User:Betacommand/disscusion/Welsh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< User:Betacommand | disscusion
You have new messages (last change).

this is the origianl debate from Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 July 1

Contents

[edit] People by language

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete all --William Allen Simpson 11:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Category:People by language
Category:English speakers
Category:French speakers
Category:Spanish speakers
Category:German speakers
Category:Italian speakers
Category:Portuguese speakers
Category:Dutch speakers
Category:Catalan speakers
Category:Danish speakers
Category:latin speakers
Category:Welsh-speaking people

All categories are ridiculous and don't connect between like articles. All categories have existed for at least a month and have barely any people on them, if any. Cesc Fabregas is the only spanish, english and french speaker in the world apparently. Yonatanh 01:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete all Not helpful in the slightest. Chicheley 02:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete all Category:English speakers is potentially larger than category:Living people and even less useful. Sumahoy 02:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete all, not a smart way to categorize. Also delete Category:Dutch speakers, Category:Portuguese speakers, and Category:German speakers. Merge the subcategories into the Category:Foo language cats. --Musicpvm 03:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Could they be speedy deleted seeing how they've been empty for 4 days after they've been created which I see in the criteria for speedy deletion. Yonatanh 03:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Wait! Please don't delete yet! These categories came about after discussion at the talk page of Wikipedia:Categorization (now archived here). The idea was to create a hierarchy of people categorized by language for all professions that relate to language. Thus there would be Category:Poets by language, Category:Actors by language, Category:Film directors by language, etc... It looks like no work happened on these categories after the discussion ended. But I think this is a very good idea, and makes MORE sense for these profession categories than having subcategories by nationality. Rather than deleting these, they should be fully populated. -- Samuel Wantman 06:49, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment This user has amended his vote to delete below. Chicheley 10:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Even if this is the idea, can you have a category as a sub-category of two categories so list of Hebrew-language poets would be under list of Hebrew speakers and under list of poets? Either way, I don't think the list of x speakers is needed as people can just go to the poets list in the first place, takes as many clicks. Yonatanh 16:36, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep for now. I'd like to see it fully populated, per the discussion. If it doesn't work out, then I would support this CfD. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 14:19, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I can't see this working, and I don't see the point. Olborne 17:13, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Very strong delete all If this is taken up it will add category clutter to exactly the articles where it is worst already. For the overwhelming majority of people language is not a defining characteristic in an encyclopedic sense. When people want to jump from say New Zealand poets to Australian film directors using the search box will be at least as quick. Osomec 17:38, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • delete all - unnecessary category clutter.--Smerus 21:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete all. These have far more potential to do harm than good. Calsicol 00:01, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep all. There are two ways: populating the categories or removing the categories. I think removing is easier for most of the people voting here, but I'm convinced these categories are useful. And, on top of that, there was a previous discussion as Samuel Wantman said. Mxcatania 17:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete all Category clutter. Golfcam 03:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
    • I fail to see how it is clutter to categorize writers, actors, film directors, etc... by the language they work in. For many occupations, language is much more useful and relevant than knowing nationality. -- Samuel Wantman 04:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete all There is no way to stop such categories being added to the hundreds of thousands of articles about people who are not in a field in which language is important, where they would be mere clutter. Merchbow 08:25, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Welsh-speaking people. Most people speak the language of the country where they were born. It's probably fair to say that 100% of English people speak English. But for Wales the proportion of people who speak the language is much smaller, which I think is why the category was created. Deb 11:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
    • We can hardly have categories for all the hundreds of minority languages but not for majority languages, and having them for majority languages, and English in particular, would be a nightmare. Speaking a particular language is important to the subject of a biographical article, but it is not a defining reason why they are worthy of an encyclopedia article. Nathcer 23:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
      • Isn't it? Wouldn't you say that someone having been, for example, the first known author in the Welsh language, would be a defining reason? Deb 11:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
        • These categories aren't restricted to such examples, so your argument is rather like saying of Category:People over six feet tall, "Don't you think that being eight feet six inches tall would be a defining reason?". Nathcer 18:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete all. Dahn 22:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete all per my comments above. Nathcer 23:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete all This can't have been thought through properly. What is to be gained from adding such a category to over a thousand articles about English footballers? Landolitan 10:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete all. Every single person article would have to go in at least one of these. Not even close to worth it.--Mike Selinker 22:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. It seems strange to me to include all of these categories as a collective for deletion. There may be good reasons for keeping one category while none exist for keeping another. These categories should be voted on separately IMHO, they represent different languages and the languages all have a different political/social status. For example Welsh, as a minority language (and one threatened with being lost up until recently) has few really famous speakers, and the fact that a famous person speaks the language may be of some note. There is nothing norteworthy about a Danish person speaking Danish for example. Alun 11:29, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
    • If we delete the lot we don't need to get into the issue of deciding which speaker-language combinations are important and which aren't. Nathcer 18:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
      • I don't get the logic of that. What is or isn't important? Some might argue that much (or even the vast majority on Wikipedia) isn't important. Isn't that why we talk of people being noteworthy rather than important? Alun 21:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
        • Quite. Unfortunately it's clear that many people are blanket voting on this issue because they are unfamiliar with the minority language issue. Deb 21:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
          • Please don't assume that people who disagree with you are ingorant. I am familiar with the issue and it has been addressed by other users who have voted delete. Chicheley 10:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Keep Welsh & Catalan speaking category - Regardless of the fact that I'm a fluent Welsh speaker, I think it is important to raise the profile of any minority language, including making clear whether a famous person speaks it. No, having a category on English speaking people clearly is not viable, in most cases it is taken as a given that the celeb speaks English, within reason of course. However knowledge of a minority language is an interesting point, and can do much to raise a language's profile.GarethRhys 22:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep Welsh & Catalan speaking category, as per GarethRhys. Alun 22:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete all including the Welsh and Catalan categories. In India every language is a minority language so Alun's logic we would keep all Indian languages but only a few European ones. Given a choice between all or none, none wins hand down. Twittenham 10:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
    • But of course you would have to show that a notable person speaks the various Indian languages, would you not? Alun 11:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


