User talk:ProveIt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives 1

Contents 1 Your edit to Category:Farms in Norway 2 Turn Left page 3 Category redirects? 4 Categories for Discussion log pages 5 Your edit to Category:Companies based in Butte County, California 6 Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion 7 Re: People from Potomac, Maryland 8 Re: Administrator Circeus's advice 9 Roy Harper re-categorisation 10 Your revert of Category talk:Health Club 11 Hindu temples 12 Vijay's films 13 X-Men members 14 CfD comment 15 The Cadet Organisations categories 16 Your addition of Category:Gossip Columnists to Category:Gossip columnists for speedy renaming 17 Pro-life, pro-choice CfDs 18 Transport in London 19 Barnstar! 20 WikiProject Munich 21 Your edit to Category:Politics by issue 22 Anti-Judaic people 23 Category:People from St Helens 24 Rajkumar Kanagasingam 25 Zone 3 cat 26 Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#A quintet of continental categories 27 Category:San Diego Tourist Attractions 28 Pastorwayne and categories 29 Mess 30 Crime families vs Criminal families 31 you'll laugh! you'll cry!! you'll execute a head of state!!!! 32 Bangladesh 33 American Veteran Politicians 34 Estudios Churubusco films 35 Request for Comment 36 Category: Tom Green 37 Ping! 38 Compositions by musical composer 39 Image:Santa-Clara-County-Almaden-Expressway.gif 40 Image:Santa-Clara-County-Capitol-Expressway.gif 41 Image:Santa-Clara-County-Expressways.gif 42 Image:Santa-Clara-County-Oregon-Expressway.gif 43 Image:Santa-Clara-County-San-Tomas-Expressway.gif 44 Category:Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity 45 Category deletion proposal (Vanity Fair list, etc.) 46 Barnstar 47 Category:Non-combatant people of World War I 48 Re Cfr, Cfd 49 Pastorwayne 50 Dern it 51 Category:Writers by audience and nationality 52 Your name 53 From a Browncoat 54 * 55 Category:Award winners / etc 56 Category:Towns in California 57 Category:Ancient Roman foods 58 Category:American skeptics 59 Category:Songs Performed on "Make Your Own Kind Of Music" 60 CfD 61 Upcoming CFD subpages 62 Printmaking Categorization 63 Categories of animals in very specific places 64 Diabetics 65 Barnstar 66 Issue of speedy CfD on CVG catagories 67 Consider this a star of some sort 68 Category:The Simpsons episodes featuring Mr. Burns 69 "people by people" 70 Israeli Jews 71 Category:Canadian American football players 72 criteria for speedy rename... 73 Nominating you to become an administrator 74 You are invited to a WikiProject! 75 your RFA 75.1 Account name 76 Categories on Columbus Circle 77 Best of luck on your RfA 78 Question 79 Re: Category:Computer and video game articles by quality 80 Fair use rationale for Image:Jethro-Tull-Broadsword-Beast.jpg 81 WrestleMania venues 82 'Allo 'Allo! cast 83 Quick Querie 84 Empty then delete list 85 About the article La Timba I created 86 help/favor 87 Fulbright Scholars 88 Relisting CFDs 89 Japan trains 90 Hmm... 91 Removal of White House Executive Residence Operations category on White House article 92 Prinsendam picture 93 Hilltowns in Italy, Medieval and Renaissance hill towns in Italy 94 Category:Actors who have portrayed Jesus 95 Your edit to Category:Natives of West Dunbartonshire 96 Category:Streets in Vancouver 97 CfDs 98 Job queue 99 Christchurch, Virginia article

[edit] Your edit to Category:Farms in Norway

Your recent edit to Category:Farms in Norway (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 16:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_August_10#Category:List_of_farms_in_Norway_to_Category:Farms_in_Norway. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 16:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning for editing Category:Public terminal IP addresses (diff). The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. // AntiVandalBot 18:23, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_August_27#Wikipedians_who_required_user_interventions. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 18:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, AntiVandalBot, you're so funny when you get false positives. ;) No worries, it gets upset over things like that now and then. It's usually pretty smart and saves everybody lots of work, but as you can see it occassionally errs. The worst it'll do is report your activity to AIV, at which point an admin will look it over and confirm you're not doing anything worth blocking. Luna Santin 22:30, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, ordinarily removing a CFD tag is something we would want to consider vandalism. Oh well, live and learn. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 22:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Turn Left page

Hi. I'm involved in an argument on the Turn Left page. As you have edited the page in the past, I'd like to seek your input on the matter, also dicussed on Talk:Turn_Left. Thank you. Xiner 02:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know much about Turn Left ... all I did was fix a category for it once. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 05:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category redirects?

Is there a way to redirect a category? Let's say Category:Georgia Institute of Technology Sports should be redirected to Category:Georgia Institute of Technology sports because people keep misspelling it. How would you do that? —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 02:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

That's a category redirect, see, for example Category:American authors, it's done with the {{category redirect}} template. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 05:43, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Ahh, thank you. That's what I was attempting with Category:Georgia Tech people. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 07:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I recommend making Category:Georgia Tech a redirect to Category:Georgia Institute of Technology, just like Georgia Tech itself. Everyhing else will just follow. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 14:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good plan. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 15:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help in redirecting from an incorrectly spelled category, that for Al-Azhar University alumni. RahadyanS 12:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories for Discussion log pages

I'm trying to figure out why the log pages for Categories for Discussion keep getting named "Categories for Deletion" and thought I'd ask you, since you've created (at least) the last few instances. Is there a template you're using, that should presumably be updated? If I'm misunderstanding the process by which these pages are created, I apologize for bothering you with this. --Bill Clark 17:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

It's a historical thing, and I think we're planning to change it come 2007. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 17:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation; I'll leave the pages as they are. --Bill Clark 17:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Category:Companies based in Butte County, California

Your recent edit to Category:Companies based in Butte County, California (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 23:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning for editing Category:Wikipedians who use WikiWikiWeb (diff). The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. // AntiVandalBot 23:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion

Hi. I wonder whether you can help find the Category change request on 22 October which seems to have gone missing - it's discussed under 'Lost Request' in the Talk section, but nothing seems to be happening. GrahamBould 16:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean this one? Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_October_27#Category:Freshwater_fish_of_New_Zealand. If you look at the user contributions tab, you can search for just your changes to wikipedia only. see wiki It shows nothing for october 22, but finds three on october 27. Hope this helps. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 17:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

One thing thats a little weird, it looks like the category itself Category:Freshwater fish of New Zealand, never got tagged. It is itelf the result of an earlier rename ... -- ProveIt ^(talk) 17:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

See also: Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_16#Fauna_by_country.

See also: Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_22#Category:Fauna_by_country_and_subcats. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 17:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: People from Potomac, Maryland

I wasn't sure at first what you were referring to, but I realize that you are referring to the names I deleted from "current residents" of Potomac. Maria and Eunice Shriver reside in California; Mike Tyson most certainly no longer lives there; if I erred otherwise, please correct.

HOT L Baltimore 17:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Administrator Circeus's advice

Oh, that was b/c of what an advised me re those categorizations. I am not sure how to link it to you, so I am copying it from my talk page and I am sure you can make sense of it:

I was wondering if you could explain the logic behind such categorization? I've been fixed such things several times these recent weeks. Circeus 13:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I am an administrator, and the only thing I've been correctig are the nonsensical attempt to use list markup on categories and sorting categories into themselves (the latter move is particularly ridiculous). If you want to link to a category, use this markup:[[:Category:People from Whatever]]. Circeus 14:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Yours, HOT L Baltimore 18:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Mind if I comment? HOTL was a bit overzealous here. Our discussion had to do with categorization such as this (unwanted/duplicate/circular categorization), which he seems to have confused with the legitimate categories you were adding. Circeus 20:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Roy Harper re-categorisation

Why did the Singles category get renamed songs? Where am I supposed to put all the singles? I'm a bit confused, shouldn't there be at least two categories? (One for songs and one for singles) I tried to look up the "debate" for this decision but just found a proposal and three agreements and they weren't on the talk page for the category either, which seems a bit odd to me, how was anyone else supposed to put forward their opinions?

