The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Delete. I think this category should be named something like Category:People with Northern Ireland ancestry if kept. How defining is in for someone if their parents are from Northern Ireland, or their grandparents or there great grandparents? While a rename is possible I really question if this category is defining. On top of that, we have, I think, 7 categories for 16 people. Clearly not a great way to categorize these people. I'm not convinced that an up merge to Category:People from Northern Ireland to keep these people in that category tree is justified. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Probably should be better defined if allowed to continue. What is the membership criteria. Perhaps "non-Northern Irish" with three grandparents born in Northern Ireland. I suspect that this category was not intended to cover people in Ireland or the United Kingdom. More likely this is overcategorisation, or overly-Northern Ireland-centric for a global encyclopaedia. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, I think using "Northern Irish" as an adjectival phrase is likely to cause a lot of upset even when applied only indirectly to people, but if you do want to open that can of worms then I'll notify the Irish wikiprojects and let those interested make their own comments. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 04:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was intended as a promise. If the idea of reopening a delicate compromise was on the table, then interested parties would need to know, and there are strong opinions on both sides. "Ulster descent" is problematic because Ulster != Northern Ireland. But why change at all? In this sort of area, a phrase which avoids being the subject to allegations of partisanship is a valuable thing. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 04:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (or rename very slightly) -- there is a lot of political sensitivity here: you are rushing into a very sensitive area: "Fools rush in where angels fear to tread". Ulster Scots is an American/Canadian ethnicity, not in British use. Accusing a Catholic resident of Northern Ireland (probably Republican) of being an Ulsterman would probably be inflamatory, since it has a Unionist context. I would suggest we use "Northern Ireland" as an adjective or "Northern Irish" as a grammatically better adjective. I suspect that the degree of intermarriage between Ulstermen of English and Scottish ancestry is too great for that split to be useful. "Adams" (Sinn Fein leader) appears to have a Welsh surname, while some of the Unionist leaders have Irish surnames. This suggests to me a good deal of past intermarriage between Protestant (settler) and Irish (native) communities. Peterkingiron (talk) 01:27, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep But, I'd rather merge to Category:People of Irish descent. England, Wales, and Scotland are well-defined, historic entities. "Northern Ireland" in this context didn't exist until 1921. What is clear to me, though, is that putting "Northern Irish" into categories is a can of worms I'd rather not have opened. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 03:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
GO, are you from down under? In Ireland, when something is dug of the ground it ascends, on account of some geospatial anomaly having placed the ground beneath our feet rather than over our heads ... --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 02:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Canadian, living in New Zealand. So yes, since I'm at your antipode my meaning evidently was the opposite of what was intended. No, what I meant was that it sounds like they are descended from the place called "Northern Ireland", as if the ground is their mother, as you might say a potato came from the earth. People are biologically descendant from other people, not places. Good Ol’factory(talk)07:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'm relisting here because there is a consensus against keeping this category in its current form, but no consensus as to what to do about it. Hopefully further discussion will settle on a solution. postdlf (talk) 20:37, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm willing to live with the choice of the closing admin. Clearly a rename is needed so any of the proposals is probably better then what we have. If the rename is determined later to be wrong and a consensus develops for a different name, we can change it. But for now closers choice. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose renaming, because no proposal has yet been made for an alternative name which avoids using the highly-contentious adjective "Northern Irish". The current name is ugly, but at least it is neutral, and I have yet to see any alternative which retains that neutrality. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 01:30, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Current title suggest these competitions are exclusively competed for by Spanish teams only and that they are open to all Spanish teams. This is not true and is misleadiing. Djln--Djln (talk) 18:49, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed to this one, per convention. Like the brunette above, I agree with changing over the system, but they need to all be done, or none at all. If no one objects, I'll run up a group nomination this weekend? Bradjamesbrown (talk) 01:39, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reply. The fact that a competition is Spanish does not mean that all its entrants are Spanish .. just as Gort is an Irish town, but not everyone who lives there is Irish. However, I agree that it's better to avoid adjectives for countries in categories such as this, to avoid any ambiguity ... just that there should be consistency in the parent category. So either rename them all, or rename none. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 00:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment we are not talking about Irish towns we are talking about football competitions, can you please stick to point. I am in favour of renaming all such categories, but I really can't be bothered nominating all of them individdually Djln--Djln (talk) 15:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reply. I'm sorry that you don't understand the point about the way that adjectives are generally problematic in category names. Anyway, the consensus is that either all the sub-cats of Category:Football (soccer) competitions by country are changed, or none of them is ... but that for consistency, this one won't be changed alone. So unless somebody bothers nominating all of them, they won't be changed. --11:02, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Delete. An unnecessary eponymous category which consists of the related article about the architect Vilhelm Dahlerup, and 1 subcategory, his buildings. The subcategory can be upmerged into the parent categories. Cjc13 (talk) 14:54, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Relisted to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 January 30. Jafeluv (talk) 18:12, 30 January 2010 (UTC)