User talk:William Allen Simpson/Categories

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Pederasty and education

I am not sure that your removal of the "Education" category is defensible, in light of the central role that pederasty played in the educational systems of the Greeks and the Japanese (and its mentions in the context of Islamic pedagogy). Can you comment? Haiduc 15:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Category:Education has very descriptive definition and summary article. The topic of pederasty does not fit. Moreover, to be a subcategory of Education, all pederasty articles would discuss pedagogical pederasty, and that does not appear to be the case. Perhaps you could label specific articles dealing primarily in both topics with both categories.

--William Allen Simpson 22:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, good idea. Pederasty in Ancient Greece and Shudo should be a good fit. Haiduc 00:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Tropical cyclone disambigs

Although I have no preference on the category itself, it does not seem to me that Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 March 16#Category:Tropical cyclone disambiguation expressed a consensus for deletion. I think it should be re-opened for further discussion. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, since I was closing, I thought it wasn't supposed to count my vote, and that left it at 2:1 in favor of delete. But hey, I'd be delighted to re-open! And almost all of them were {{hurricane disambig}} so it will be easy to put back.

--William Allen Simpson 17:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for noting that. I hate to broach this topic, but since you're not an admin, why are you closing deletion discussions that result in "delete" decisions? See Wikipedia:Deletion process#Non-Administrators closing discussions for guidelines on non-admins closing discussions. I'd support you for adminship based on your contributions, though I can see from this page that you might meet some resistance. BD2412 T 02:33, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing that out (I don't remember reading that before)! I'd been using copy and paste examples to close (and typically only close to help out when the page is more than 7 days old and nobody else did it), and didn't know there were templates.

• I'd asked Splash over at TfD (when I saw other non-admins closing), and the response was AfD was more restrictive than TfD. But I'll keep this in mind for CfD, too.
• As to adminship, I'm mostly active on weekends rather than weekdays, and am more involved in content than vandalism patrolling and maintenance. It would be helpful to have more tools.
• But as you can see, I'm not afraid of controversy.... Of course, 281,000 Google entries would tell you the same. Since I was an early NSFnet participant (actually helped organize its funding), I've been around for a long time.
• AFAICT, adminship is a bit of a social popularity contest, notwithstanding that there are some very dedicated ones, too. if you nominated, I'd accept, and see where the chips fall.

--William Allen Simpson 03:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

The templates are helpful, and certainly it helps to have non-admins catching up the backlog. Maybe the rule should be changed (see also [{WP:IAR]]). Adminship votes do have a "popularity" element, but popularity on Wikipedia is largely premised on participation and good interactions, which are good admin indicators. I certainly think you'd do well with the tools! BD2412 T 03:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Categories with abbreviations

re your statement on Scouting category renaming...if Wiki policy is non-negotialble on abbreviatoins in category names, why are you not voting to deabbreviate the ARCA racers and NASCAR drivers categories? Rlevse 01:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Pardon, I must have missed them. I'm generally too busy to do this every day.

--William Allen Simpson 01:30, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

It amazes me the these Scouting articles get so much attention (it failed before and this time has a huge amount of responses), yet it's OK for ARCA and NASCAR not to be spelled out. If I were paranoid, I'd say there's a conspiracy against Scouting articles-;) Rlevse 01:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)