Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All current discussions

< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion
(Redirected from Wikipedia:CFDALL)
Shortcuts
Deletion discussions
Artikel
Templates and modules
Dateien
Kategorien
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

Speedy renaming and merging

edit

If the category and desired change do not match one of the criteria mentioned in C2, do not list it here. Instead, list it in the main CFD section.

If you are in any doubt as to whether it qualifies, do not list it here.

Use the following format on a new line at the beginning of the list: 

* [[:Category:old name]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~

If the current name should be redirected rather than deleted, use: 

* REDIRECT [[:Category:old name]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~

To note that human action is required, e.g. updating a template that populates the category, use: 

* NO BOTS [[:Category:old name]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~

Remember to tag the category page with: {{subst:cfr-speedy|New name}}

A request may be completed if it is more than 48 hours old; that is, if the time stamp shown is earlier than 17:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 2,140 open requests (refresh).

Current requests

edit

Please add new requests at the top of the list, preferably with a link to the parent category (in case of C2C) or relevant article (in case of C2D).

Oppose You can not erase the "Category:Islam and slavery" without erazing the eqvivalent: "Category:Christianity and slavery" and "Category:Judaism and slavery". Wikipedia must be consistent: erase all of these categories, or none of them.
To rename this category is in a sense an erasure, since a different name would have a different meaning: it will no longer correspond to its sister-categories of other religions. Rename all, or none.
These categories are useful for articles about the religion's rules and attituedes toward the institution of slavery. For example, the article Concubinage in Islam is suitable to have in the category "Category:Islam and slavery".
I do not object creating a sub category such as for example "Category:History of slavery in the Muslim world", but the "Category:Islam and slavery" have a separate purpose. You can create "Category:History of slavery in the Muslim world" without deleting or renaming "Category:Islam and slavery".
In short: If you erase/rename "Category:Islam and slavery", you need to do the same with its sister-categories "Category:Christianity and slavery" and "Category:Judaism and slavery" as well. They all have - or should have - the same use.--Aciram (talk) 16:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I guess you responded after I stopped checking regularly for a response, so thank you for the note on my talk page. DGG is deceased, so it's obviously not an option to seek his input. I'm opposed to using obscure corners of project space to bypass discussion on items which should be discussed. Some editors in those project spaces appear only interested in pursuing (a purely superficial notion of) consistency, often without regard for whether there was any consistency involved WRT consensus enroute to that point. Hence, my earlier mention of venue-shopping. I have no strong opinion on capitalization variants other than they're often time wasters that stand in the way of moving the project forward. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 04:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't answer the question @RadioKAOS, we need to know whether you're opposing just the national monuments nominations, or also the national forest nominations. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:10, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed requests

edit

On hold pending other discussion

edit

For the record, these were moved and may need to be moved back:--Ymblanter (talk) 05:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Moved to full discussion

edit

Current discussions

edit
Shortcut

September 6

edit

NEW NOMINATIONS

edit

Category:Tamil-language Indian films

edit
Nominator's rationale: These two categories seem to cover the same scope and "[blank]-language films" seems to be the established practice in Category:Indian films by language. ~~ BaduFerreira (talk) 16:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chemical compounds by type

edit
Nominator's rationale: The contents of this Category clearly don't fit with the current name: none of them is "by type", as they all use different parameters.

which is what gave me the idea for the proposed rename. Honestly, I'm not entirely sure that's the right name, so if somebody comes up with a better name I'll be more than happy to support. Anomalous+0 (talk) 08:15, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By property? Remsense ‥ 论 15:23, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Drawing artists

edit
Nominator's rationale: We already have a long established category tree for these artists, the new one should be merged into it. Fram (talk) 13:39, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1947 in Islam

edit
Nominator's rationale: delete, isolated container category, the next year is 1979. With only two subcategories there isn't much need to fill up the intermediate decades. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of Major League Baseball retired numbers

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to parent categories. Only one article. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Actress filmographies

edit
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with industry standards and international relevance - The9Man Talk 09:32, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prehistoric Asia

edit
Nominator's rationale: merge, it is unclear how the two categories are supposed to be different from each other. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:13, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Populated places in ancient Arabia

edit
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. The single article is about a place that would currently be in Yemen. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History of the Jews in the Middle East

edit
Nominator's rationale: merge or reverse merge, and keep a redirect, Middle East and West Asia are very overlapping concept. I will tag both categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Technical universities and colleges in Germany

edit
Nominator's rationale: This category is a mess, based on the mistranslation "Technical University".

In Germany, there are "Technische Universitäten" (which usually call themselves "Institute/University of Technology" in English) and "Technische Hochschulen", which are Fachhochschulen. They're both completely different types of higher education institutions (both depending on the type of high school degree you need to access them, as well as the right to confer PhDs and Habilitation). You can read more about this in de:Technische Hochschule and de:Technische Universität.

It's been a constant for a while in enwiki that many editors (without really understanding the differences) translate everything as "Technical University" (that's actually what Google Translate suggests in both cases), but it creates a big mess.

This category should be deleted, and it should be replaced by Category: Technische Universitäten in Germany and Category: Technische Hochschulen in Germany, which recognizes that both things included in this wastebasket category (based on poor translation) are completely different things. SFBB (talk) 11:46, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS1: The same issues applies to other countries with differentiation between Fachhochschulen/Hogescholen and Universities like Austria, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Belgium. I understand there is an aim for consistency given the existence of Category:Technical universities and colleges by country but it simply does not work, because within those systems you're talking about completely different things:
PS2: Perhaps all Technische Universitäten should be merely classified under Category:Universities in Germany as there is legally no difference between them (as correctly acknowledged in List of universities in Germany). Technische Universitäten are, in their own right, full universities (not technical universities) with a technical tradition, name, and perhaps emphasis? But, based on their right as full universities, they offer all subjects that are usually found in full universities (and make them fundamentally different from what is understood as a technical university or college). For example, just listing the Technische Universitäten for TU9, but this applies to most TUs:
Law (e.g. TU Dresden, TU Darmstadt, Leibniz University Hannover),
Medicine (e.g. TU München, TU Dresden, RWTH Aachen),
Humanities (e.g.TU Berlin, TU Braunschweig, RWTH Aachen, Leibniz University Hannover, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, University of Stuttgart),
History (TU Berlin, TU Darmstadt, TU Dresden),
Education (TU Berlin, TU Braunschweig, RWTH Aachen), Leibniz University Hannover),
Social Sciences(TU München, TU Darmstadt, RWTH Aachen, TU Braunschweig, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, University of Stuttgart))

SFBB (talk) 12:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For discussion on non-deletion paths forward (though, of course, it may be decided that deletion is the best path forward!)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

basically potayto, potahto. Whether we delete it and create two (or one) new categories/y, or we rename and repurpose the existent one, does not make any difference. So, if you prefer the second option, that's perfectly fine (and it would even have the advantage that the info does not get lost, without me having the require help to see a previous state of a deleted page) SFBB (talk) 00:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
maybe, more importantly: should I also start a request for other countries with a similar situation (e.g. Austria, Belgium, NL, Switzerland)? SFBB (talk) 00:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus seems to favor renaming; discussion on rename target would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a reason to rename this category away from consistency with Category:Technical universities and colleges by country. It sounds like Technische Hochschulen are technical universities – in other words, that one isn't a poor translation, so there's no issue with the title. The English term "technical university" is unambiguous here, so it doesn't need to be disambiguated. The only problem with the category is that some articles have been erroneously placed into it. The solution is to remove them from the category, and put a note on its description page to help future editors avoid making the same error. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


