User talk:Tim!/Archive 19

Template:Year in country category

I notice that you do a lot of work on year categories. I have created a new template, Template:Year in country category, which can be used for the endless series of year in country categories. I have used it as an example on Category:1165 in England. For me, it seems to be much easier to use and not really harder to interpret for passing editors, but I am of course biased towards my own creation ;-)

If you believe this template to be useful, it may be an option to use it in further creations of similar categories. If it can be improved, feel free! And if you see fundamental problems with it, please raise them at my talk page, or the talk page of the template, or (if necessary) at WP:TfD.

If you know of any other editors or projects that may be interested in this template, spread the word! Fram (talk) 12:34, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Categories '<period> disestablishments in the Netherlands'

Category:2010s disestablishments in the Netherlands, and several similar categories regarding disestablishments in the Netherlands, which you created, have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: as far as I could see you have created most (if not all) of these categories - my apologies if I missed others who have also created such categories, would you mind alerting both me and the other creators? Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think Fram (talk · contribs) also created some of these. Tim! (talk) 12:05, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Categories '<period> disestablishments in New Zealand'

Category:2010s disestablishments in New Zealand, and several similar categories regarding disestablishments in New Zealand, which you created, have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated three trees of categories more, I invite you to comment (will tag the categories shortly). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you indicate how many pages you, realistically, expect to be having in the fine grained categories at the end? I would like to see it worked out for one of these countries in stead of speculation that there will be more. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot obviously give any sort of concrete number but 6 more members of Category:2007 disestablishments in the Netherlands in under 15 minutes. Tim! (talk) 12:09, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And for Vatican City, Cayman Islands? If Netherlands in 2007 is getting up to 25 (which I could imagine), then Vatican City and Cayman Islands, which are so much smaller countries and have so many less people, are likely going to be 1-2 notable establishments (for the very, very few years that will exist). And if 2007 in NL is getting up to 25, then 1948 in NL is realistically unlikely to have more than 5 too. Please, don't do this bottom-up, but do this top down - make a millennium category, populate it - if it starts to go out of hand, break it up in centuries, and so on (and if you expect that a certain country gets to that, start with a list of subjects, make a reasonable guess what is a reasonable grain-size (say if you have a list of 1000 establishments in a millennium, then it is save to go to decades, if it is 50 century-level is probably the finest that is reasonable, if splitting of the millennium is actually needed for that), and start there). Realistically, I doubt if you can find for the first 12 years of this millennium more than 10 notable establishments in the Vatican City, which would then realistically maybe go to 200 in the complete millennium (i.e., over 88 years) - that does not warrant a split per year, 200 pages are fine in groups of roughly 20 in the 10 century categories. Many of these categories are simply not suitable for such a fine-grain level of categorisation. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 13:05, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DAD

This Project is inactive, so I have proposed a conversion into task force. Please improve consensus if you can by joining discussion. --George Ho (talk) 04:51, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category removal

Hey Tim, just wondering what prompted this edit. Masdar, both as a location and as an organisation, was established in 2006, so it seems appropriate. Cheers! — Huntster (t @ c) 08:10, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The year the city is built is more appropriate and won't be until 2025 according to the article. Tim! (talk) 20:42, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mercian Regional Football League

Hi

I have had to modify the page for the Mercian Regional Football League as it has been misleading some of our member clubs who are searching for information and taking wikipedia as gospel, which as we all know is never the most reliable of sources.

I don't suppose there is any chance of letting me know who you are and what you have to do with football in Shropshire???

Many thanks

Jamie James Mercian Regional Football League Referee Secretary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjames3133 (talk • contribs) 10:59, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I only made a minor edit to the article so have no real knowledge of the topic at hand, sorry. Tim! (talk) 20:02, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TV categorisation dispute

Tim! - as you may have seen, Mais oui! has requested my assistance (or perhaps support) re edits at Category:Scottish television people and the associated talk page. It seems from his comments that this is a long-running dispute and that there may be a personal, as well as functional, element to it. I intend to post a comment soon at Category talk:Scottish television people as a neutral space in which to address the dispute and hopefully find some kind approach that will lead to resolution. It may be that you consider my membership of WP:Scotland will lend some bias to my intervention. Whilst I hope this will not be an issue, by all means invite a third party or parties to assist you. Regards, Ben Mac Dui 16:33, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 2012 Study of authors of health-related Wikipedia pages

Dear Author/Tim!