this is from User talk:Betacommand & User talk:Deb

[edit] Welsh-speaking people and Welsh language poets

Hi. Your bot deleted both these categories. The former has only been under discussion for four days and is controversial. The latter was never even nominated for deletion. So I've restored them both. Deb 16:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

The Catagorys were deleted per WP:CFD/W and the category's were deleted please see this per WP:CFD ruling Betacommand 04:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you saying that "Category:Welsh-language poets" was nominated for deletion? Please refer me to that nomination. Deb 11:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

i never emptied or deleted Category:Welsh-language poets i just removed a category that was on the page diff all i removed was the category Category:Welsh-speaking people link. i never atempted to remove the poets. i think i see where the misunderstanding came from because of the end of the link was | Poets]] you might have thought i was empting the poet cat but i wasn't Betacommand 16:15, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


Okay, my mistake. Sorry. I've referred the other matter to the admins' noticeboard now, so that someone else can give a view on what should be done. Deb 16:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

this is from Wikipedia talk:Welsh Wikipedians' notice board

[edit] Categories for deletion:Welsh-speaking people

Sorry, I should have put this comment here in the first place.

  • I'd like to add to this that I'm getting into a spot of trouble for defending the category for a language I don't even speak properly (though I admit I created the category). Some of the comments made by voters are verging on the racist, and the category was deleted by a bot even though it had been added to the list five days after the other categories and most of the votes in favour of "delete all" were cast before it was even added. I've therefore restored it and I expect to be complained about by various users. I really hope that people will back me up. I don't care about the category being deleted, only about the minority language question being properly understood and discussed. Deb 16:43, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I didn't vote in the discussion as I'm really in two minds about it. What exactly is the definition of "Welsh-speaking"? A fluent Welsh speaker or someone who has spent a few hours with a "Teach Yourself Welsh" book? I'm surprised no-one has created the sub-categories "CY-1 Welsh-speaking people", "CY-2 Welsh-speaking people", etc.. I find it all rather patronising.
-- Maelor  17:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, what happened was that these categories existed for other languages, so I added one for Welsh. I also found there was already a category for "Adult learners of Welsh" -- don't know where that came from. But if you look at the arguments people are putting forward for deleting the language categories, they don't apply to Welsh. It has just been shoved into the deletion proposal at the last minute. I don't know what you mean by patronising -- maybe we don't agree on the purpose of categories (which didn't exist when I started editing here). This category's only existed for a few weeks, and has still to find its feet. Deb 17:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I certainly don't understand the uses of categories on Wikipedia. When I started, I assumed that perhaps there was, or would be, a way to look for "all people in these two categories" and so on, and that therefore it was important to categorise very completely. Alas, no. You can't do that, and so I'm not quite sure what they are for, except for browsing. So I don't feel terribly qualified on discussing categories. Also, I lost the page! It's really difficult to find, so here's a quick link: WP:CFD on People by language .
I do think it should be mentioned in articles when people speak Welsh, because it seems obvious to me that many people never even realise that people really do. (See the whole fuss about Welsh on Big Brother. I suppose you might argue that the reaction on the CFD page is another example.) As to categories, sorry, Deb, but I have no strong feelings either way. I feel slightly disillusioned about the category system and unsure what it's for. If the category exists, I'll use it, but the "how fluent do you have to be" question is a fair one, and for it to be complete there is also a huge number of historical (or not :)) figures to go through. Argh.