There are 35 years of singles and albums to cover and this doesn't make it any easier. Can you help. Stephenjh

Sure, I know what happend. Once upon a time there were two categories with a huge amount of overlap, Category:Songs by artist, and Category:Singles by artist. All the singles are songs as well, so they decided to merge the two and just use Category:Songs by artist to cover both singles and songs. However, they still use Category:Singles by year, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 14:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I have a lot of work ahead of me with the Harper stuff I know, but that does make it a lot simpler. Regards Stephenjh

[edit] Your revert of Category talk:Health Club

I'm not sure why the redirect was reversed, but since I started this Category and have been the main one editing it, I went ahead and re-directed it. I agree with the rename and re-direct. I will be reverting your change. --Maniwar (talk) 14:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion#Category:Health_Club. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:06, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hindu temples

Temples in the context of Tamilnadu almost always means Hindu temples. So, I wanted to mean Hindu temples, when I put it as temples. All said, I agree that there might be some temples that are not Hindu temples. So, I would like the categorization to be linked to both Hindu temples in Tamilnadu and Temples in Tamilnadu. Otherwise it might create deep hierarchies and won't enable proper collaboration. Balajiviswanathan 02:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vijay's films

Why did propose a deletion for Vijay's films category? Tamil films is such a huge category and hence it must be sub-categorized.

Balajiviswanathan 02:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Category:Films by actor doesn't work, because each film can have dozens of actors. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 16:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] X-Men members

You sir are fast : )
We were just discussing this user at User talk:ChrisGriswold. There is also apparently at least a Category:Brotherhood of Mutants members as well. - jc37 21:32, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Just the luck of the draw, I just happened to be looking at recent changes... -- ProveIt ^(talk) 21:49, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, he's going non-stop (fast enough to make me think it's a bot), creating new team membership categories. Considering the mixture of responses from posting at the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics, perhaps the easiest answer would be to just nominate them for deletion again? or do you have a fast way to undo what he's doing? (In other words, asking for your opinion / insight : ) - jc37 21:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

He seems to be building a new cat called Category:New Mutants members, looks real to me, but I'm hardly an expert. No I don't have any fast way to undo it. The comics people would probably know better than me. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 22:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks anyway : )

and I have to go for the day : (

Anyway, Have a great day : ) - jc37 22:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CfD comment

please learn how to do an umbrella nomination. This has 106 subsections, and that's just unweildy. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

It's not even close to as large as several we've had : )

(Fauna and actors by TV series both come to mind.)

That aside, what would you see done differently?

(Also note User talk:Radiant!, for a related, though different thought.)

- jc37 15:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

As you would expect, the tricky part is making all the tag links work. I had it all figured out, and was even ready to point you to a working example, see religious leader by year. However, good thing I checked, it turns out someone recently modified the {{cfd}} template so that it automatically adds Category:. This means that if you tag everything as {{subst:cfd|Umbrella}}, you now have to name the section header Category:Umbrella, instead of the Umbrella that used to work before. Oh well, I had to go back and fixed my links. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 17:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Cadet Organisations categories

Please can you look at you proposals again. The word "Cadet" is usually capitalised in respect of such organisations. I agree wholeheartedly that "organisation" should not be. I have made a note over this under "Naval Cadet Organisations", and felt it simpler to ask you to revisit than for me to add a similar comment to each. If you agree, I think it would be great to do this once only :) Fiddle Faddle 23:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

If it's part of a proper name than it gets capitalized, so like Michigan Cadet School would be capitalized, as a proper name, but Michigan cadet schools would not be. I think the reason was that Wikipedia started off using sentence case for articles, and so it sort of carried over to categories when they were invented. And you're right, the C is capitalized in the articles, such as Australian Army Cadets, but that's because it's part of a proper name, not because Cadet is a special word. Hope that helps. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 23:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your addition of Category:Gossip Columnists to Category:Gossip columnists for speedy renaming

I made the capitalization error out of force of habit. Sorry. Since it was my creation, and I concur with the move, do we need to wait 48 hours?

And thanks for catching it. Sorry I didn't notice before clicking "save". --Jgilhousen 01:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, if no one protests, it will just happen automatically. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 01:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pro-life, pro-choice CfDs

Because the concerns that counsel the deletion of the pro-life actors category are the same as those that counsel the deletion of pro-life musicians, pro-choice actors, and pro-choice musicians categories; because the creation of the four was undertaken by one user in view of a discussion toward such collective creation at the abortion WikiProject's talk page; and because similarly-styled categories were dealt with (and, quite properly, IMHO, disfavored) collectively in a May CfD, I merged the four discussions under an umbrella heading and refactored your nom (very, very minorly) accordingly; I hope you'll not mind, and I hope you'll forgive that which otherwise might be perceived as rather untoward.

On an entirely different note, having first encountered you at CfD a few days ago and having apprehended from a look at your talk page history that you are exceedingly sensible and well-versed in policy (especially as regards CfD et seq.), I concluded you might make an excellent candidate for adminship, but then I learned from your userpage that you like Jethro Tull. Your liking Veronica Mars and The West Wing redeemed you, but then I saw Babylon 5 on your list of favorite TV shows, so now I'm eminently confused. :) In all seriousness, if you should like to pursue an RfA, I'd be happy to nominate you... Joe 06:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Sure, I think an umbrella nomination makes sense in this case. And thanks, I guess ... meybe someday ... -- ProveIt ^(talk) 06:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Transport in London

I added the cfd tag because a number of people started voting to delete the categories alltogether, which I don't think is abundantly clear outcome on the cfr tag. I am concerned that if users see the tag that says the category will be renamed, and they do not object to the proposed new name, they might not bother participating in the discussion, and then get a nasty surprise later on. I'll see if I can make the new tags point to correct section.

It has been suggested that the wording on the template be changed, see for example [1], quickly reverted here [2]. Tim! 18:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I, Persian Poet Gal, hereby award you this barnstar for your tireless categorization efforts :).¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 22:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Munich

Kingjeff 02:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Category:Politics by issue

Your recent edit to Category:Politics by issue (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 17:17, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-Judaic people

Regarding your nomination here. Unfortunately the two categories aren't supposed to be even related. Anti-Judaism is criticism or hostility toward Judaism (the religion), whereas antisemitism is hatred against Jews as a people. One is hostility toward a religion; the one is hatred against a certain group of people. They're not that related. Taxico 11:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I see the distinction, but I think that Anti-Judaism in theory would soon become antisemitism in practice. Categories aren't very good for making these kinds of fine distinctions. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 13:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Not a big deal I suppose. Taxico 13:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:People from St Helens

Hi, I notice that you have recatted this to Category:St Helens and kept it in Category:St Helens, Merseyside. We don't want articles split between the two or folks will not be able to find things (If people go to Category:St Helens they may think that is all there is). I want to depopulate the first prior to deleting it (or you could depopulate the second, I don't mind but I think one has to go). BlueValour 04:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

You are right, the Category:St Helens ought to go. I've set it up for merging. The problem was that it was trying to use a template with a bug in it. I noticed it was trying to create a category named Natives of and it had a messed up description. Doing a revert fixed that, but as you point out, it still left an extra category. I think I've got it set up correctly now, there's still the extra cat, I didn't fix that because we aren't supposed to empty a cat while it's in cfd ... but it will go away soon. I just have a simple catmore there now, go ahead and change that as you see fit ... -- ProveIt ^(talk) 06:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for this helpful response. BlueValour 17:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rajkumar Kanagasingam

Though the Rajkumar Kanagasingam was posted by me to the wikipedia originally but wrongly as a newbie (and still feel so), it was actually created by Wackymacs[3] and subsequently shaped by others [4], [5], [6], [7] and [8].

After they all have given notability for Rajkumar Kanagasingam only, I started to shape the Rajkumar Kanagasingam.

The Daily News of Sri Lanka [9] is a Sri Lanka's National Newspaper since 1918 and the widest read newspaper in Sri Lanka and overseas.

Rajkumar Kanagasingam has published articles over the years and the following articles [10], [11], [12] and [13] are available online since 2002.

Though the articles have been written by the subject Rajkumar Kanagasingam, the facts he has mentioned in those articles might have well accepted by the populace without any complaint before he published the next article over the years and might have established some credibility within the Editorial circle as well.

I wonder why those articles can't be considered as Reference for Rajkumar Kanagasingam.

The Press Release in Daily News [14] could speak for Rajkumar Kanagasingam's association with leading Sri Lankan and international personalities and adding notability for Rajkumar Kanagasingam.