My name is Nuša Farič and I am a Health Psychology MSc student at the University College London (UCL). I am currently running a quantitative study entitled Who edits health-related Wikipedia pages and why? I am interested in the editorial experience of people who edit health-related Wikipedia pages. I am interested to learn more about the authors of health-related pages on Wikipedia and what motivations they have for doing so. I am currently contacting the authors of randomly selected articles and I noticed that someone at this address recently edited an article on 2007 Bernard Matthews H5N1 outbreak. I would like to ask you a few questions about you and your experience of editing the above mentioned article and or other health-related articles. If you would like more information about the project, please visit my user page (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hydra_Rain) and if interested, please reply via my talk page or e-mail me on nusa.faric.11@ucl.ac.uk. Also, others interested in the study may contact me! If I do not hear back from you I will not contact this account again. Thank you very much in advance. Hydra Rain (talk) 12:42, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

London Chorus

We had to revert London Chorus back to an earlier version to remove some copyvios. In the meantime, you removed Category:English musical groups; the reversion restored it. I don't know enough about the subject matter to make the removal myself, so you might do so if it doesn't belong.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 19:06, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it is the article is in the sub-category Category:Musical groups from London. Tim! (talk) 06:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When working on years by country categories etc

Since you also seem to be spending a lot of time populating and maintenancing (maintaining) these structures I wanted to express an encouragement with regards to some considerations that might save us all some time and misspent work. That is to add the {{Commons category}} where relevant. Commons has chosen to name several of these structures somewhat differently, so considerations must be taken for that. But you will see from the work I have done how that goes, or you'll discover it for yourself easily. Also, when you add links to Commons categories, would you also add a reciprocal link from the Commons category to the English Wikipedia? I have also commenced a minor calibrating of the Commons hierarchy with respect to years in US states so that it corresponds better with our structure (e.g. adding the intermediary level commons:Category:History of California by period), and if you have the capacity to check that this is also in order, or make the required changes, that would be nice. __meco (talk) 10:21, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

are there any bots that can do this type of link, similar to how inter-language wiki bots work? Tim! (talk) 06:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That would have to be a bot with dual access to this Wikipedia and Commons. I have never gotten as far as issuing an actual bot request, so I cannot answer your question. These links cannot be cursorily added as there has to be a check to see that the page actually exists on the other project. Also, in doing this manually, other users who do work on these categories will also get into the habit of harmonizing with Commons, which is all for the good. __meco (talk) 09:50, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GFDL violation by User:Spiritofstgeorge

Please explain. There are articles about 2012 in England, 2012 in Scotland etc for items that apply to those countries, and the article 2012 in the United Kingdom is for matters of UK-wide significance, is it not? Otherwise, these articles will just be massive and needless overlap. Spiritofstgeorge (talk) 21:41, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You copied the information from the UK article to the England and Scotland article without attribution. As England and Scotland are parts of the UK, there will be some overlap, as there would be from the article 2012 in the United Kingdom and 2012. Tim! (talk) 21:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks "without attribution" - noted. I also expect some overlap but only when a story is of UK-wide significance. Spiritofstgeorge (talk) 18:25, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Doctor Who radio stories

Hi, please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 August 22#Category:Doctor Who radio stories. – Fayenatic London 22:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have withdraw it. – Fayenatic London 20:05, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I think a few of the articles need to be updated eg. the Architects of History doesn't even say it has been broadcast. Tim! (talk) 20:44, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Walking to Babylon.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Walking to Babylon.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:50, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Sabalom Glitz.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sabalom Glitz.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Web of Caves.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Web of Caves.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:54, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New gadget

Do you see my request?--Vivaelcelta {discusión · contributions} 18:07, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page move for We are History

Hi Tim! I don't suppose with your admin hat on you would be able to move We are History to We Are History over the redirect, would you please? Thanks, Bob talk 18:45, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Moved. Tim! (talk) 19:12, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Super, thanks Tim Bob talk 20:53, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Choral conductors