Telsa (talk) 07:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I'd agree with that last comment. But of course you can look to see what the articles are within the category. You just look at the category, and it lists them all. We used to just have "List of" (in fact, there still is a List of Welsh-speaking people) but it was much harder to keep that up-to-date. Now you just have to add the category when you add a new article. Deb 11:48, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


this is from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

[edit] Independent advice requested

I need the help of other administrators to resolve a problem that has arisen in relation to a category nominated for deletion: "Category:Welsh-speaking people". This is a category that I created on 7 April. It was reasonably well-populated, I thought, though certainly not complete. However, the argument does not really concern whether or not the category should be deleted, but the failure to follow correct procedure with the result that a full discussion has been prevented.

On 6 July, I discovered that User:Chicheley had nominated the category for deletion. He had added it (along with three other languages, two of which were minority languages) to a list of similar categories which had been nominated on 1 July. The other nominated articles were subcategories of the category, "Wikipedians by language", but those added on 6 July had not been subcategories of that category when it was created. I pointed out that the votes cast before 1 July could not be treated as applying to the four that had been added later. On 10 July, however, User:William Allen Simpson removed the discussion, treating the categories that were added on 6 July in the same way as those that had been nominated on 1 July. This prevented any further votes from being cast. He declared that the result of the vote was "Delete all", and a bot owned by User:Betacommand then deleted all these categories and depopulated them. I reverted the bot's changes, pointing out that discussion had not been properly completed for some of the categories, and I restored the category and re-populated it. Neither William Allen Simpson nor Betacommand will accept that there is a problem, and the Betacommand bot has once again depopulated the category.

The problem now is that the discussion cannot be properly continued for this category and the other minority language categories, as the discussion has been "closed". Could someone please suggest an appropriate resolution? My inclination is to suggest that the category be protected pending proper completion of the discussion, and that Chicheley be asked to re-nominate it so that the case can be argued outside the context of the deleted parent category. I will abide by the outcome of any subsequent vote, as long as it is fairly administered. Deb 16:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review? Thanks/wangi 16:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I think DRV will be the best course, as it will sort of force the deleting side to present with you and isolate this one particular category. I'm no fan of mass AfD, CfD, TfD, etc. debates, because it can be a way to hide the jewels with the junk. At the very least, I think an editor should be able to ask for an independent assessment of a particular category, so long as it isn't a subcategory of one being considered for deletion. Geogre 17:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Since you have not been able to work it out with the other editors, I also think that Deletion Review is the place to go. I would only go there as a last resort because it is by far the most mean spirited, uncivil place on Wikipedia, in my opinion. -- Kjkolb 17:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


This comes from Wikipedia:Deletion review/Content review

  • Category:Welsh-speaking people this category wasn't deleted per WP:CFD policy it was added to a group of other catagorys near the end of the debate. I propose to recreate and repopulate and then there can be a dicision per WP:CFD policy. Betacommand 20:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/e/t/User%7EBetacommand_disscusion_Welsh_ef22.html"