September 5

edit

Category:History of college tennis in the United States

edit
Nominator's rationale: Löschen entire tree. Only one category in each and all for one article. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:13, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, not opposed to recreation if there were enough content to support it. Mason (talk) 23:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Women in war in the Middle East

edit
Nominator's rationale: merge or reverse merge, and keep a redirect, the Middle East and West Asia are very overlapping. I have tagged both categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:45, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/reverse merge. I agree that they need to be combined. I don't have an opinion about the direction. Mason (talk) 23:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Category:Women in war in West Asia to maintain consistency with other subcategories under Category:Women in war in Asia. Sakakami (talk) 05:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17th-century lighthouses

edit
Nominator's rationale: merge, these are single-article isolated categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ancient Jewish Greek history

edit
Nominator's rationale: Current category name is clunky and also vague. The topic here is Hellenistic Jewish history in the classical period, while the "ancient period" is vaguer – also encompassing earlier periods. Proposed name says more with fewer words. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Hellenistic Judaism already exists. What would be the distinction between that and Category:Hellenistic Jewish history? I feel like a merge might make more sense here. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:05, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Power Book IV: Force characters

edit
Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article, which is already present in Category:Power (TV series) characters. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ethically disputed practices

edit
Nominator's rationale: This, as well as all subcategories of this category beginning with "ethically disputed", should be deleted per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. The fact is that almost any practice can have a dispute as to its ethics - for example, if I have a sandwich, I can be committing the ethical sins of eating meat, GMO food, and food made by poorly-paid workers, as well as paying companies making unhealthy processed food. If I use toilet paper in the bathroom I could be doing the ethically debated practice of putting pollution in the water supply and wasting water. There's no end to it and it's wholly subjective. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:11, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Category:Ethically disputed business practices can be kept and renamed to Category:Unfair business practices instead, per its main article, which would be more accurate and eliminate the subjectivity of the current name. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Counts in the Holy Roman Empire

edit
Nominator's rationale: Extremely overlapping categories. If the solution is to keep "in" instead of "of" then we should merge and then rename back to preserve the history. See [[1]] for a discussion about the merits of renaming the original versus the creation of a duplicate. Mason (talk) 13:48, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Mclay1's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:17, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Choess's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiProject Shaktism

edit
Nominator's rationale: Defunct task force; category only contains an articles subcat. – Fayenatic London 08:14, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: After this discussion was started, the category was renamed to Category:Shaktism task force and de-tagged by JJMC89 bot III. I will re-tag the category.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Thundermans

edit
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. Need at least half a dozen members for a category or template to be useful, which is not the case here. Created by an overzealous user. Amaury • 08:46, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Amaury WP:SMALLCAT is not longer a policy. Mason (talk) 13:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like such a silly decision to no longer make it so, but at this point, it is what it is since it's already happened. It doesn't seem like it was replaced with anything else or like an equivalent guideline/policy exists, that I can find. So, can anyone just make any category or template under the sun now? Genuine question. Amaury • 17:40, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - WP:OC still has plenty of limits on what categories should be made; the depreciation of WP:SMALLCAT just means that the fact that a category can only have a small number of things in it is no longer an exclusionary rationale in itself. Alphius (talk) 04:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Then I guess WP:NARROWCAT would be the next best one to file this under. Getting rid of SMALLCAT as a guideline/policy was still a poor decision, in my opinion. Amaury • 17:46, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:27, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Personal care companies

edit
Nominator's rationale: There's a very large overlap among companies doing business in cosmetics and personal care, merging them into a single category tree would be much easier to navigate and maintain. If the proposal looks like it has a chance, I'll come back in a day to properly tag the subcategories. Done now. Paul_012 (talk) 08:09, 20 August 2024 (UTC), updated 09:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Comments in general would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same request: Comments in general would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Thraco-Macedonian mythology

edit
Nominator's rationale: This doesn't appear to be any different to its subcategory. I cleaned up the contents and everything ended up in there so it's otherwise empty. I can't find any evidence that the term "Thraco-Macedonian mythology" exists. No need to upmerge. Mclay1 (talk) 14:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Minyan mythology

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge unnecessary category layer. The category name implies that it's for mythology of the Minyan people rather than what it actually is, which is Greek mythology relating to the Minyans. Most of the articles are in the subcategory Category:Minyans. Mclay1 (talk) 12:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer: The target is nominated for renaming to Category:Mythology of Boeotia below. Mclay1 (talk) 12:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greek mythology by region

edit
Nominator's rationale: These categories are for mythology relating to the places rather than mythology necessarily originating in those places, as the current titles imply. There are many Greek myths about places didn't originate in those places and many for which it is impossible to know where the myths originated. Some of the subcategories of Category:Greek mythology by region already follow the proposed naming convention. Mclay1 (talk) 12:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The rationale proposes a distinction without a difference. Additionally, renaming these will make them harder to search for, since there are already too many entries for "Mythology" to display in the search window, while most of the articles using demonyms appear right away when someone starts to type them. Consistency is not a strong argument when balanced against convenience. A handful of these names may not be familiar to readers, but readers who are familiar enough with the topics to be searching for them would probably recognize them; and many of the proposed names are equally objectionable.
For instance, "Mythology of Elefsina", rather than "Eleusis", since inexplicably the entire history of ancient Eleusis is covered under the unrecognizable modern name of the town; "Mythology of Corfu", as though "Corfu" were the name of a place one encounters in classical history or mythology; "Mythology of Corinthia", when "Corinthia" is the name of a modern administrative region of Greece that did not exist in antiquity; "Mythology of Arcadia, Peloponnese", as though any other Arcadia would have distinctive mythological topics; "Mythology of Salamis Island", when Salamis was never so called "Salamis Island" in antiquity and will not generally be encountered under that name, and there is no corresponding mythological topic for the other Salamis, in Cyprus. P Aculeius (talk) 12:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Paeonian mythology

edit
Nominator's rationale: All but one of these articles (Amydon) are for mythological Paeonian people in Greek mythology. The current name makes it sound like it's for the local mythology of the Paeonian people. Reparent to somewhere in Category:Mythological people by nationality, and the one article that doesn't fit can be purged. Mclay1 (talk) 11:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

People of Middle Eastern descent

edit
Nominator's rationale: Follow-up of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 27#Category:Middle Eastern diaspora. I have already manually merged and redirected many Middle Eastern descent categories into West Asian descent categories. Only now have I realized that their history may also need to be merged. Below is the list --Sakakami (talk) 09:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Manually merged
  • Comment – I understand the rationale, but I find this proposal and the previous ones that went through with very little discussion quite odd. "Middle Eastern" is a far more common term than "West Asian". Is there a reason we need to go that way instead of the reverse? If there are countries in West Asia that don't fit into the Middle East, is it necessary to group every country into a region for ancestry? Mclay1 (talk) 12:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mclay1 – We have categories for Category:People of Central Asian descent, Category:People of East Asian descent, Category:People of South Asian descent and Category:People of Southeast Asian descent. While both Middle East and West Asia are somewhat imprecise, West Asia aligns better with the existing geographic categorization. Middle East is a political term that has changed frequently depending on political and historical contexts, whereas 'West Asia' is a more consistent geographical term. It excludes most of Egypt and the northwestern part of Turkey, while including the southern part of the Caucasus. Additionally, 'West Asia' is arguably a more neutral term; for example, see the WANA Institute in Jordan. Sakakami (talk) 13:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those other Asian regions are common terms, whereas "West Asia" is basically a term created to fill the gap and replace the Middle East for the reasons you mentioned. While that might make sense for geography, I'm not sure it makes sense for ancestry. I doubt many people would consider themselves to be "West Asian" as opposed to Middle Eastern. It feels like we're inventing our own classification system just for the sake of having neat subcategories rather than reflecting outside usage. Mclay1 (talk) 13:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Karabakh

edit
Nominator's rationale: The region of Karabakh has rather imprecise boundaries. Most people from Karabakh do not fall into this category, as they are already classified under more specific categories. Sakakami (talk) 07:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Student farms

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This category only has one page in it, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason (talk) 00:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Readers

edit
Nominator's rationale: Only one actual page in here. The other is a re-direct. The name is extremely vague. Mason (talk) 00:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History of medical education

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. This category is underpopulated and neither of the pages are really about the history of medical education. Mason (talk) 00:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Environmental organizations by region

edit
Nominator's rationale: This category only contains one page, but the name implies that it should be a container for specific regions. Mason (talk) 00:24, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Electronic waste in Nigeria

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. These categories only has one page in it, which isn't helpful for navigation. The only page in Electronic waste in Ghana is already in Electronic waste in Africa Mason (talk) 00:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Forestry researchers

edit
Nominator's rationale: I think we should merge these two categories; they're highly overlapping. Mason (talk) 00:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


September 4

edit

Category:Members of the House of Commons of Canada by term

edit
Nominator's rationale: Misguided and deeply incomplete scheme of overlapping categories. WikiProject Canada has not established any consensus that instituting a scheme of categorizing Members of Parliament for each individual term that they served in the legislature is desired -- note that these were started by an editor from Bangladesh, not a Canadian, and did not exist at all until three weeks ago.
Each election sees only a modest turnover of membership, so the end of a parliament and the initiation of a new one results in a large percentage of MPs being reelected to another term -- meaning that a large percentage of MPs would have to be readded to each new category, resulting in extreme category bloat as MPs get added to two, three, four, five, six, seven or eight of these in succession.
Furthermore, the creator half-assed the job, creating these only for a few of the most recent parliaments and adding them only to eight MPs total -- but if this scheme is to exist at all, it would need to comprehensively exist for all 44 parliaments all the way back to 1867, and it would need to contain every person who had ever served as an MP at all, not just eight incumbent Conservatives.
Again, the Canadian contingent has never established any consensus that this is desired -- we categorize Members of Parliament by province and/or party, and use lists to handle the "who served in which Parliament" stuff -- and if there were a consensus to start doing this now, it would have to (a) come from Canadians, not Bangladeshis, (b) be named differently than "Canada MPs YYYY-YYYY", and (b) get seen all the way through to actual completion, across 44 parliaments rather than just three, and a few thousand MPs filed in the categories rather than just eight. Bearcat (talk) 23:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Disasters at organized events

edit
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining category Mason (talk) 23:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Looking at the events listed here already, I think there's a workable definition for it already. We can, of course, express this more clearly and specifically should anyone wish. But the obvious 'unexpected loss of life by a tragic happening at an organised mass gathering' should be a start. Is a terrorist action a 'disaster', or do we restrict that to accidents alone? That's the sort of distinction that could usefully be clarified. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, there is already Category:Crowd collapses and crushes while riots in stadiums and aviation show accidents are each very different things. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cultural policy of Germany

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This category is underpopulated. Mason (talk) 22:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Transport companies of East Germany

edit
Nominator's rationale: The only page in here was founded in 1916, which is well before East Germany existed. Mason (talk) 22:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Luthiers from Genoa

edit
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge for now. There's only one person in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 22:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jat states

edit
Nominator's rationale: We avoid extensive WP:CASTE based categories, and the outcome linking caste and princely states at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 4#Caste based princely state categories was that these cats should be delted. This is just an alterered form of Category:Jat princely states for which there was a clear consensus for deletion as seen in the discussion. Gotitbro (talk) 17:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1982 Japanese television episodes

edit
Nominator's rationale: Categories newly created just to hold redirects. These would be fine if there were actual articles about Japanese or German television episodes from these years to file here, but are not needed just to hold redirects to television series. Bearcat (talk) 15:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This has only just been created. Allow a chance for it be populated rather than just delete it straight away. Also what is wrong with a category composed of redirects? --Jameboy (talk) 15:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Allow a chance for it to be populated" with what? The content has to exist first, and then the category to contain said content comes second, not vice versa. And the purpose of categories is to help readers find articles, not redirects — so while redirects can be included where appropriate in categories that also contain articles, categories that exist exclusively to hold redirects without articles are done only as hidden project tracking categories, and not as end-user browsing categories. I mean, if we just exhaustively created a redirect from every episode title that has ever existed to the television series it was an episode of, and categorized them all here, then how would that be helpful to a reader at all? Episode categories in the mainspace tree need to contain at least some actual standalone articles about the episodes themselves to be useful, and are simply not needed just to hold redirects. Bearcat (talk) 15:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a link to a relevant guideline concerning the above? I looked at WP:ACATR and WP:RCAT and couldn't find anything that would prevent a category from containing only redirects. --Jameboy (talk) 18:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The intro of WP:CAT says that "the central goal of the category system is to provide navigational links to pages in Wikipedia within a hierarchy of categories". To, not between. Pages, not articles. It's true that most redirects aren't categorized in user-facing categories but WP:ACATR does allow for this in some specific circumstances and I think this falls under that. --Jameboy (talk) 20:08, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cannabis distribution retailers of Canada

edit
Nominator's rationale: Duplicates the more full Category:Cannabis shops in Canada. RA0808 talkcontribs 15:39, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Singers from Vijayawada, India

edit
Nominator's rationale: Category newly created for just one article. The article, further, is a group, not a person, and a group should not be categorized as a "singer" — but regardless, this isn't necessary for just one article, and while the target has a few other singers in it, with only eight articles (including the one article here having been left there as unncessary duplicate categorization alongside this) it doesn't need to be subdivided.
Additionally, it warrants note that the creator also created a whole mess of other new "X from Vijayawada, India" categories to parent this, despite the fact that all of them duplicated "X from Vijayawada" categories that we already have. I've redirected all of those to the existing categories, but this is the only one that didn't already exist at the "Vijayawada" form. Bearcat (talk) 14:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nomination. Not enough entries in Category:Musicians from Vijayawada to need diffusion. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 15:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American writers about The Holocaust

edit
Nominator's rationale: "Writers about subject" category, newly created for just one person. There's no "Writers about the Holocaust" tree for this to be part of, and while there are obviously a lot of people (from throughout the world, not just the US) who could be added to such a category, it would have to encompass such an incredibly wide variety of different types of writing -- personal Holocaust memoirs, historical analysis, novels, poetry, and unfortunately even denialism -- as to not actually represent a unified group because they weren't all writing about the Holocaust in the same way, which is precisely why such an obvious "you would think it would already exist" category doesn't actually already exist. So the United States doesn't have any special need of this for just one person. Bearcat (talk) 14:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think Category:Writers by subject area precludes different types of writing, does it? I mean, for example, the first three names in Category:Environmental writers are a photographer, a philosopher, and a documentarian. I'm sure those are all quite different, and yet I don't see why any of them would be removed. I don't quite see why Category:Writers about the Holocaust shouldn't exist, at least based on this argument. I do agree that this specific by nationality cat shouldn't exist without the parent, but I think the better solution would be creating the parent, and maybe merging this into that for the time being if there aren't enough Americans to justify the subcat. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 15:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it doesn't already exist, then there has to be a reason why it doesn't already exist, because it's such an obvious "you would think it would already exist" case that its failure to already exist has to have been actively thought out rather than simply overlooked by accident. Bearcat (talk) 15:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After opening with the blatantly false assumption/premise that the category was "created for just one person", Bearcat then proceeds to lay out the very reason these categories are sorely needed. Precisely because they
"encompass such an incredibly wide variety of different types of writing -- personal Holocaust memoirs, historical analysis, novels, poetry" [as well as essays, short stories, plays and screenplays].
User:QuietHere makes an excellent point regarding the diverse contents of Category:Environmental writers -- which is not in the least exceptional in that respect. There are countless other Categories with a similarly diverse array of contents.
Nothing illustrates the compelling need for these categories more clearly than the cases of two people who are surely among the best known of all Holocaust writers:
Elie Wiesel, who got crammed into Category:Holocaust historiography;
and the magisterial Primo Levi, who was left out entirely.
In closing - I've made a good start on populating the new categories, and there is no shortage of articles to be added. And Category:Holocaust diarists now has a good home in Category:Writers about The Holocaust, alongside Category:Historians of the Holocaust. Anomalous+0 (talk) 13:35, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:First ladies and gentlemen of Las Vegas

edit
Nominator's rationale: Both subjects in this category are notable for themselves having served as mayor. Being married to a mayor is not generally notable in itself. Fails WP:COPDEF. AusLondonder (talk) 12:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:First ladies of Denver

edit
Nominator's rationale: Not a notable office. All members of the category were notable outside of being married to the mayor. Fails WP:COPDEF. AusLondonder (talk) 12:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English chiropractors

edit
Nominator's rationale: Redundant layer. Only two entries, and the parent cat only contains this. Upmerge both articles to Category:British chiropractors. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 10:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chiropractors by nationality

edit
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary additional layer. Category:Chiropractors is already near empty with just three articles and this one subcat, and this subcat only has 11 subcats, so it's not doing much diffusion. Upmerge all subcats to Chiropractors. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 10:30, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Magritte Award winners

edit
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:COPSEP, we should not have a mix of biographical and non-biographical articles in the same category so this needs to be split somehow. Open to other naming schemes however. --woodensuperman 08:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Split per nom. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 10:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Writings by topic

edit
Nominator's rationale: This is simple and straightforward: Anything that is referred to as "Writings" is by definition "Literature". End of discussion.
I should add that I've already made Category:Literature by topic a parent cat, just in case it turns out there is a useful distinction between the two terms that has somehow eluded me.
I would love to be enlightened as to why this Category was even created - especially considering that there is no Category:Writings to serve as its parent. However, that is exceedingly unlikely, given that its creator was our good friend User:Stefanomione, who has never to my knowledge responded in any way when informed of a CFD for one of his innumerable Categories. I will nonetheless notify him of this discussion. You never know. :) Anomalous+0 (talk) 08:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anti-capitalist political parties

edit
Nominator's rationale: Anti-capitalism is not a distinct ideology (like say Socialism, Communism, Liberalism, etc.), and as such not a good categorization for political parties. Many political parties may have some anti-capitalist traits, but it is almost never the defining characteristic of the ideology of a party. Here we get a WP:OR hodgepodge, where disparate parties are grouped together. --Soman (talk) 21:34, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All we'd need to do is swap the word "Foo" for something else and we've got the exact same rationale that being anti-something cannot be defining, even if it has a main article like Anti-capitalism (which, by the way, says in its opening sentence that Anti-capitalism is a political ideology and movement..., undermining nom's primary argument that it's "not a distinct ideology").
I think nom needs to either (A) justify singling out only the Category:Anti-capitalist political parties tree for deletion, or (B) broaden the nomination with other anti-something parties, or (C) withdraw the nomination if it seems to be a bit special pleading-ish. If nom cannot do A or B, I'll have to oppose, but I'll give them the opportunity to explain their rationale. NLeeuw (talk) 13:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it should be a mix of option A and B: incidentally there may be parties that are first and foremost against something rather than for something, but I expect these will be exceptions. I would be ok discussing them one by one. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:32, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Content analysis I indirectly agree with @Marcocapelle that there is much overlap with child Category:Socialist parties (rather than grandchild Category:Communist parties), but some anti-capitalist parties are not socialist. Practically speaking, I think this category is good for all non-socialist parties that are also anti-capitalist, and that all anti-capitalist parties which are also socialist can be WP:DIFFUSED to child Category:Socialist parties (as probably very few socialist parties will openly identify as "capitalist" rather than "anti-capitalist"; I've not seen any examples). Based on the article contents we can group the following:
PS: The result is 7 non-socialist anti-capitalist party articles and 1 child cat. I think that's enough for a Keep. However, I might add that all these 8 non-socialist anti-capitalist parties are examples of Category:Right-wing anti-capitalism. Therefore, I would be open to rearrange the situation such that we consider all socialist parties anti-capitalist by definition (and thus diffuse them), we Purge the 4 parties whose status is unsourced, and that we Rename & Re-parent this category for the 7 + 1 non-socialist anti-capitalist parties to Category:Right-wing anti-capitalist parties, adding a catdesc with something like For left-wing anti-capitalist parties, see Category:Socialist parties. The only possible exception is the Liechtenstein Free Trade Association, which is difficult to put on the political spectrum, but probably leaned socialist ("against private property"), and could be put in parent Category:Anti-capitalist organizations instead if we can't make up our minds. I'm curious what other editors think. NLeeuw (talk) 07:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on NL's objections?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:02, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - I have to say, I am genuinely astonished that nowhere in this discussion has there been any mention of Anarchist political parties, who are most assuredly Anti-capitalist. Evidently that is because Category:Anarchist political parties was left out of Category:Anti-capitalist political parties. (I've gone ahead and remedied that.) Never mind that the head Category:Anarchism is included as a subcat of the head Category:Anti-capitalism. The point being that there is a diverse array of political parties that are fairly described as "Anti-capitalist". Call it a "hodgepodge" if you like, but that is simply a reflection of the real world. Anomalous+0 (talk) 08:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a fair point, although there is also a thing called anarcho-capitalism. But generally speaking, I did say that my opposition to the proposal could be broader than just categories with "anti-something" in the name. "republican" (lowercase "r") is often synonymous with "anti-monarchist", etc. "anarchist" means "anti-power", and as such is also an anti-something catname, and in that sense I agree with you.
    There is still no reason given to single out anti-capitalist for deletion, either in isolation or just as a first in a series of anti-something nominations, when this nomination cannot stand on its own feet. NLeeuw (talk) 06:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Paralympic medalists in athletics (track and field)

edit
Nominator's rationale: Also, Category:Paralympic gold medalists in athletics (track and field)‎, respectively. Like Category:Olympic medalists in athletics (track and field), this category grows every four years, so being specific is useful, as para athletics is one of the events with the highest number of medals per Game. (CC) Tbhotch™ 05:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commment @Tbhotch: I think the rationale doesn't align with your aim so it's worth reflecting on that. Unlike Olympic medalist biographies, most Paralympic medalist biographies are for people who have won multiple Paralympic medals. Often they've won 2 different kinds and frequently all 3 kinds. I plucked the first name in my head Jonnie Peacock and, behold, he has won Paralympic gold, silver and bronze. The end result of a by-medal split will probably be three categories that are maybe 80% of the same articles, which isn't too useful for navigation. I think a by nationality split would be far better for this tree (e.g. Category:Paralympic medalists in athletics (track and field) for Great Britain). SFB 21:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pentose phosphate pathway

edit
Nominator's rationale: Can someone take a look at these category (as well as others by DinosaursLoveExistence (talk · contribs)? I don't know enough chemistry to really evaluate whether this is actually defining or just more examples of non-defining/overcategorization by the same creator. Mason (talk) 01:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chemistry instruments

edit
Nominator's rationale: Non defining/underpopulated category. Mason (talk) 01:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chemistry volumetric instruments

edit
Nominator's rationale: There is no need to create an intersection between the field and type of scientific instrument Mason (talk) 01:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Employment contracts

edit
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping category made by the same underpopulating category creator Mason (talk) 01:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Airport bus services in the United Kingdom

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There's no need to diffuse by country Mason (talk) 01:43, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Construction law by country

edit
Nominator's rationale: There is no need to diffuse this topic by country, with two underpopulated categories. Mason (talk) 01:43, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Psychiatric procedures

edit
Nominator's rationale: This underpopulated category only has one page in it, and Vagus nerve stimulation is not typically described as a "Psychiatric procedure" Mason (talk) 01:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Radio serials

edit
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping category. Mason (talk) 01:39, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Construction law in France

edit
Nominator's rationale: This underpopulated category was mass created by an editor who has not engaged with repeated attempts to discuss their approach to rapid-fire underpoplated intersecting categories. Mason (talk) 01:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gaza envelope in the Israel–Hamas war

edit
Nominator's rationale: This is a redundant category layer. Upmerge for now. Mason (talk) 01:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


September 3

edit

Category:User tlh-N

edit
Nominator's rationale: This category says "These users are able to contribute with a native-born (including colloquialisms and idioms) level of Klingon." How can someone be a native-born speaker of a made-up language of a non-existent place? It can only be used ironically and if it is a joke, the category should indicate that. I think that Template:User tlh-N should also be tagged for deletion but since the content is written in Klingon, and Google Translate can't handle that, I'm not sure what it says. Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cooperative video games by platform

edit
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining trivial intersection between genre and platform. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:34, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not all games added to every category - because of course I do not know all games. But it hundreds of games, especially for Windows. Vitaly Zdanevich (talk) 04:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
> Non-defining trivial intersection between genre and platform
I disagree - "genre" and platform are not trivial. Vitaly Zdanevich (talk) 04:48, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:16, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am seeing consensus that these categories should not be kept; but no consensus on whether to merge or delete. Therefore, discussion on merging vs. deleting would be helpful :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:16th-century American people

edit
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 result of the discussion was: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename consistent with Category:People of the Thirteen Colonies. People in completely different areas (e.g. in the southwest) are completely unrelated. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as formulated: the proposed title is anachronistic; none of the thirteen colonies was founded in the sixteenth century. The only English colonists in North America belonged to the Roanoke colony, which failed and disappeared within a few years. Although that colony was located in present-day North Carolina, the patent for Carolina was issued in 1629, and no permanent English settlement was made until 1653. Virginia was chartered in 1606, with the first settlers arriving at Jamestown in 1607. The first of the thirteen colonies was thus founded in the seventeenth century. By that time, twenty years had elapsed since the last contact with the Roanoke colony, and of the few colonists who returned to England in 1587, none ever settled in the thirteen colonies.
I note that all of the non-native persons in this category should be in one or both of the two subcategories, "16th-century American women" and "People of the Roanoke Colony". Joachim Gans was part of the Roanoke colony, though he returned to England before it failed; Bachiler, Gosnold, and Wingfield were alive in the sixteenth century, but did not come to America until the seventeenth century, and should be removed. Presumably the Indians mentioned in connection with Roanoke and perhaps elsewhere in the area that became the thirteen colonies could be added to this category as "American people", since some of them have articles. However, they were not residents of the thirteen colonies. P Aculeius (talk) 01:04, 5 September 2024 (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.

Category:YouTube podcasters

edit
Nominator's rationale: Podcasts are published across a variety of platforms. I am not aware of any podcasts which are published exclusively on YouTube. As such, this is a non-defining characteristic for the podcaster. User:Namiba 17:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I checked a handful of these and most didn't discuss YouTube as a platform for the podcasts in question at all, let alone as the primary or exclusive platform. I'm unconvinced that categorising people who make podcasts by the platforms that those podcasts are available on is useful in general; this category specifically certainly doesn't seem to be. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 13:28, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prejudice and discrimination in fiction

edit
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:XY, this is an unhelpful multi-target category redirect. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:08, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: INVOLVED relisting to tag Category:Prejudice in fiction.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Court Treasurers

edit
Nominator's rationale: This category name is vague, and currently has one template it is (I moved the other template to a more specific category). I think we should merge it. If not merged, it should be renamed and populated. Mason (talk) 02:32, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can it be populated?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 08:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcelus is welcome to try. Mason (talk) 13:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will do that in a free time, but I think nominator should make an effort. Marcelus (talk) 14:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I already told you I tried. There's no need to repeatedly make passive aggressive comments. Mason (talk) 01:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same question: Can it be populated? I see consensus that something needs to change about this category, so if it is not populated and there is no further participation I would close this as merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1990s religious comedy films

edit
Nominator's rationale: Newly created category for 1 article. Category:Religious comedy films not subcategorized by time. Gjs238 (talk) 14:07, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we create more, is that acceptable? But it's difficult via mobile and I don't have desktop access at the moment. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:56, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Three pages and one subcategory as of relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:24, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still need more participation to achieve consensus (n.b. nom !voted twice).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Monarchs of South Africa

edit
Nominator's rationale: rename, few of these monarchs were monarch of the entirety of South Africa so "in" is a better preposition. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:01, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:22, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Redirects from transliterations

edit
Nominator's rationale: The template is {{R from alternative transliteration}}, which implies that the target is also transliterated. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

People of Arab descent

edit
Nominator's rationale: People of Arab descent are those whose ancestors belong to the Arab ethnic group. This term should not be used as a catch-all category for people from Arab-majority countries, as other ethnic groups also reside in these regions (e.g., Berbers in the Maghreb, Copts in Egypt, Maronites in Lebanon, Druze and Kurds in Syria and Iraq, etc.). Additionally, I propose merging country categories, as dividing them by continent does not make sense given the small number of categories. --Sakakami (talk) 14:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Greek Muses

edit
Nominator's rationale: "Greek Muses" could easily be misunderstood to be "muse (person) from Greece". This is especially confusing since the category for muse (person) is simply Category:Muses.★Trekker (talk) 09:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename, making it less ambiguous. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: while there are more Muses in Greek mythology than the canonical nine, there are no non-Greek Muses in mythology; and all non-mythological uses of "Muse/muse" are understood to be metaphorical references to the Greek Muses. So the current name is unlikely to be misunderstood as suggested by the nominator, and the proposed name implies the existence of non-Greek Muses, who do not exist. I don't think there's a problem with the current name, but an alternative that would resolve the latter concern would be Category:Muses (Greek mythology). That would be less ambiguous than the proposed name, IMO. P Aculeius (talk) 07:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, not everyone is as familiar with classical mythology like you and I are, I could easily see someone mistakenly thinking that the category is for artistic muses of Greek nationality.★Trekker (talk) 16:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't Category:Muses (Greek mythology) avoid that ambiguity? P Aculeius (talk) 01:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Women's baseball people

edit
Nominator's rationale: Löschen with no objection to recreate if there is more to add. Other than a defunct league, there are no other women's baseball leagues so this won't be populated any time soon. Note: these all are already in appropriate subcats so no need to merge. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Just player is "Women", not all of people who involved in "Women's baseball" is "Women", that's why we need Category:Women's baseball people, Category:Women's baseball coaches. Category:Women's association football didn't add Category:Women in association football. HanTsî (talk) 08:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Philip K. Wrigley is not woman. HanTsî (talk) 08:49, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HanTsî (talk) 08:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's... not the point of this Cfd. Completely unrelated, in fact. Note: this is the creator of these categories and I think they are confusing an unrelated disagreement about categorization - which was resolved after they finally explained why they were doing so - with why I nominated these categories. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Women's baseball is nowhere near women's association football, unfortunately. Hence why I said "no objection to recreate" if there is more to add in the future. At the moment, there's nothing to add here and the rest of the categories in Category:Women's baseball will have to make do. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles with outdated impact factors

edit
Nominator's rationale: These tracking sub-categories of Category:Articles with outdated impact factors are meant to be temporarily (according to the documentation) and pages in these categories should be updated to the most recent impact factor. Since these are empty, that has been done. Gonnym (talk) 08:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scottish humanitarians

edit
Nominator's rationale: per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_November_10#Humanitarians Mason (talk) 04:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Political and economic think tanks based in the European Union

edit
Nominator's rationale: I don't this we need to make the distinction between EU and Eureope for Political and economic think tanks. There's no equivalent parent category for non-political think tanks Mason (talk) 03:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kyrgyz Political Organisations

edit
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category created by a new wikipedia editor. Usually, I'd just make a redirect, but this category is different enough that I'd rather merge. Mason (talk) 03:39, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DELETE. Apologies for that, and agree with the proposal here. Isoceles-sai (talk) 17:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:17th-century mayors of places in Pennsylvania

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. The current lone member might be the only Pennsylvania mayor in the 17th-century. Humphrey Morrey Mason (talk) 03:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History of blood donation in the United Kingdom

edit
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge. I don't think we need to diffuse History of blood donation by country, given that the History of blood donation only contains this category Mason (talk) 00:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


September 2

edit

Category:Teenage pregnancy in video games

edit
Nominator's rationale: This category contains only a single page. And besides it's not much of a defining trait for video games either. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:UK Singles Chart number-one singles

edit
Nominator's rationale: UK Singles Chart was renamed UK singles chart (lowercase) a while ago. Or, seeing as the name of the chart is actually the Official Singles Chart, there's no need to write "UK singles chart" at all and possibly we should simplify to "UK number-one singles". (Beats me, I don't know much about the rules around categories.) Popcornfud (talk) 18:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Table tennis magazines

edit
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge per nom. Only one article. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiProject Central Asia projects

edit
Nominator's rationale: These aren't sub-projects. Similar to Category:Southern Africa WikiProjects and Category:Polynesia-related WikiProjects. Gonnym (talk) 17:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Military humor in film

edit
Nominator's rationale: The category groups films by the distinct genre, name of which seems to be established at this point and supported by sources like [2]. And also the parallel category to this is Category:Military comedy television series. Solidest (talk) 14:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Australian food and drink organizations

edit
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:TIES, this category should use Australian English spelling. AusLondonder (talk) 14:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video game franchises by genre

edit
Nominator's rationale: As Category:Video game series by narrative genre was also renamed, replacing franchise with series, this category should be renamed to match with its subcategories. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 08:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, the merge you have suggested (which isn't related to the renaming of this category) will break the current categorization scheme that has remained static for years. It is necessary since these categories make a border between franchises and other related content to a genre. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Meteorites by name

edit
Nominator's rationale: Not a navigation to lower categories. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Taxoboxes with uncapitalized status parameters

edit
Nominator's rationale: Unneeded category per User talk:Peter coxhead#Category:Taxoboxes with uncapitalized status parameters. Gonnym (talk) 08:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cyber Security by country

edit
Nominator's rationale: Merge to existing category to match Computer security. AusLondonder (talk) 22:05, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as long as the child cats are renamed/merged. Mason (talk) 01:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename the subcategories, too? (They have not been tagged for a full week, so I will relist in addition to pinging previous participants.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:34, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vehicle simulation MOGs

edit
Nominator's rationale: A very similar category already exists. The desired category for merging is for practically the same thing. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 05:00, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose. As the originator of both categories, "multiplayer vehicle operation games" is actually the category that is more specific. :here is its specific role : A category for any video game, arcade game, or board game in which multiple players are able to each operate a different control station or weapon station on the same vehicle at the same time.,
the category "vehicle simulation MOGs" is more generic, as it is simply any multiplayer games where players play the game by operating a vehicle, i.e. rather than controlling an in-game persona. --Sm8900 (talk) 02:09, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge or reverse merge, the difference is too subtle to keep them apart. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:39, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Disagree. it is entirely different. in "multiplayer vehicle operation games," you and other players would be at separate stations on the same vehicle. Whereas "Vehicle simulation MOGs" includes any and all games where each player has their own jet fighter, or tank,or other vehicle, and is trying to shoot other players. Sm8900 (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For discussion on Sm8900's latest comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still would be helpful to have a response to Sm8900's most recent comment :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Do not merge. as the originator of both categories. and I am simply replying to the comment above... so this is not cheating.  
Sm8900 (talk) 22:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Experimental science

edit
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining/redundant. (All these categories have been made by the same user.) For bio the category is Unhelpful for navigation, this category contains 1 topic, a journal, and an organization. The working assumption in biology is that they're doing experiments. Mason (talk) 19:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should the other two also be deleted? (If there are no further comments in a week, I would close this as regular delete Category:Experimental science and soft delete the other two.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Jagiroad District

edit
Nominator's rationale: The Wikipedia category should be renamed from "People from Jagiroad district" to "People from Jagiroad" because Jagiroad is not a district but a town in Assam, India. Saurabh{Talk} 03:12, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just delete, the only article in the category does not contain any information about where the subject lived or lives. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle: Does He has been elected in Assam Legislative Assembly election […] from Jagiroad constituency not imply that? jlwoodwa (talk) 06:18, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, unless Jagiroad is the only populated place in the constituency. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:22, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Marcocapelle Jagiroad is actually the most populated town in the constituency, and it's also the second most populated area in the district after the district headquarters. It's often considered a sub-division of the district due to its size and importance. Besides being a major transport hub, it's also an industrial area with significant establishments like the Hindustan Paper Mill and the Tata Semiconductor Assembly and Testing Facility. Saurabh{Talk} 17:22, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, the phrase does imply that he was elected from the Jagiroad constituency in the Assam Legislative Assembly election. Categorizing this information can help clarify these details and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the subject.

    However, we can also use "Jagiroad" instead of "People from Jagiroad," which will provide broader coverage. Saurabh{Talk} 14:54, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:47, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same question: Rename or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scientists with secret work

edit
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining categories. The only non-occupation page is for an organization not defined by Scientific secrecy. Mason (talk) 19:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should Category:Scientists with secret work also be deleted? (If there are no further comments in a week, I would close this as soft delete Category:Scientists with secret work and regular delete Category:Scientific secrecy.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:16, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mass shootings involving armed citizens

edit
Nominator's rationale: I'm not sure if this should be renamed, as armed citizens seems like a POV title, or outright deleted as non-defining. User:Namiba 14:20, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Löschen, not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:58, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Delete per nom. POV and not-defining. Are there mass shootings perpetrated by unarmed people? Or wait, is this supposed to be shootings where someone was armed at all? regardless, delete. Mason (talk) 03:59, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep for context, this refers to incidents where someone where someone who was not the police went after the perpetrator with a weapon, armed citizen here is referring to the person who tried to stop them and not the perp. For a few of these incidents in this cat this is actually quite defining and discussed, but I don't care enough to argue this. In either case I do not think it is POV; armed citizens is the usual title for this kind of thing in the sources. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:25, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as creator This has been a major topic of discussion in the American gun control debate, and there are plenty of sources talking about it (just search "mass shootings armed citizens". I think it is a defining characteristic for some shootings (New Life Church, Greenwood, Sutherland Springs, Cetinje for an international example; there are plenty of sources discussing the armed citizens' roles in those attacks). The cat can be removed from the others if you want. It's also not POV, I guess we can change it to "Mass shootings involving defensive gun use" if you want.Also Mason please look at the category page and take 5 seconds to read the description before you comment anything. Thank you. Lettlre (talk) 22:09, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I read the category. @Lettlre My point was that the name was not clear. Mason (talk) 19:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Queen of Hearts (talk) 03:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename? Delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:LGBT YouTube celebrities

edit
Nominator's rationale: Not a helpful redirect, considering that the start of both this category and its target is "LGBT YouTube". Löschen it. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The category was moved to Category:LGBT YouTubers nearly a decade ago, I don't have a problem with deleting this. AusLondonder (talk) 03:26, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite sure I understand the rationale though, it was only in existence as a result of a move. AusLondonder (talk) 04:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AusLondonder: unlike normal redirects, category redirects are usually not kept after moves. See Wikipedia:Category redirects that should be kept for an essay on the topic. (I would say that essay is fairly reflective of community consensus.) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:This TV affiliates

edit
Nominator's rationale: Empty category (network defunct) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:46, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Post-Classical Chinese philosophers

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. Post-classical is vague and unclearly defined Mason (talk) 02:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thought we had a complete post-classical tree for East and South Asia, but apparently not, or not any longer. Merge as it does not make sense to keep a single post-classical category on its own. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian women designers

edit
Nominator's rationale: Merge per EGRS and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_December_3#Category:Women_designers Mason (talk) 23:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are you suggesting that the subcategories need to be nominated for? All of them are in established "X by nationality" trees with dozens upon dozens of siblings for other countries, with no discernible reason why Canada should be uniquely excluded from established trees, so why would they need to be deleted? Bearcat (talk) 17:31, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am sorry but I just don't get it. Why would we remove the women subcat here, but keep a women subcat both at a higher level and at a lower level in the tree? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:49, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No worries. So my thinking is that Women designers isn't defining. It's a catch-all generic term, but the subcat is defining and well established, as is the parent; so I'm effectively suggesting we cut out the middle layer. Mason (talk) 23:31, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:First-person shooter multiplayer online games

edit
Nominator's rationale: This is a though one, but there are multiple reasons why this long-lasting category might not be as defining as everyone has once thought.

FPSMOGs are not a legitimate sub-genre of first-person shooters, while MMOFPSs considered one and Wikipedia has their own article on it. More importantly, most games in the FPS genre as whole will have online multiplayer, making it even more non-defining. This category isn't an entirely non-diffusing category and is also one of the only categories at the moment combing a genre and multiplayer online games.

This merge may make navigation harder, both the MOGs and FPS categories will contain 35-45 more articles, and that's okay. And besides not every single title that would fit into this category has been added here anyway.

For the subcategories we will instead replace the MMOFPSs category with category:Multiplayer online games and category:First-person shooters by series. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


September 1

edit

Category:Tulsa Tribune people

edit
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 22:28, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ambassadors of Portugal to Prussia

edit
Nominator's rationale: 2x upmerge mostly per discussion on JPL's talk page [3]. There's only one person in each of these. Unlike the discussion, I think that these should be merged to Ambassadors of FOO to Germany. Mason (talk) 21:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Empirical evidence

edit
Nominator's rationale: There are only two pages in here, which can be linked directly if they're not already. Mason (talk) 20:05, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reverse merger: empiricism is a narrower concept than empirical evidence: empiricism holds that true knowledge or justification comes only (or primarily) from empirical evidence. Empirical evidence per se makes no claim about its importance, whether it's primary or secondary in knowledge construction. fgnievinski (talk) 21:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films about psychosis

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. Only one page in here. Mason (talk) 17:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History of cell biology

edit
Nominator's rationale: This is unhelpful for navigation to only have one page in here, that may be be part of cell biology's history. Mason (talk) 17:47, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Survey selection methods

edit
Nominator's rationale: This category is not helpful for navigation, nor are these really defining. They're all related to participant selection, but... that's not something really unique to "surveys". This are just general sampling methods (or issues related to sampling). Mason (talk) 17:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wooden floors

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There's no need to intersect the the type of floor. This is uphelpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Insurance law in France

edit
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation to make categories like this. Mason (talk) 17:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films about neuropathology

edit
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category Mason (talk) 17:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Thermal instruments

edit
Nominator's rationale: This category only as a single redirect. It is not helpful for navigation. I urge the category creator to stop mass creating categories without populating them. There's no need for this category, or many of the recently created ones Mason (talk) 17:19, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cantonese nationalism

edit
Nominator's rationale: Wrong category and it is clear that the creator does not understand how category works. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 16:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I removed the only category in it, which was Category:Cultural nationalism. Mason (talk) 17:24, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cultural nationalism

edit
Nominator's rationale: Wrong category and it is clear that the creator does not understand how category works. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 16:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This category isn't helpful for navigation. In the future, can the nominator bundle this kinds of category nomination? Mason (talk) 17:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison: Of course, it's just because that Twinkle doesn't come with bundles and you can help me bundle them. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 18:44, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tokisaki Kurumi, I don't really understand your deletion rationale. "Wrong category" doesn't really explain what is wrong about this category and neither does your claim that the category creator doesn't understand categories explain why this one should be deleted. Luckily, the editors who frequent CFD can fill in the blanks just by looking at the category but you really should have a policy-based deletion rationale if you are going to nominate more pages for deletion discussions and this nomination isn't based on a specific policy guiding category usage. Liz Read! Talk! 20:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Liz: By "wrong category", I mean, 1. wrong parent category (until now, the parent category of this category still contains categories like Zionism, Bundism, Three Principles of the People, American exceptionalism, American nationalism) 2. wrong subcategory (initially, this category contained only two subcategories and no articles). In addition, it is clear that the creator still do not quite understand how to work over category until now (Special:Diff/1243506564/prev). It's true that I'm not familiar with CFD, but it's also true that I don't know what policy should be used for a Wikipedia:PAGECAT level error. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 17:39, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Historians of Abraham Lincoln

edit
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge per WP:NONDEF. While I'm sure these people have written books on Lincoln, they aren't solely Lincoln historians or likely known just for that. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:24, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Diplomatic missions in Nicaragua

edit
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation. Contains only a single article, the main article List of diplomatic missions in Nicaragua. AusLondonder (talk) 13:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ice hockey people from Louisiana

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge and delete respectively, same as Delaware (see below). Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ice hockey people from Delaware

edit
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to Sportspeople from Delaware with no objection to recreation. Only one notable person grew up in Delaware. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14th- and 16th-century towers

edit
Nominator's rationale: merge, these are single-article isolated categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Most categories require only one merge target, namely in case the article is already part of the lighthouses century category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American convicts who became writers

edit
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining/narrow intersection between occupation, criminal status, and nationality. Mason (talk) 02:50, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:BBC Micro and Acorn Electron game covers

edit
Nominator's rationale: Another WP:XY category redirect which should be deleted. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Suicides by carbon monoxide poisoning in South Korea

edit
Nominator's rationale: Another WP:XY category redirect with two targets which should be deleted. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:24, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


August 31

edit

Category:Ihor Gereta

edit
Nominator's rationale: Not enough content to justify an eponymous category (two articles including the main one). Pichpich (talk) 20:00, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:National League (baseball)