Hi. Can you split Category:Choral conductors by nationality?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:28, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Can you try to populate Category:Bach musicians and start Category:Bach singers,Category:Bach conductors, Category:Bach choirs and Category:Bach music ensembles. Musicians should probably be split by instrument like Bach organists etc and perhaps by nationality, e.g German Bach conductors. Basically any article which mentions them being heavy reciters of Johann Sebastian Bach.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:41, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking of something along the lines of Category:The Bach Choir people for people associated with The Bach Choir. Tim! (talk) 20:10, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I'm told there are a lot of biographes relevant to the above found in Mass in B minor discography, St Matthew Passion discography and St John Passion discography.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up on those links I'll have a look at them. Tim! (talk) 08:13, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

	categories
	Thank you for structuring, maintaining and populating categories, such as Category:Bach musicians, - you are an awesome Wikipedian! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greatly appreciated, thank you. Tim! (talk) 08:11, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 264th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:04, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2012 in the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lancaster (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:05, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for Silverwater Women's Correctional Centre

An article that you have been involved in editing, Silverwater Women's Correctional Centre , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Rangasyd (talk) 06:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Science fiction-related magazines

Hello. Just thought I'd note the difference between Category:Science fiction-related magazines (magazines *about* SF, rather than containing SF fiction) and Category:Science fiction magazines (magazines containing SF fiction) with regard to the magazines SciFiNow and TV Zone (and more specifically Category:British science fiction magazines). There could possibly be a need for Category:British science fiction-related magazines? You're doing a great job categorizing, but here I think you may have missed the subtle distinction! Cheers, Stephenb (Talk) 07:35, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, a very subtle distinction indeed! Tim! (talk) 20:20, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Portugal

Category:Populated places in Portugal. Can you split cities and towns and villages and order them by district of Portugal. So many villages which are not cities or towns. Also the parishes should also be applied the same cat on top of the parishes category/ The categories are currently a great mess, poor for navigation.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:35, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Blofeld that it's a mess but I thing that what you been doing is not correct.

A municipality (or concelho) it´s not a place (villages, cities or towns) but a division of district and in most cases constituted by parishes (or freguesias). In other words "Country->District->Concelho->Freguesia".

I give you the case of Covilhã, that I think should be on "Category:Populated places in Castelo Branco District" and it´s not. Instead you've altered the Covilhã Municipality that sould be mantained on "Category:Castelo Branco District" like it was before, since it´s "not a place" but a region/zone.

Txus, NelsonCM (talk) 20:56, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Probably there need to be more categories along the lines of Category:Municipalities of Braga District created for each District. Please note that though you say what I have done is incorrect, there are many municipalities in the towns and cities categories which are subcategory of Category:Populated places in Portugal. Tim! (talk) 05:52, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Please note there was a "Renaming to convention established on Wikiproject Portuguese Geography".

In portuguese WP, usualy the city/town hasn't that much information and it is described in the muncicipality/concelho page and in the en:wp since some people didn't "Avoid creating locality pages since they are not legal entities, nor do they usually have enough information to make them more then perpetual stubs.", as recommended by the Wikiproject Portuguese Geography, you are both wright: " there are many municipalities in the towns and cities categories" (I believe because of the renaming that didn't included a recategorization) but not all, like the cases of Covilhã, pointed by NelsonCM or Albergaria-a-Velha, Castelo de Paiva, Espinho, Portugal or Ílhavo (just to name the first I´ve encountered in Aveiro district) that are cities/towns that are not in the Category:Populated places in Aveiro District. Shouldn't they be in this category?

I´ve started the Category:Municipalities of Aveiro District and will try to organize the municipalities but if you talk in towns and cities... well, that's another ball game!

So. I think this is a question to be adressed in the Wikipedia:Categories for discussion, if not resolved before in the Wikiproject Portuguese Geography (if active). Maybe cases like Covilhã and Covilhã Municipality shoud be merged? I don't know.

Best regards FilipeFalcão (talk) 12:25, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When I say that what you, Tim, "have done is incorrect" I mean, to be more explicit, that taking them out from the "Category: XXXXX District" is wrong, when the natural subdivision of "District" in this case is "Municipality". I know they are still there but they are under another layer "Populated places" and yes, a "Category:Municipalities of XXXXX District" would do the trick but that trick wasn't needed before. And while someone is at it, create also the "Category:Municipalities of XXXXX" acording with the NUTS to be included in Category:NUTS 2 statistical regions of Portugal and Category:NUTS 3 Statistical Regions of Portugal. The newest and correct information can be found here pt:Anexo:Lista de concelhos por NUTS.

If you, Tim, want to put Municipalities on "Category:Populated places of XXXXX District" go ahead but that has the problems that I've said related with cities/towns. And one more thing: since all the Municipalities (in wich all the Portuguese land is divided) are "Populated places" does this mean all Portugal is a "Populated place"?

I agree with Filipe and let's put it for discussion, specialy the merges. Maybe even this was already discussed in PT:wp and they may say how they went about. After that change from "Name" to "Name Municipality" you can now find pages about cities/towns that speak about the Concelho and the other way arround. Also most of the who writed that part about "perpetual stubs." was wright but on the other and, the Coat of arms, for instance, it's for the cities/towns and not for the "concelho", right? Txus, NelsonCM (talk) 01:37, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From my perspective the article on Municipalities with no seperate article on the town centre mean "Municipality and town" into one article so technically they should probably have Municipality of xxx district and Populated places in xx district in. Unless of course there are separate articles. Category:Towns in Portugal is still a mess, largely because meany of them contain no content to work out which district they're in.☠ Count de Blofeld 15:04, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you split Category:Populated places in Panama by province?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:29, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tim, seasons greetings. I created Category:Compositions in B-flat minor. I wondered if you could go through some of the lists of symphonies or whatever by key and categorize them by key? Gerda and I think such categories are very useful for finding pieces in a given key.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:31, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that! Stands a good chance of it being kept though. Sometimes people try to delete some of the most useful categories! Can you split Category:Populated places in Stockholm County by Municipality like Category:Populated places in Karlskrona Municipality?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:35, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly nothing for you to apologise for! Tim! (talk) 21:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, can you also add Category:Populated places in Sweden by municipality to the cats you created?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 16:47, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scottish people convicted of child sexual abuse

Category:Scottish people convicted of child sexual abuse, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. No unique names 15:26, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English people convicted of child sexual abuse

Category:English people convicted of child sexual abuse, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. No unique names 15:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Greetings Tim! Can you create building categories for each Province of Spain in Category:Buildings and structures in Spain by province. Best to do by region and categorize in both. E.g Cadiz which I created earlier goes in both the general cat above and Andalusia. If possible churches and museums should have categories by province. If we're short on any later me know and I'll stub a bunch.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 23:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Happy new year to you too. I'll look at that later today . 07:13, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Added the Spanish categories, if you could add them as you create, just add the province name at the end, see some of the examples i've done. Don't worry about them being unpopulated grin grin.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:38, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okiedokies. Tim! (talk) 19:37, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An award for you!

	The Andrew Sachs Award for Fine Spanish categorizing
	Mister Fawlty, I know nothing.. Si. si. I learn from a book. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 22:15, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

:) Tim! (talk) 07:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if France has building categories for each department, I think most of them do have. Can you check by creating Category:Buildings and structures in France by department and linking each one in it like Category:Buildings and structures in Hautes-Pyrénées. If you then compare the list of departments of France and the category you should be able to route out any missing categories, if there are indeed any. Anyway, tomorrow will ensure no empty categories for the Spanish buildings.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 22:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you split Category:Opera directors by nationality?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:51, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll make a start, do you think Category:Opera composers should be also be done? (there will be some overlap so may be easier to do at the same time). Tim! (talk) 19:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, but I'd ask at the opera project before you do that as they tend to have some rules. Opera directors should be fine though.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 22:26, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have a somewhat ambitious request. I want a category system which links together all categories on settlements and organized by country. Something like Category:City categories and Category:City categories of Afghanistan etc by country fed into it. Basically I want to keep tabs on how much development has gone into cities by country.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you thinking of something along the lines of Category:Wikipedia categories named after districts of England ? Tim! (talk) 19:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

or even Category:Wikipedia categories named after cities which has a few countries but needs expanding. Tim! (talk) 07:09, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that appears to be it. But those are maintenance categories, I think we should have city categories ordered within the encyclopedia.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:24, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One of the more bizarre CFD "decisions" that they should be considered "maintenance categories". Tim! (talk) 21:38, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Perennial candidates‎ CfD

I have two problems with your CfD:

You didn't bother to notify me as creator
The CfD you cite has only a single participant. Not an overwhelming consensus

p b p 15:41, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Privatisation

Category:Privatisation, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your tireless work on the categories by year. Beagel (talk) 05:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Tim! (talk) 07:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:States and territories disestablished in 979

I have closed the merger discussion at Cfd January 16 as "no consensus". You may wish to consider a followup nomination.

(This note is being sent to all editors who participated in that discussion). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:01, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ADF "established"

Hi! I have a bit of a problem with the ADF article being categorised "1976 establishments in Australia" and "Military units and formations established in 1976". I would have less problem with a date of 1901, but even that has its problems. Obviously, "somebody" co-ordinated the three arms (well, initially two arms) of the military in the period 1901-1975 - but they didn't have the name "ADF". The ADF is still a somewhat nebulous concept - no-one is employed by the ADF; even the current Chief of the ADF is still employed by the Australian Army. I don't know what the best solution might be. (But removal of those two categories you added would remove the problem!) Your thoughts? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed them and added a note to the talk page. Thanks for the heads up. Tim! (talk) 16:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tim!. You have new messages at WP:CFD/S.
Message added 10:52, 17 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:52, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

City halls

hi, I have a request. Can you create Category:City halls and find all of the categories which exist like Category:City halls in Spain etc and feed it into them, also can you do the same for town halls and have town halls feeding out of the city halls category? Several American states have categories. Can you create an organized system and perhaps also find uncategorized town hall articles?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:18, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a few are based in Category:Seats of local government. I'll look around see if more need to be created. Tim! (talk) 12:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of city and town halls might help but I think its far from comprehensive!!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:22, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I should think each country needs its own list! Tim! (talk) 12:23, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, can you merge all of the city hall and town hall categories into Category:City and town hall categories then? That seems to be the consensus which I agree with to avoid duplicaiton of city and town. Category:City and town halls in Spain would be better, and I think it would be sensible to redirect Category:City halls in Spain and Category:Town halls in Spain for each country as a lot of editors will create one or the other.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Carmen Media for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carmen Media is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carmen Media until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 00:06, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

English county categories

Please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 March 3#Category:Berkshire society. – Fayenatic London 09:34, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1707 in Great Britain

Hi there. I removed items that occurred prior to May 1st for the simple reason that the state had not been created then. This article should begin at May 1st 1707, the point at which the state came into being. Perhaps the solution is to have a hatnote stating that 'for information about events prior to May 1st see the appropriate articles'. Regards Fishiehelper2 (talk) 10:23, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Categories at WikiProject Wisconsin

Hi-I had been putting the WP-Wisconsin template in the talk pages of the categories you been creating involving Wiisconsin. It is easier to keep track of the categories in case they are needed when the template is needed. Thanks-RFD (talk) 15:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of UK references by Mais oui!

Hi, thought you might be interested in Mais oui!’s latest escapade. On the John Logie Baird page there was a dispute over whether to give his nationality as ‘British’ or ‘Scottish’. A compromise was reached to use ‘Scottish-British’. Predictably, Mais oui! refused to accept this and continually edit warred it to ‘Scottish’. He finally recruited an admin, Lectonar, to revert and then lock the page (Pending changes protection) on the grounds of violations of the biographies of living persons policy (the salient point here is that Baird died in 1946). In the meantime, every editor who disagrees with him he accused of sockpuppetry. Flagators (talk) 00:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of bus routes in England

Category:Lists of bus routes in England, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:45, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia categories named after festivals

Category:Wikipedia categories named after festivals, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:08, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]