762: 681: 641: 328: 222: 2299:, if I were to jump either way. The concept of Britishness began earlier than 1707, for example with the 6805: 6693: 6673: 6645: 6341: 6294: 6266: 6066: 5982: 5909: 4499: 4479: 4451: 4342: 4227: 4126: 4102: 4074: 3957: 3940: 3905: 3759: 3731: 2693: 2121: 2093: 2065: 1544: 1524: 1496: 1347: 1327: 1299: 1108: 1084: 1056: 992: 888: 860: 731: 703: 294: 266: 98: 74: 6515: 6121: 4407: 4272: 3661: 3523: 3325: 3231: 3164: 3029: 2807: 2734: 2627: 2529: 2484: 2419: 2341: 2270: 2009: 1875: 1803: 1770: 1734: 1649: 1618: 908: 657: 580: 186: 3623:

category. So it shoudn't contain the by-nationality subcats, and removing them woud leave it empty.

3005:

seem oblivious to the easily-checked existing structure, and want to create a pile of new anomalies.

97:. (All the current members are racing drivers, including motorcyclists, so no purging is needed.) – 6242: 5771: 4338: 4325: 4293: 4251: 4239: 4208: 4190: 4003: 3978: 3952:

in accordance with other categories. Still not sure how this qualifies as "administrative" though.

2300: 6777:

Cannot see a profound difference in content here. I would consider the difference that global is

6762: 6577: 6470: 6434: 6403: 6207: 6174: 6089: 6035: 6002: 5972: 5821: 4194: 3862: 3507: 2997: 2872: 2610:

I resent that suggestion of pointiness, and hope you will either withdraw it or substantiate it.

2565: 2470: 2455: 2337: 2243: 2000: 1893: 1697: 1670: 1257: 242: 3430:

the person moved between France/Germany, Sweden/Norway, Portugal/Spain or wherever. What we do

1256:, but one or two are containers for county, city, etc.: for these "locality" needs to be kept. 3547:

There is no "change of tack" - my first comment said "Keep both under some name certainly - eg

2626:; b) by extension, those who advocate retaining the subcat when its parent has been deleted. -- 819:, which only contains this category at present, unless there are other more pertinent entries. 6804:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

6730: 6644:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

6625: 6545: 6484: 6451: 6265:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

6102: 6031: 5951: 5888: 4450:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4282: 4073:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4053: 3915: 3895: 3880: 3846:, which resulted in a No Consensus close. Further episodes of the soap opera can be found at 3786: 3730:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3557: 3289: 3277: 3194: 2894: 2851: 2771: 2657: 2594: 2064:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

1854: 1841: 1726: 1669:-- This is in effect a container category for the British Isles, as a subdivision of Europe. 1495:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

1476: 1455: 1298:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

1055:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

1034: 1014: 859:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

820: 758: 702:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

677: 650: 637: 324: 265:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

6672:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

6293:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4478:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4101:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3758:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

2092:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

1523:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

1326:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

1083:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

887:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

730:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

293:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

73:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5873: 4425: 4393: 4385: 4367: 4307: 4223: 3953: 3936: 3901: 3269: 1730: 1279: 981:. This is also the name that it has been referred to most common in the past e.g. on RSSSF: 620: 598: 221:) would make more sense than a deletion that would remove articles from the Yorkshire tree. 5836:. All these categories are useless. If you are doing some maths, a full sortable list like 4341:

has now been blocked. I have updated the nomination to reflect the actions now required. –

6729:, the scope of the two categories is too closely related to keep the categories separate. 6117: 6109: 5937: 5845: 4403: 4268: 3711: 3459: 3355: 2611: 2378: 2308: 2045: 1871: 1645: 1412: 991:

on the technical grounds that there had not been an actual discussion on the page move. –

972: 968: 671: 654: 577: 182: 6541:

this may not be about sponsor names at all. From the website of the first nominated club

3497:

argues that "nationality" does not actually mean nationality and really means identity;

6542: 6134: 4321: 4247: 4204: 3999: 3974: 3634:, it makes no sense to implement it only for one area in one century. But there is no 2524: 988: 978: 2715:. So "x-century British people" for the era when Britain actually existed as a nation 574:

Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_November_12#Military_bases_and_facilities

6757: 6572: 6466: 6430: 6399: 6203: 6170: 6085: 5968: 5815: 4036: 3876: 3859: 3577: 3415: 1690: 6621: 6480: 6447: 4041: 3568: 3553: 3500: 3434:

do is to invent anachronistic nationalities to resolve ambiguities. So we have no

3300: 3285: 3205: 3190: 3001: 2782: 2767: 2668: 2653: 2605: 2590: 2004: 1837: 1701:

wants to extend the scope of to include the whole of the so-called "British Isles".

1472: 5932:

announced from the begining, better relist this (3)-discussion before proceeding.

1853:

per nom as anachronistic. Ireland was under English rule, not under British rule.

1706:

This is a radical change of scope which would be hotly contested in Ireland. See

1713:

The consistent practice so far has been to apply the label "British" only to the

6601: 6062: 5869: 4421: 4389: 4363: 4320:. Very annoying. When a discussion is opened, editors should await the outcome. 4302: 3423: 3381:

It's your assertion that these categories are about nationality and not identity

3305:

drop the game-playing. As you well know, this discussion is about categories by

3257: 1275: 1107:, except Sri Lanka and Albania); however, that can be considered another day. – 840: 616: 594: 3012:

it contains only 21 articles so it is already too small and should be upmerged.

200:

This category assists in grouping together better-related people by sport from

6058: 5933: 5905: 5841: 3707: 3656: 3493: 3372: 3351: 2393: 2374: 2319: 2304: 2041: 1408: 982: 3364:

You're very much proving my point on Cfd & art here, Bhg! Where appropri

3264:(not mentioning a single 17th-century painter who was clearly Irish), though 3268:

is much better. In general our coverage of this sort of thing is pathetic.

3261: 6666: