Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Weapons by name
The following discussion comes from Wikipedia:Categories for deletion. The decision was to delete the category. This is an archive of the discussion only; please do not edit this page.
Decision: Keep.
- I don't know who decided this. The decision was to delete. -Aranel ("SexyHannah:P:P") 23:56, 5 January 2005
"By name" categories are inherently redundant, since categories already sort their member articles alphabetically. In the near future Wikipedia will have the ability to aggregate all members of subcategories in a listing, so just putting articles into various subcategories of Category:Weapons should be sufficient. Bryan 07:25, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- An exception is Category:ships by name which is a category focusing on particularly famous names, used by multiple navies and in fiction such as Nautilus, Enterprise, Valiant, Reliant, etc. the corresponding categories do not alphabetise by name, as these are scattered in subcategories. Pedant 22:49, 2005 Jan 10 (UTC)
- Agreed - Category:Weapons is sufficient. Brianjd
- DISAGREE do you folks even bother to LOOK at the category before cfd'ing? Category:Weapons is a category by TYPE. This sub-cat serves a very useful purpose towards removing clutter of the main cat. Alkivar 07:12, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- KEEP and remove weapons-not-listed-by-name to Category:Weapons This category should be limited to notable named weapons Pedant 23:36, 2005 Jan 10 (UTC)
- These categories are nothing more than a way to make a run around subcategories by creating a dumping ground that has no internal organization. It also adds unnecessary clutter to articles; categories should function as classifications of articles. This does not classify. Delete this and all others of its ilk. Postdlf 19:44, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- COMMENT most weapons are not listed by name in this category, they're just dumped there. Most weapons don't have names in this cat, only designations, and some don't even have that. There is a difference between Name and Designation. For instance, the Dora is a railway gun, it's calibre is 80cm, and it's designation is K (E). If this category is kept, it needs a rename to Category:List of weapons, because Weapons by name is a wholly inappropriate name for the current contents. 132.205.45.110 23:52, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Any given weapon is going to have a type, a country, an era, and possibly a conflict. It is logical to have those categories. Specific weapons may also have a name,a nickname, a color, and a size. I do not think it is useful to categorize a weapon as to whether or not it has a name (or a color). -Willmcw 23:40, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I count four votes to delete, one keep, and one anonymous comment (in favor of deletion, or at least renaming, which requires deletion). Five to one (or, for that matter, four to one), is a consensus for deletion. This category should be deleted. All categories are inherently "by name" since all articles are "by name", and it is articles that are listed in categories. -Aranel ("Sarah") 23:56, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I think I was the one who labelled this "keep", though it may have been a tad premature. Or perhaps I did not comprehend the subtle logic by which I have now come to understand the destruction of this category is necessary. At first, I was thinking I was supposed to dump the contents in to Category:Weapons, but now I see we just want to disband this category, and let the other subcategories of Weapons classify these. I'll make sure that all of the articles here are listed in one of them before removing them from this category...that should be easy enough to automate. -- Beland 04:25, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)