The US State Department's Office of Weapons Removal and Abatements "Safe Passage" Newsletter carried a news[15] on "Night of A Thousand Dinners" which was organised jointly by Asian-German Sports Exchange Program and PDIP, A Think Tank which was founded by Rajkumar Kanagasingam.

As the PDIP's Secretary-General, his activities in the available publications (on-line) will speak for his achievements.

All of his above attempts are substantial enough for a fair testimony for his notability among Sri Lankans and gives weight of his book German Memories in Asia which is about-to-be-released.

Ezine Articles may be "Vanity Press" but the contents in most of the articles by Rajkumar Kanagasingam are falling in the lines of well-researched and well-documented articles than those of mere Search Engine Optimization (SEO) ones.

After all his Ezine Articles are linking to his Book/Author Info. Page in AGSEP[16], which is an NGO and not to his personal or affiliated sites with ulterior motives of Ad Sense and click-gimmicks. As an author he is trying his fair attempt for his book without any hidden baits.

Some of the linkings might be Link Farms as I am a newbie of mere three months, but you should consider few of the internationally prominent people I have so far created and those have been left out in the wikipedia so far, especially Dr. Gamani Corea and others.

I have spent lot of my time to keep Dominic Jeeva from deletion with rest of my creations Arumaipperumal and Pandara Vannian which are not falling into the Link Farms.

The Internet is introduced after the mid nineties and still most of the news items are not falling into the web-world. By expecting reference for testing a person's notability with on-line reference materials might be some times misleading where the particular persons' references are mostly in off-line media archives.

Internet is mostly weighing a person's prominence based on the Internet availability in English and few other languages and not in all other world or local languages.

I don't have any objections if suitable and appropriate deleting Rajkumar Kanagasingam from wikipedia, but my kind expectation is at least wikipedia should attempt to have a survey among Sri Lankans through its available means whether Rajkumar Kanagasingam is prominent enough or not among Sri Lankans.

User:Rajsingam 2 December 2006

[edit] Zone 3 cat

Forgot about the bot and created this on my own. Now there are 2 categories for London Travelcard zone 3 and both with half the stations in i.e. one cat has one half of the stations and vice versa. Simply south 16:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, they are WAY behind, see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Working. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 16:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Should i create the other cats? Simply south 16:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Only if you are becoming impatient. It's already near the top of the list, so I'm sure they will get around to it pretty soon now. ProveIt ^(talk) 16:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Naaa I'm not impatient (i hope) and i'll leave it to them. It's only minor. Simply south 16:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#A quintet of continental categories

Since I don't like editing other people's XFD nominations, do you want to add Category:United Methodist bishops by continent and Category:Religious leaders by continent, along with the various continent subcategories? Mairi 02:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I considered adding the UM Bishops one, but I figure that the creator is an expert on that subject... so I've been leaving it alone. I'll look into the other one though, hadn't noticed it. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 02:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a few more I want to add, but I'll start a new cfd. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 02:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:San Diego Tourist Attractions

Good call considering the naming conventions. I have withdrawn my speedy renaming request, as it would be redundant. GregorB 11:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pastorwayne and categories

Pastorwayne seems to be a perpetual source of bad categories. He is probably responsible for 5% of the categories at WP:CFD, and his actions verge on being disruptive. Is it possible to ask for administrative action to stop him from creating categories? (I will mention him at WP:AN later today.) Dr. Submillimeter 07:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, please do. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 14:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mess

I feel i have created a mess on WP:CFD as i created a category but it got finished pat midnight. If you have seen, i have been swapping it back and forth between Dec 8th - Dec 9th. Simply south 00:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The important thing is to make the tag links work correctly ... I've taken care of it. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 02:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crime families vs Criminal families

Thanks for your previous participation at Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_8#Category:Crime_family. I would appreciate your comments on the latest conversation. TonyTheTiger 21:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] you'll laugh! you'll cry!! you'll execute a head of state!!!!

Hi, Provelt. I won't hold your LAMP usage against you. :) I was pondering Hideki Tojo today and happened upon one of the categories that makes wikipedia such a special place: Category:Executed heads of state. I noticed that Nikolai Ceaucescu was absent from said list, and went to add him to the list. On so doing, I saw yet more executive mirth: Category:Executed presidents, Category:Executed royalty, and I am sure there are more lurking out there. Would it be worthwhile to just join all of these people into a larger category, such as the executed heads of state category? It seems to me that whether they were royalty, president, or whatever other title a head of state can have, is not exactly relevant to the fact that one day they were head of state, and the next day, they were wormfood. I see you're one of those very useful categorists (thank you, thank you), and I'd prefer to yield to your experience in this matter. ttfn, ... aa:talk 07:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm ... I did a little bit of tinkering, let me know what you think. It seems to me that presidents are both politians and heads of state, but royalty is sometimes, but not always head of state. I've moved things around a little bit and I think it's probably ok for the moment ... do you agree? -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:08, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I hadn't thought about the royalty part. I suppose it looks fine. ... aa:talk 09:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bangladesh

You must be able to see that this is an ongoing piece of work that started only today re Bangladesh; though in fact that is just one small phase of a general restructure of the entire category:History of cricket. This restructure is being done to improve matters for the readers because several of the cricketer categories are too big and we need to categorise them both spatially (which has already been done for the most part) and temporally.

Why not ask me via the talk page what I am doing before going straight to CfD? --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 17:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I've already said thanks to you on the CfD page but I really should do likewise on here. All the best. --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 20:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] American Veteran Politicians

Category:American Veteran Politicians(Deceased) -> Category:American veteran democrat politicians

American Veteran Politicians(Republican) -> Category:American veteran republican politicians

American Veteran Politicians(Deceased) -> Category:American veteran deceased politicians

Category:American veteran independant politicians

There seems to be an urge to merge these categories when all that is necessary is making the names lower case. I think the categories should remain seperate so that wikipedia can provide a more useful delination fo this information to people. I don;t have a problem changing the names, I'll even do the work myself. How Do I declare the discussion ended? --Dr who1975 21:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Estudios Churubusco films

Hi. The category is for films shot at Estudios Churubusco, not made by them. It is mostly used for American films like Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Free Willy and The Mask of Zorro. I've been through all this before, as I nominated the category for deletion a few months ago, but nobody could understand that the category is not "Films made by Estudios Curubusco", but "Films shot at Estudios Churubusco", which is why I nominated it for renaming. JW 15:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

As you voted to keep the category under its present name, and added Category:Films by studio, are you now going to remove the films shot at Estudios Curubusco but not made by them, as they account for more than 2/3 of the entries? JW 10:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Comment

As an editor of the article "Jhonen Vasquez", you are invited to a Request for Comment (as suggested by Admin Luna Santin). Please see: Talk:Jhonen Vasquez#Request for Comment: Book format. -- Tenebrae 04:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category: Tom Green

Thanks for your help with my proposal to delete this Category. I see that it has met with a thunderous silence. I'm just curious, when you write "no vote" does that mean that you don't choose to vote or that it is ineligible for a vote, hence the indifference from other editors? I'm rather new at this, as you can tell, thanks Shawn in Montreal 23:58, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I said no vote because it's not my nomination, I was just fixing a mistake, and I hadn't thought about the issue very much. Don't worry about the lack of response, discussion lasts all week for a reason, many people don't look at cfd every day. I'm leaning in favor of voting to delete btw... glad I could help. -- 00:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. BTW, I did leave a message on the Talk page User:GRider, who'd created the Category, asking what he thought of my suggestion. I haven't heard back yet, but then I noted with some alarm that his user page is devoted to his strong opposition to article deletions, which he likens to being "in the spirit of Nazi Germany"! Seems a tad excessive and un-Wiki-like. I just can't believe anything as frivolous as Category: Tom Green is going to raise this type of controversy. It's not worth it, either way. Shawn in Montreal 00:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty much an inclusionist for articles, but I kind of go the other way for categories. Too many and it becomes difficult to navigate. And in this case We're only suggesting removing the category, not the articles. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 01:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ping!

 

[edit] Compositions by musical composer

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Compositions by musical composer, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Compositions by musical composer. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Fram 21:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead and kill it. For some reason it got started as a category, and I just moved the text to article space. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 00:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Santa-Clara-County-Almaden-Expressway.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Santa-Clara-County-Almaden-Expressway.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 18:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Santa-Clara-County-Capitol-Expressway.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Santa-Clara-County-Capitol-Expressway.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 18:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Santa-Clara-County-Expressways.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Santa-Clara-County-Expressways.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 18:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Santa-Clara-County-Oregon-Expressway.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Santa-Clara-County-Oregon-Expressway.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 18:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Santa-Clara-County-San-Tomas-Expressway.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Santa-Clara-County-San-Tomas-Expressway.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 18:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity

Unfortunately, right now there is no way to differentiate the pages which are specifically part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity from those other pages which belong to some of its subprojects, like Catholicism, Church of the Brethren, and on and on and on. Given that the Christianity WikiProject itself is now gaining an assessment unit, and all of the subcategories which are required for the existence of such a unit, it seemed to me that creating a dedicated subcategory was probably the best way to go. Unfortunately, I couldn't think of anything else to call it. If the naming is in error, I apologize. However, if you can think of some other way to differentiate the specific pages of WikiProject Christianity in and of itself from all the other pages in the greater category, I would be more than gratified to know what it is. Badbilltucker 18:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Usually one creates a WikiProject Christianity articles, and under that Christianity articles by quality and Christianty articles by importance. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 18:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

So, presumably, the various project pages itself, like the Assessment page, would be included in the "articles" subcategory. Sounds good to me. Thank you for your assistance. Badbilltucker 18:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

See Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments for examples. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 18:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category deletion proposal (Vanity Fair list, etc.)

Hi, Provelt. I appreciate your very clear objection to it. You are right. I looked over the guidelines on published lists and agree with you completely, 100%. Is it poor Wikiquette for me to delete the category myself, as I did create it, or should I wait for an administrator or some other action? Thanks for your advice! --Ashley Rovira 15:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

As the creator, you can simply tag it with {{db-author}}. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		With thanks for your numerous categories nominations. Timrollpickering 22:17, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Non-combatant people of World War I

Pastorwayne created Category:Non-combatant people of World War I recently. I almost want to nominate this for deletion, but I want a second opinion on it. Does this look like a functional category to you? It seems like it could include anyone who did not fight in World War I. Dr. Submillimeter 23:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, as currently worded, it would include most people alive during the war, and everyone born after 1919. It seems to me that nearly everyone alive during that time was affected by the war in some way. I think it's a bad idea, and I'd support a nomination to delete it. Hopefully it will be better recived than my recent nomination. Sorry about taking so long to get back to you, yesterday was a travel day ... I've been mostly snowbound in Denver the past two weeks, and it's nice to be back home again. Happy New Year! -- ProveIt ^(talk) 13:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

OK. Category:Non-combatant people of World War I has been nominated for deletion. (I was traveling during the past week, too. Fortunately, I avoided Denver. Unfortunately, I encountered fog in London.)

Do not feel bad about having a failed category nomination. My nomination of Category:History of Methodism in the United States does not look like it will pass through (although a single vote could at least make it a "no consensus" vote).

I found a few more that may be worth working on. I will probably nominate Category:Emigrants and its subcategories for merging/deletion, as they are redundant with Category:Expatriates. Also, could you look at Category:Evangelical Converts to Christianity and tell me what you think? Thank you, Dr. Submillimeter 21:16, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The article on expatriates may or may not be elightening regarding the definition of expatriate (although I marked it as unreferenced). Dr. Submillimeter 21:37, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re Cfr, Cfd

Hi Eric,

We need an admin to update {{cfd}} and {{cfr}} ... I've already done {{cfm}} -- ProveIt ^(talk) 01:33, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Done – correctly, I hope... I'm around for a few mins more, so if you spot something amiss...  Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 01:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pastorwayne

I left a comment on User:Pastorwayne and his rapid category creation at WP:ANI. The comment asks for Pastorwayne to be regulated regarding category creation. Feel free to comment. Dr. Submillimeter 22:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I have left another complaint about Pastorwayne at WP:ANI. In his 3 January 2007 edits to Beverly Waugh, it looked like he was attempting to recreate Category:Christian editors using a method described in WP:CAT, which described adding a category as a red link to an article before creating the category itself. Moreover, since this category was renamed on 2006 December 8, the recreation of this category is disruptive editing. Dr. Submillimeter 15:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You're right, and he's been adding nonsense redcats all morning ... I've been trying to repair the damage. I feel somewhat uncomfortable doing this as it feels a lot like stalking. But there would have been many more future CFD's to deal with so I've been proceding. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Please add comments to WP:ANI. I think he is trying to game the system. (Perhaps you should create a new entry at WP:ANI? No administrators have responded to my post.)

I am going to try contacting more administrators. We need help! Dr. Submillimeter 15:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I added a message to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Pastorwayne_and_category_creation ... I suggest you talk with either BrownHairedGirl or Mairi. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 16:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for adding to the WP:ANI message. BrownHairedGirl is not available for another four days, but she is willing to act on this situation. User:Jc37, who is now an administrator, has discussed the issue with Pastorwayne but has not indicated that he is ready to take additional action. User:Mairi may be able to help. I have also asked several people with the arbitration committee for advice; this may be an issue that goes to them. Dr. Submillimeter 18:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dern it

You beat me to categorizing the category! :) Thank you, in any case. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 06:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Writers by audience and nationality

What do you make of Category:Writers by audience and nationality? Does it serve any purpose at all? I can get hold of Category:Writers by audience and Category:Writers by nationality but not this composite beast. I would have thought subcats should be of form Category:Ukrainian writers for children ... must go and lie down. (People should have to pass some test before being allowed to create cats.) roundhouse 15:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the notion of Category:Writers by audience is a flawed premise. Currently it's being used to parent Category:Children's writers and Category:Christian writers. However, both Children's literature and Christian literature are well-established genre's on their own. Other potential audiences could be well covered by Category:Writers by subject area. I'd rather classify writers by what they write, rather than to try and guess who their audience might be. For example, although Harry Potter is definitely a kids book, lots of adults read it too. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 17:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your name

After over a year of seeing your name in discussions, I only just realized it was PROVE IT and not PRO VELT, which I could never understand. -- Samuel Wantman 11:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

One day I was trying to think up a good user name, and of course Eric was already taken. I wasn't sure I wanted to use my full name, and everything else I tried was taken. Then I remembered Dean Edell and his frequent complaint about how nutrition supplent companies aren't required to justify their claims ... His consistant challenge to them was Prove it. That reminded me of Wikepedia's insistance on verifyabilty and I thought it might make a good user name. It never occured to me that someone might read it as Pro Velt, I guess I'll have to change my signiture -- Prove It ^(talk) 15:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

It's because of the font. I thought exactly the same for a while. (Provelt sounds a South African name.) Try eg Prove It -- roundhouse 22:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I added a space to the sig, that should help a lot, I think ... -- Prove It ^(talk) 14:03, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] From a Browncoat

I like you! Can you help me with some categorizing? I need help with three articles, and some sexuality articles as well. Here's my New Years Day card - it has some useful links in it:

Please click on useless image. Happy New Year from a complete maniac. Nina Odell 19:14, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I have another present for you too - IF you help me categorizing;). You'll like it, I'm sure of it - it was a "picture of the day". NinaOdell | Talk 16:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the nice picture, I'll help if I have time ... what articles are they? -- Prove It ^(talk) 16:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much. They are James McCune Smith, African Free School, and Glasgow Emancipation Society. NinaOdell | Talk 01:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] *

Thanks for your help> One does wonder why the Birmingham Alumni list is so short.Is it due to the fact that users do not know the way it works?Ronval 16:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Award winners / etc

Hi ProveIt, I've been working on the various Awards categories for a while now, and have proposed to merge Category:Recipients of formal honors, Category:Prize winners, and Category:Award winners together. It looks like you're the first editor of the Category:Award winners, so if you have some thoughts about the proposal please join in. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 9#Category:Prize winners and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 9#Category:Prizes . (I guess you review the CFDs anyway but just in case you're taking a break, it seems like you're an interested party.) Best, lquilter 04:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Towns in California

I have replied to your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 13#Category:Towns in California. ^BlankVerse 10:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

You're right, and I've changed my vote. -- Prove It ^(talk) 14:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Ancient Roman foods

You reverted by db-catempty of this. I've been working on removing several of the redirects that have no links from main articles, per the header at Category:Wikipedia_category_redirects, which says, amongst other things, "This category page should be empty." Therefore can you explain why you reverted this - you didn't leave an explanation in your revert message. I checked there were no relevant links remaining.

Further, one reason I personally have for wanting to remove these obsolete categories is that I've been doing a lot of work categorizing uncategorized pages, and using the category index to find an appropriate category to put pages into. These redirect categories appear in the index, leading to my wrongly putting new pages in those categories. If you don't agree with policy as quoted above, please work to change the policy. Akihabara 14:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Category redirects are good becuase they act as references to the correct category. If it is an Obvious name, removing it is the wrong thing to do, since it will just get recreated again by another well-meaning editor. I've seen it happen dozens of times. -- Prove It ^(talk) 14:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Then I think the header of the category needs to change. Can you suggest / edit it with appropriate wording? Akihabara 14:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:American skeptics

Neither is agnostics or athiests a religion, but are (properly) under the Americans by religion cat. Isn't the thing one is a skeptic OF religion? It seemed a more complete way of categorizing skeptics. Pastorwayne 23:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. People can be skeptics of all kinds of things, although yes, sometime religion is in the mix. Often they are trying to prove or disprove all kinds of paranormal phenomena, alien abductions, health food claims, new age philosophy, talking to plants, pyramind power, etc ... -- Prove It ^(talk) 23:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Songs Performed on "Make Your Own Kind Of Music"

You said that the Category: "Songs Performed on 'Make Your Own Kind Of Music'" might be deleted. Could you explain your reasoning? Cuyler91093 00:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that categorizing songs by television shows doesn't really work. Songs can be used in dozens of television shows, and it wouldn't work for every song to make a category for every time it was performed. -- Prove It ^(talk) 01:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I know that songs are used in many different television shows, but "Make Your Own Kind of Music" was the Carpenters' own television special.

Yeah, but a category isn't the right way to do this. Just add a list of songs to the Make Your Own Kind Of Music (Television Series) article. -- Prove It ^(talk)

Okey dokey.

It's been seven+ days up for deletion, with little activity in 'voting', and no Keeps - perhaps the right time to get rid of it (both from Wikipedia, and my watchlist!). Refsworldlee^(chew-fat) 19:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CfD

I'm a long term admin just getting into CfD stuff. I want to thank you for your hard work. Makes my job much easier. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you ... glad I could help. -- Prove It ^(talk) 14:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Upcoming CFD subpages

Hi ProveIt. I recently created Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 February 1, and was going to create some more, but it occurred to me that I might be stepping on your toes by doing so. Seeing as there are multiple CFDs every day, and always will be until there are major changes to the system (and therefore, there is no chance of having an "empty day"), I think setting a bot up to do it, like LDBot does at AFD, would be a good idea. Thoughts? Picaroon 20:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I have a little python script that builds them, it takes me about half an hour to do a months worth. I'm planning to do February sometime soon, definately over the weekend at the very latest. It's no problem at all if you want to do some ... I'll just pick up whatever is left. There's always plenty of work it seems. -- Prove It ^(talk) 22:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, seeing as you already have a semi-automated process, I'll leave it to you. I just saw no note of a script in the edit summaries, and since you only got about one or two a minute, I figured you were doing them by hand - albeit quicker than I could. (In other words, if a script can do them at three times my speed, I'd rather be writing yet another stub on some town in Nigeria.) In conclusion, if you're fine with your method, feel free to continue that way. Picaroon 22:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Printmaking Categorization

Since you are clearly a categories expert, could you very kindly take a look at my proposal at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts#Printmaking_Categorization & add any comments there. I don't think any of the few people in the Visual arts projects know much about categorization, to judge by the mess most categories are in. Printmaking may be useful at explaining what the subject is about. Many thanks in advance. Johnbod 17:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories of animals in very specific places

I am actually planning on starting to work with some of the "Fauna of U.S. state" and "Fauna of Canadian province" categories first. See boar, for example. I shudder to think about what would happen to house sparrow. That could gain at least 50 categories for each of the U. S. states in which it is found.

(I am also not right all of the time. This statement logically proves my point.) Dr. Submillimeter 20:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

See my multiple nominations in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 31. I particularly like the subdivisions of Texas. Canada will be next. Dr. Submillimeter 10:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Diabetics

Regarding the diabetic categories,[17] you might want to see what the Wikipedia Manual of Style says on the issue: "Be careful not to define a person or group of people by their medical condition. For example, seizures are epileptic, people are not." [18] Wryspy 07:35, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I concede your point, but at the same time I remain convinced that simple common language is best. People who have diabetes are known as diabetic. -- Prove It ^(talk) 13:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Sufferers, surely, as my wife is an epileptic sufferer? Refsworldlee^(chew-fat) 21:30, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For the incredible amount of category work you do. —mikedk9109SIGN 21:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome. Cheers. —mikedk9109^{SIGN 21:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC)}

[edit] Issue of speedy CfD on CVG catagories

Thanks for the reference to that other discussion. I've change the CfD on the page to regular from speedy. Do I delete the speedy entries from the cfd-speedy page? BcRIPster 03:18, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that would be good. -- Prove It ^(talk) 03:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

On a related issue, in regards to your comment on the CfD page. Is there a good guide for doing something like or can you give me some pointers to doing what you suggest? Thanks. BcRIPster 18:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• I did one like that a while ago, but not nearly so ambitious. See English people by county for an example. The only tricky bit is when you build the cfr tag, it has to look like {{subst:cfr|Proposed new name|Category:Computer_and_video_games}}. -- Prove It ^(talk) 03:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Also, compose the nomination in a sandbox somewhere and then cut and past it when it's ready. Otherwise you'll be constantly interrupted. -- Prove It ^(talk) 03:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Consider this a star of some sort

Dunno how to award stars and such but I just wanted to say that I appreciate the work you do here. Even if I don't always agree with you on various and sundry your arguments are well thought-out and very conducive to an in-depth discussion of the issues you raise. Otto4711 04:37, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you ... -- Prove It ^(talk) 04:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:The Simpsons episodes featuring Mr. Burns

Hi, I was wondering if you would mind withdrawing your cfd for this category. We at WikiProject:The Simpsons have come to a consensus to use categories for character-specific episodes instead of crufty "episodes featuring this character" lists. You can see our discussion here. Don't worry, we won't be making categories for every minor character, just the ones with many episodes. So if you would be willing to withdraw your nom, it would be appreciated. Thanks, Scorpion 14:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be fine as a list article, but categories aren't really good for this. -- Prove It ^(talk) 15:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

A list specific article would just be cruft. A category on the other hand would be more useful. There is only set of caetegories for Simpsons episodes anyway (by season), so having character categories wouldn't be overcategorization. Either way, we've come to a consensus on the matter, so can you please just withdraw your cfd so we can get started on the big jobs like Homer, Bart, etc? -- Scorpion 15:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm also curious to know which cfd guidelines the category is breaking. -- Scorpion 15:21, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Overcategorization#Mostly_overlapping_categories. -- Prove It ^(talk) 15:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

We're going to tag only the episodes in which characters are very centric. And, we can just limit it to family members and Burns if your so concerned about overlapping. -- Scorpion 15:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Simpsons/Idea. >Radiant< 15:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "people by people"

Good name for it - I'm going to add it to my list of categorizing principles. <g> --lquilter 19:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Israeli Jews

A quarter of Israelis are not Jewish, so I am not sure that it is redundant, as you suggest, to indicate that someone is an Israeli Jew. What percentage would you think suffices for it to be redundant? --Epeefleche 07:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I mean to say there's probably quite a bit of overlap ... however, note that I just filed it correctly where it's supposed to go... I do see your point. -- Prove It ^(talk)

Yep ... 75% overlap ... though that number is getting smaller ...--Epeefleche 07:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Canadian American football players

I ve rereverted you edit to cut the link this page to Category:Canadian expatriate sportspeople in the United States. The players listed have Canadian citizenship and have played in the NFL or have been notable American college football players. You comment that American football is played in Canada is essentially erroneous - organized gridiron there is Canadian football. Mayumashu 16:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I've checked ... you're right, while American football is played in many contries, Canada is not one of them. See Category:American football by country. However, my point is that a Canadian who plays American Football doesn't have to live in the United States. What happens when a Canadian joins Frankfurt Galaxy or Kolbotn Kodiaks? -- Prove It ^(talk) 17:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

you re right. i ll remove the link. i wanted to cut down on category clutter and was looking for a short-cut. Regards! Mayumashu 03:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] criteria for speedy rename...

Hi, I saw you recommended five categories for renaming. They all had "al Qaeda" in their name. And you recommended that be changed to "al-Qaeda".

I don't have a problem with the renaming. But, in the interests of learning about category renaming, would you mind telling me which of the five categories for speedy rename they match?

Thanks -- Geo Swan 17:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Sure, it's spelling (1) and pluralization (3). al-Qaeda is not an english word, so there's lots of correct ways to spell it, but in the interest of consistancey I was matching the main article. Same goes for Osama bin Laden. The CIA calls him Usama, but I was just trying for consistancy. -- Prove It ^(talk) 18:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nominating you to become an administrator

Hello, ProveIt, I am nominating you to become an administrator of Wikipedia for you incredible amount of contributions. I don't think some stewards, users who are assigned boardvotd for the Wikimedia, board of trustees, or the board of trustees themselves have that many edits to Wikipedia! If you accept or decline, could you please tell me on my talk page, or here? Congratulations!--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 02:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Excellent! It may take me a little while to create the page, but it shouldn't be too hard. I'll start by going here and view the sources of some examples. Plus, there's no rush, right? This is the first time I've nominated a user that accepted the nomination, which I'm thrilled to find out! Good luck!--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 03:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've never been nominated before either ... but I figured if I was, I'd say yes. -- Prove It ^(talk) 04:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA page has been created here. Once you confirm there that you accept the nomination, I think it will begin. Then, I think you will be asked questions.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 04:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I couldn't understand the directions. If you still want to run on the RfA, you can still nominate yourself here. I can't help you any further. I'm sorry. I think you would make a great canadate, which is why I would hope you consider. If you have trouble with the directions as well, I understand.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 04:59, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the page, if you want to accept and run anyway I can undelete it. --W.marsh 05:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Even if I failed to set the page correctly, I hope that my mistake doesn't prevent you from running.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 06:16, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I think these pages should help you in creating your page. See the main RfA page here and the instructions here. Good luck! I know you said that you accepted, but the RfA says that every canadate must state their acceptance on their RfA page. The instructions will tell you complete details. I would again recommend using the self nom.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 17:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, based on your user page, I take it that you decided in the end not to run for the RfA. It seems to look easy to set, but it's not, and it's my fault for that mistake. You did accept up until I screwed everything up. administrators don't have more value than any other user, and you are certainly still a value to the community as a good-faith editor. Administrators just help with special maintence, and many users don't want to do it. I think you should still be proud of your accomplishments on Wikipedia, as am I, and everyday as a user is an opportunity to build your accomplishments even higher! Also, this doesn't mean you won't have the equal chance to become an administrator any time in the future that you decide to change your mind. Keep up your outstanding work on Wikipedia!--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 18:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I've been trying to think if I was an admin, what would I be doing differently than I already am? The answer is probably not a lot. I'd probably take on the additional job of cleaning out speedy delete, but most everything else would continue pretty much the same. It probably wouldn't be appropriate for me to take on closing the cfd nominations, since so many of them are started by me that it would be seen as a conflict of interest. There's been a couple of times I've wanted to protect things, but overall nothing much would change. I'm already spending a great deal of my free time here so I don't think it's really feasible to much more than I already am. So no, I don't have a burning desire to be an admin. I figured that if I was nominated I'd accept the nomination, but I'm certainly not about to nominate myself. And while I consider myself a good editor, I'm not really much of a writer ... so the number of pages I've actually written is quite small. I'm not at all sure if I'd pass the RfD ... -- Prove It ^(talk) 19:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello again, ProveIt. BigDT showed me how to nominate someone elso for an RfA correctly on his talk page. Since you said you would still accept if you were nominated by someone else, I re-created your RfA sub page. The last time, before BigDT told me how to do it right in the future, I linked it to the main RfA page before you stating your acceptance on the page, the questions being asked on the page, and you answering the questions. The first step will need to do is to go to this page, and state your acceptance there. It will say on the page where it says canadate, please indicate your nomination here, before it is linked to the main RfA page. Then, we will have to wait for all of the questions to be asked. In the meantime, there are to be no votes, such as someone adding Support or Oppose, or comments on the sub page, but when it is linked to the main RfA page, but not before. After you answer all of the questions, then the page can be linked to the RfA. The instuctions are as I already told you Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/nominate. Your RfA page is Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ProveIt. You also said that you would help with deleting pages, and that's an essential job for the communtiy. Congratulations! You can still decline the nomination by not going to the page to state your acceptance on that page.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 03:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I see three questions you can answer on that page after you accept. I think after they are answered, you can add it to the main RfA page.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 03:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll have to think about how to answer the questions ... -- Prove It ^(talk) 03:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm proud to see your acceptance and the questions answered.Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ProveIt. I think we may be at the step to add your sub page to the main RfA page, but I am not certain, and I think it would be the best to wait and find out if the sub page is supposed to added to the main page. I asked BigDT, and he has been an incredible help to me already with the RfA procedure. I think we should wait for his response.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 08:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You are invited to a WikiProject!

Dear Provelt,

Our "administrators" had reviewed some of the articles that you had cleaned up for us. We have discovered that you have a great experience of cleaning up. This has attracted our attention. Perhaps you can help out our current clean-up advisor, Colonies Chris. What you do is to clean-up after us, that means if there is any grammar mistakes, style errors, you can fix it for us. You had already done millions of work regarding this issue anyways. We sincerely invite you to join our Wikipedia:WikiProject Golden Horseshoe Roads. Please reply to Smcafirst to further discuss your role in the WikiProject as soon as possible.

For further detail what this WikiProject is about, click here.

Please sign up on our base page under the subtitle of Participants, and please remember to add a template to your user page, so every Wikipedian would know you are part of this project.

Please enter this to your user page in order to create this template:

{{Golden Horseshoe Roads}}

And it would show up like this:

.

And if you don't mind, I can do things listed above for you.

Smcafirst | Chit-Chat posted at 02:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

PLEASE REPLY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!

[edit] your RFA

Heya, you've already partially answered question 4, but could you expand upon it and give a response? - Ta bu shi da yu 04:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Account name

Given your answer my question (Q.11), I've supported you in your RfA. Might I suggest that you regiter account User:Provelt (i.e. using the letter 'l' instead of a captial 'i') as a doppelganger account. There's an obvious risk of impersonation. Also if users are going by histories rather than seeing your sig they may assume that its your name and look for you there- once you own the account you can redirect the user and talk pages to your actual pages. Best of luck with the rest of the RfA... WjBscribe 17:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that's an excellent idea ... I didn't know that I could do it myself. -- Prove It ^(talk) 17:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

If no one can register it, you may as well go and change it to redirects anyway. WjBscribe 18:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's impossible to register doppelganger accounts as a username filter prevents this. (I wish I knew when this was implemented). I do suggest you change you name to Prove it (with a space). Hendry1307 20:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories on Columbus Circle

I agree completely that Columbus Circle is a traffic circle. However, all of the items that are in the Category:Columbus Circle do not belong in the Category:Traffic circles. The hotel, schools, buildings and shops are most definitely not traffic circles and do not belong in the traffic circle category. This is the fourth time I have removed categories that were placed here inappropriately, each time explaining why they don't belong. I'm straining to understand your urge to add something, but none of the categories you have added to the Category:Columbus Circle are relevant there. Here's a guideline: If you add Category X to Category:Columbus Circle you are saying that every item in Category:Columbus Circle belongs to Category X. You cannot possibly justify a statement that every article in Category:Columbus Circle is a traffic circle, as your recent edit would imply. Alansohn 03:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Every category should have at least one parent, if it doesn't than it can not be navigated to from the rest of Wikipedia. Orphaned categories show up on the Special:Uncategorizedcategories list, where Category:Columbus Circle is currently #75. And yes, it's true that every article in the Columbus Circle category is not a traffic circle. But it's also a location, and location categories are always like that. Every article in Category:Manhattan is not an Category:Islands of New York City. Nor is every article in Las Vegas a City in Nevada. -- Prove It ^(talk) 15:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Best of luck on your RfA

Hi ProveIt, I wish you best of luck on your RfA. You have worked tirelessly on your RfA to answer all of the questions! You are in great standing, and it's scheduled to end in two days from now (Wednesday).--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 17:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I can say that turning on that edit summary reminder helps quite a lot, it's saved me many times in the past few days. I only hope people will look at my recent edits ... I'd not thought a lot about it before. Thank you again for nominating me... -- Eric, aka Prove It ^(talk) 17:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, the next time I'm logged in, I'll be able to find out the results of your RfA. Again, good luck. That was an excellent RfA. Good job.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 03:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

And congratulations, you're now an admin. Have fun with the new tools. Don't hesitate to ask questions, and re-read the policies before acting. Once you get the hang of it, dig in and help out with the backlogs. Again, congrats - Taxman ^Talk 15:06, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations from me too. Good luck! The Rambling Man 15:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I've got a bit of reading to do... -- Prove It ^(talk) 15:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, congratulations and happy mopping! (aeropagitica) 15:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!!! You are now an administrator. I'm sure you'll help the communtiy well! Cheers to your successful RfA!--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 20:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you ... I'm still learning... -- Prove It ^(talk) 00:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Congrats - It's very well deserved : ) - jc37 23:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

[edit] Question

I see you've removed categories such as Category:FA-Class Africa articles from Category:WikiProject Africa. I was wondering if you could explain the rule behind this. Thanks, — Emiellaiendiay 05:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Category:FA-Class Africa articles is a member of Category:Africa articles by quality, which is a member of Category:WikiProject Africa. It doesn't need to be included in both its parent and its grandparent. -- Prove It ^(talk) 05:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah. That makes sense. Thanks for the reply. I'll make sure to avoid doing that again. — Emiellaiendiay 06:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Category:Computer and video game articles by quality

This project was renamed, and this is now handled by Category:Video game articles by quality. The category is listed to be deleted, but I want to make sure you're all done with it first. What's is the correct way to remove this from assesment? Please respond on my talk page ... -- Prove It ^(talk) 15:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, all you need to is delete Category:Computer and video game articles by quality, Category:Computer and video game articles by importance, Category:Computer and video game articles with comments, all the pages in that category, and all the subpages in Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Computer and video game articles by quality. Since you guys wanted the rename so badly, I guess you've go to do all that cleanup. :) I will reply on your talk page too. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:48, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I was afraid of that. So is there any fast way to delete a bunch of subpages at once? -- Prove It ^(talk) 02:55, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so. You guys wanted the rename, you've got to delete the old names (all 50-80 or so of them). Sorry. :) Let's keep all conversation at Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index, so please reply there if you'd like to comment further. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:58, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Jethro-Tull-Broadsword-Beast.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jethro-Tull-Broadsword-Beast.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yonatan (contribs/talk) 11:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WrestleMania venues

I did not know this category had been deleted before. Why should it be deleted when there are categories for Super Bowl venues, NBA All-Star game venues, etc.? WrestleMania is THE biggest event in wrestling. TJ Spyke 03:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it's not obvious how to tell if a category has been created before, it would be better for everyone if that was better documented. What works best is the What links here tag. You can also search with Special:Logs. In any event, blocking it will prevent someone else from rebuilding it by accident. As far as category goes, I agree with, Dr. S ... there are too many of them, and knowing him those will be coming up soon. The problem is that it doesn't work well when articles get too many categories, so we want to reserve categories for defining characteristics. And most really big arenas get used for hundreds of events it soon becomes unworkable. -- Prove It ^(talk) 03:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

But this isn't an ordinary event. It's watched in over 60 countries by million of people, and has broken attendance records at several of the arenas it has been at (like Safeco Field, SkyDome, and AstroDome). It just seems silly that something like the NBA All-Star game (which is just an exhibtion match really) gets a category, but the biggest event in wrestling doesn't. Hosting WrestleMania is a big deal. TJ Spyke 03:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like creating an article would be the right thing to do. Categories just don't work very well for this kind of information. I think the other sports venue cats will be going away too ... I'm very much an inclusionist for articles, but too many categories just get in the way. -- Prove It ^(talk) 03:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I would be fine with categories like Category: Super Bowl venues being deleted. I am not the kind of editor who says "this article should exist since this other one does", but it wouldn't make sense to delete this category and keep other similar themed ones. TJ Spyke 04:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I think in the long run, they are probably all going away ... this same thing happened with actors by tv shows. I'm for keeping the information, but losing the categories. Anyway, this is obviously something you care about ... make it a list somewhere. I'm ALL FOR keeping the information, I'm sure there are others who would be interested. -- Prove It ^(talk) 04:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Allo 'Allo! cast

Gah! Thanks for catching that. Time for a break I think. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quick Querie

Good evening (GMT time); I was under the impression that IPs couldn't create articles. Yet, your user page states:

"...I created an article more or less on a whim, and signed up as a registered user the next day..."

If you signed up the next day, then you must have been IP the day of "creation" - yet IPs can't create, only edit :)

By the way, congardulations on the promotion! Don't hesitate to call on me at my talk page any time!

Kind regards,
Anthonycfc ^{[T • C]} 01:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you ... yes, it's true, I created my first article, The Secret Language of Birds before I got an account. My very first edit. I think you are right, they don't allow that any more, I don't know when they changed the rules. -- Prove It ^(talk) 02:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Empty then delete list

Can you post instructions on my talk page on how to use this list? I'm not familiar with it. Thanks. Otto4711 03:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About the article La Timba I created

(1) Why did you edit it? I mean, it's pointless. All you did was to remove the Categories of Spain and Catalonia from the article. Are you happy now?

/clap

/bow

/clap

Why? You wanna gain extra edits or something?

Anyway I've added them again, because there is no reason to remove them, and there are lots of reasons to add them (basically because La Timba is in Catalonia, and therefore in Spain.

(2) And why do you want my Category:Tiny_and_interesting_places to be removed? It doesn't annoy you. What about creating good articles instead of annoying the people?

Onofre Bouvila 22:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

La Timba<--Category:Vallès Occidental<--Category:Comarques of Catalonia<--Category:Geography of Catalonia<--Category:Catalonia <--Category:Autonomous communities of Spain<--Category:Spain.

Usually we want to avoid putting an article in both it's parent and grandparent category. In this case, you have put your article in categories for parent, plus 4th and 6th generation ancestors. We could also mention that it's in Europe, or on Earth ... but we don't.

The problem with your category is that both tiny and interesting are subjective. Different people have different ideas about whats interesting. Would Carmel, California go in this category? Or is it too big? Interesting enough? -- Prove It ^(talk) 23:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

(1) About the parent and grandparent category:

You already said it: usually. And usually does not mean always. So in this case, we think it's appropiate to add both the categories of Catalonia and Spain to the article. Anyway if you think it well, EVERY CATEGORY in the wikipedia can be suitable to a higher category. Then, according to what you are saying, we should only put the ultimate (the most specific) category. But that doesn't clarify anything. We could put an article talking about a museum of San Pepito del Morlaco to the category Interesting things to see in San Pepito del Morlaco. And Interesting things to see in San Pepito del Morlaco would go into the category San Pepito del Morlaco, which would go into the category Municipalities in Barcelona, which would go into Barcelona province [...] which would go into Things in the Earth. But it's pretty obvious that just adding the category Interesting things to see in San Pepito del Morlaco doesn't clarify anything, right? Then what do we do? We add: Interesting things to see in San Pepito del Morlaco, Province of Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain, for example, and so it clarifies A LOT what are we talking about in the article. It is right that all these categories are linked, but what's the problem? Everything is linked in the vital circle. So then what do we do? It's like trying to draw a continuous function: you must draw the infinite dots that form the function. So as that is sometimes quite unviable, what we do is to draw a discrete signal, taking just some important dots of the route.

(2) About the category of Tiny and interesting places:

I think it's quite obvious: the whole town of Carmel would not go to the category of Tiny and interesting places, but that small piece of land under that Monterrey cypress that appears in the picture WOULD go in the category of Tiny and interesting places.

I mean, it's not subjective. You have understood what's the category about. Pay attention to the fact that you have told me the example of Carmel, California. But why did you choose that example? Because you saw the picture of the tree. That's it! That's a tiny and interesting place. You got the idea. It's not subjective. The tiny and interesting places that fit in this category are innate in the mind of every human being.

In conclusion: If instead of being so fastidious you just let the things be, the world will be better.

Oh, and please, before performing any change in the article of La Timba, discuss it in its talk page. I don't understand why do I have to come here to ask you for explanations. This kind of issues should be discussed in the neutral territory that offers the talk page of the article we are talking about. I mean, you deliberately perform drastical changes in the articles and then you wait the people to come here to ask you for explainations. You should be more modest.

Thanks

Onofre Bouvila 18:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] help/favor

I'm not great with CFD. Can you make a large CFD to upmerge all Category:European converts to Hinduism, Category:North American converts to Islam, etc to respective Category:Converts to Hinduism, Category:Converts to Islam, etc. World religion's should not be divided by region.Bakaman 18:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I made a CFD here Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_4#Category:European_converts_to_Hinduism.Bakaman 18:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fulbright Scholars

To the best of my knowledge, the term Fulbright Scholar is the title of someone who receives a Fulbright Scholarship, so I have objected to the request for a speedy rename. Caerwine Caer’s whines 03:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Relisting CFDs

Hello. I was looking at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 March 4#Category:WikiProject Cryptography templates, and I'm not entirely convinced by the rationale. Is it ok to relist that on the current log page and update the the category page with the new location? Thanks! Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm ... I'm trying to think where the new category would go ... I'm not nearly so good at finding template cats. It's usually the case that the project templates are used in the article space, so this isn't anything new. I'd be inclined to let them stay where they are. As far as relisting goes, I've seen it done in the past, especially when nobody has registered any kind of opinion. So, yes, I think it's the right thing. I'm not convinced of his reasoning either, btw. -- Prove It ^(talk) 00:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I've relisted it. Many thanks! Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Japan trains

I noticed you deleted a few of the empty categories that resulted from the discussion here: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 March 2#Tokyosubway. I've cleaned out one more cat already, but, I'm not sure if I need to tell you (or anyone) that the Cat:Stations of Keio Inokashira Line is empty; or, if there is an automated procedure that will find it eventually. Since it was not technically listed on the CFD page (just implicitly, by virtue of its parent cat), the CFD won't have the tell-tale red links that show what is already taken care of, and whatnot. Thanks for your help. Neier 07:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, it's done ... thank for letting me know. -- Prove It ^(talk) 13:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hmm...

I hope this wasn't as condescending as it appeared. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 03:31, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Uh ... I was trying to be helpful. I think it was a couple of months before I figured out you could use it to find old discussions. --- Prove It ^(talk) 03:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

You were. Apparently that didn't come off as dry wit (as intended, I've seen your work enough to assume the best) but rather just plain dry. Sorry about the mixup. :) youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 03:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of White House Executive Residence Operations category on White House article

Hi. I did not see an edit summary regarding your removal of the category White House Executive Residence Operations from the White House article. I am curious to know your thinking. I feel that category needs expansion, as it it reflects a part of the hierarchical structure of how the White House is administered, and many articles can/should be placed within it. Including it on the main White House article page can serve as a portal to that category which is about the non-political household side of the building. Best, Jim CApitol3 14:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Sure ... what happened is that Category:White House Executive Residence Operations was in the uncategorized categories list, and I gave it a parent of Category:White House. It makes sense to make the staff cat a subcat of the White House, but the White House itself shouldn't be a member of it's own staff cat. It's already in lots of categories, and adding it to it's own staff is a bit like having the tail wagging the dog, so to speak. -- Prove It ^(talk) 15:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prinsendam picture

Nice picture of the MS Prinsendam. Love that ship. Thanks for helping improve the article. Splamo 18:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I like it too ... been on two different trips, first one was in the Baltic, and the last one was Black Sea. There's a few other pictures of you might like ... see also Flying bridge and Turkish Riviera. -- Prove It ^(talk) 01:43, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Those are good. I have few pics from my 3 week transatlantic that I'm going to try to work in for a few articles. Splamo 21:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hilltowns in Italy, Medieval and Renaissance hill towns in Italy

I don't know if it was intentional but Medieval and Renaissance hill towns in Italy was deleted without anything being posted at that section at least not when I looked at it three days ago. I then restored it unaware that there had been an actual discussion about its merger into Hill Towns in Italy. Apparently, there was a discussion but those of us most interested in the subject didn't know it was taking place. I know little about computers but I do know something about medieval hill towns in Italy, having visited all within 3 hours drive of our apartment in Rome and having a hill town home in the family. It is OK with me not to have that category and assume the deletion was in good faith with good and sufficient reason in your mind. However, the history, art and architecture of these towns is studied by many scholars. I assume the reason you wanted to delete it was because it shared two photographs with the section Hilltowns of Italy and the towns were the same. That's because just about every hill town in Italy has ancient roots. I just ask that you now leave Hilltowns in Italy as is. Although there are many hill towns in Tuscany and Umbria that are prospering, most hill towns in Italy are struggling to survive, even those that have been listed with I Borghi piu belli d'Italia. These are architectural gems that constitute an important part of Italy's history or as Italians say "patrimony".Thanks in advance. MGerety 18:16, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I can explain what happened ... the original discussion started on March 6th, and the category was deleted by me on March 13th. Then it got recreated and deleted again yesterday as a recreation of deleted material. My goal is to avoid having duplicate categories, and it seems to me that Category:Hilltowns in Italy is good the way it is. Have you considered writing an article about Italian hilltowns? It sounds to me like you are an expert on the subject... -- Prove It ^(talk) 02:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Actors who have portrayed Jesus

Thanx, I couldn't find the precedent CfD discussion - didn't go back far enough apparently... it's all been just the text "per actor by performance" without the link. — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 14:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Category:Natives of West Dunbartonshire

Your recent edit to Category:Natives of West Dunbartonshire (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 16:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Streets in Vancouver

I see you're busy with a lot of category work, and perhaps that explains this CfD. If there's a legitimate concern with this category, please spell it out on the nomination page so people, myself included, know what to respond to. The outcome of the March 9 was to rename "Category:Vancouver streets" to "Category:Streets and squares in Vancouver," which was carried out, apparently with no problems. How you think this precludes a subcategory "Streets in Vancouver" is honestly a mystery to me.

I'd also like to point out that your "Rename per discussion of July 16" comment was quite misleading on the last CfD, as the July discussion -- and decision -- was about changing "___of Foo" to "___in Foo" to conform to the naming convention. Your vote came immediately after an "alternative proposal" was put forth, to which I concurred, which was to instead change "Vancouver streets" to "Streets in Vancouver." That's what you supported with that comment, yet now it appears you were supporting a change to "Streets and squares in Vancouver." Whatever your intention, it made an otherwise "rough consensus" rather jagged.

If there is no definite policy, guideline, consensus decision, or convention, that you can point to on which to base this nomination, I respectfully ask that you withdraw the nomination. Otherwise, I'll watch for a clarification that I can respond to. Thanks.Bobanny 19:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The point of categorization is to help people quickly find what they are looking for, and that is how I often browse Wikipedia ... just by walking the links so to speak. And in this, consistency is helpful. I don't have a real strong preference between Foo streets and Streets in Foo, I just want them to be consistent. I supported Streets and squares in Vancouver just because we have Streets and squares by city. If we had Streets by city I would have gone the other way. As far as making subcats for it; at the moment there are a total of 16 streets and 7 squares. If there were hundreds of streets and dozens of squares, making subcats would be the right thing. But for a grand total of 23 articles, its just not worth it, and the subcats just get in the way. -- Prove It ^(talk) 20:44, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CfDs

Please follow directions on the {{cfd}} template after substing it. You are supposed to subst {{cfd2}} to the nomination page. This creates necessary links. This was intended to be a friendly reminder. Have a nice day. -- Cat ^chi? 18:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I've changed my program to add those links ... I should have thought of that sooner ... -- Prove It ^(talk) 22:43, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Job queue

Many thanks for the detective work on the Cheshire stuff. Now I know where to find that useful statistic. It seems to be in progress now, so I guess we must have worked our way up to the front of the job queue. Thanks again for checking this out! Angus McLellan (Talk) 08:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Christchurch, Virginia article

A tag has been placed on Christchurch, Virginia, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --LaraLove 04:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)