edit
Nominator's rationale: The main category (Category:National League (baseball)) was disambiguated due to there being a number of other National Leagues. However, I don't see the need to disambiguate statistical categories since they are a) in the main category and b) specific to baseball. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison, @Muboshgu:, your opinion on this? I'm against disambiguating only the subcategories. There is only one other category called Category:National League (English football) which is a small English league and not as well known as the baseball National League. Since those subcats are disambiguated, I don't think these should be. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mild support. I really don't know enough to have an opinion about the sporting aspect, but what you've written seems reasonable. I am not aware of a reason we shouldn't do it. (You know so much more about sports, that I'm happy to defer to your judgment) Mason (talk) 20:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll ping @Marcocapelle here too. I just think that one is disambiguated (and I was on the fence about the main category too since there are only two categories named "National League" and one is already dabbed) so its unnecessary to do the primary one. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:48, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – American bias. The English National League is far more well known in Britain. (I've never heard of the baseball National League.) Neither is the primary topic, therefore disambiguating both is helpful to readers. There is no benefit to not disambiguating. Those stats may refer to baseball if you know baseball, but to anyone else they could mean anything. Disambiguation provides clarity. It's standard practice to disambiguate subcategories the same way as the parent category. Mclay1 (talk) 23:19, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mclay1, sorry but how is it American bias when its the truth? The English Premier League is the best known British league, not the English National League; its certainly not even one of the top football leagues in the world. On the other hand, the baseball National League is one of the top two Baseball leagues in the world, the other one being its sister league, the American League.
    There is also nothing to clarify here; its clearly these aren't football-related statistics and I would also note that the main category is already disambiguated. I really don't see the problem here. For what its worth, given that one is already disambiguated there is no point in dabbing the primary one. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, hate to say it because I do think the baseball league, as half of the top baseball organization in the world, is the clear primary topic, exceedingly more significant than a minor fifth-tier league. But "saves" and "wins" are indeed statistical categories in association football, even if they're less frequently discussed stats. So leaving them disambiguated makes them, well, unambiguous. oknazevad (talk) 16:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Oknazevad, I'd agree if there isn't an equivalent category for football statistics for Category:National League (English football) and even if there was (as you say, they are not as well discussed and this is fifth-tier league), those one would like be dabbed as the others are.
    Also, my only quabble here is that these was speedied rather than discussed beforehand because the original move of the article name was contentious. I've informed the higher-ups in WP:Baseball so we can have more opinions. I definitely want a consensus here about whether all or none of the categories in Category:National League (baseball) should be dabbed. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's American bias because a significant portion of the world outside of America has no knowledge of American baseball leagues. Football is an international sport, whereas baseball is primarily played in North America, so of course an American league is going to be one of the top baseball leagues in the world; that doesn't mean anything. It's worth noting that the football National League has had increased exposure internationally in recent years because of Welcome to Wrexham.
    It's not at all clear what the statistics refer to unless you look into it. "Wins" and "saves" are generic sporting terms and could easily be mistaken to refer to football by someone unfamiliar with the topic. Disambiguation provides immediate clarity. The fact that the subcategories are in a baseball category doesn't entirely prevent confusion. The parent category being disambiguated is an argument for disambiguating the subcategories per standard practice. It would also be completely against standard practice to not disambiguate the parent category when the corresponding article is disambiguated.
    I didn't speedy the other subcategories because I figured those ones were unambiguous, but I would support those being disambiguated too for consistency. All subcategories of Category:National League (English football) are disambiguated despite some being unambiguous. Mclay1 (talk) 07:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mclay1, sorry but you just cannot compare a minor British football league nobody but fanatic football fans has heard of to one of the top-two baseball leagues in the world just because you come from a country where baseball isn't a sport. Even a casual fan in Japan or the Caribbean countries have heard of the NL.
    And again, all the subcategories of the football category are disambiguated because its not the primary topic and nobody will be confusing baseball wins and saves with the minor English football league cats since those don't have a category. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, this isn't me dissing association football. This is me trying to explain that "football is more popular than baseball" is not a good reason to assume that the English NL football league is better known to people than the baseball NL league. Its not because it just isn't. This is the English Premier League, in other words. I'm against dabbed all NL baseball categories because you think two may be ambiguous even though they really aren't. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:49, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We could argue back and forth forever about which one more people have heard of. That's why the articles are disambiguated, and we shouldn't relitigate that discussion here. Since that is the situation, the categories need to follow the articles. Mclay1 (talk) 01:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. For consistency's sake within English Wikipedia, the National League article is already disambiguated between the American baseball league, English football division, and Swiss ice hockey tier. Only if National League (baseball) were moved to National League would I support the category move (which as an almost daily baseball watcher, I feel I'd be too biased to comment on that theoretical discussion). Spesh531(talk, contrib., ext.) 21:10, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Spesh531, I should clarify this is a move BACK, not a move. Just FYI. These two were speedied without any discussion and the purpose here is to move it back to as they were before which is without the disambiguation because there are only two categories with the name "National League" and the baseball one is clearly the primary one. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Sounds like a good idea, but Wikipedia:Categorization#Categories for articles bullet #5 states When a topic requires disambiguation, any category eponymously named for that topic should include the same form of disambiguation, even if no other articles are likely to have an eponymous category. I know the proposed are not WP:EPON cats, but looking at Category:Georgia (U.S. state) and Category:Georgia (country); every subcat, regardless of its specificity to the state or country, is dab'd. If I am reading that wrong or if there is a contradictory guideline, please ping me. Rgrds. --BX (talk) 04:25, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @BX, I think you are. For one, both Georgie the state and George the country are primary topics so its not an apt comparison compared to this one where the epon category is dabbed but the rest should not be due to there being no ambiguty. Second, not every subcat is dabbed in those examples. If you go in further, the cities aren't dabbed, people from cities aren't dabbed, and so on.
    So no, there is no requirement for every category to be dabbed just because the epon one is. In this case, I don't see the need to because the baseball National League is by far the primary topic which is not the case with the Georgia example. Hope this helps. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:21, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Novels about Go

edit
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge per WP:NARROWCAT. Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Track and Field books

edit
Nominator's rationale: None of these are books related to track and field. Three are not even books. Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:45, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Diplomatic missions in Burundi

edit
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation. Contains only a single article, the main article List of diplomatic missions in Burundi. AusLondonder (talk) 15:39, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Italian mathematicians by location

edit
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation to have only one region in here. If kept the category should be renamed to Italian mathematicians by region to mirror other sibling/parent categories like Category:Italian scientists by region Mason (talk) 14:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:First ladies and gentlemen of San Diego

edit
Nominator's rationale: This is an example of a non-defining category. The single article categorised as such was notable outside of his marriage to the mayor. AusLondonder (talk) 13:57, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Diplomats of former countries

edit
Nominator's rationale: I was inspired by a comment on @Johnpacklambert:'s page. I want us to consider renaming this category Diplomats by former country. It fits with the rest of the People by former country tree. Mason (talk) 13:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14th-century and 16th-century lighthouses

edit
Nominator's rationale: merge, these are single-article isolated categories, this is not helpful for navigation. A second merge target is not needed because the articles are already in a Buildings and structures or Transport infrastructure by year category. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Historical monuments in Uzbekistan

edit
Nominator's rationale: delete, apart from mausoleums the category does not contain monuments and memorials. The mausoleum articles are already in Category:Mausoleums in Uzbekistan, part of Category:Monuments and memorials in Uzbekistan. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Noblemen in the Kingdom of Scotland

edit
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OVERLAPCAT, when fully populated this will largely overlap with Category:Medieval Scottish nobility. This is follow-up on this discussion which is still open. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
add the subcats of Category:Noblemen nomination here. @Marcocapelle: letting him know that I added these to this nom per his suggestion. Mason (talk) 13:33, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:2020–2021 United States racial unrest

edit
Nominator's rationale: to align the category's title and scope with the main article United States racial unrest (2020–present). 1857a (talk) 23:40, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:52, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Milovice (Nymburk District)

edit
Nominator's rationale: consistency with Milovice FromCzech (talk) 06:14, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


August 30

edit

Category:Books about the history of San Francisco

edit
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge per WP:NARROWCAT; only two articles. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Palestinian Joint Operations Room

edit
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories Mason (talk) 03:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those are different types of categories, Category:Palestinian Joint Operations Room member groups is a "set", but the other is a topic. I was not sure whether to remove the topic category from the pages when I created the set? But if "overlapping" is a problem, then I can clean that up now, i.e. removing the category from anything that is also in the set? FourPi (talk) 04:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
> removing the category from anything that is also in the set?
Please don't do that. Wait for others to see what the category currently looks like.Mason (talk) 13:26, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete? Merge? Keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:31, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete's fine with me. Mason (talk) 17:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian ministers

edit
Nominator's rationale: I've been working a lot on fixing the capitalizations of the subcategories and aligning the categories in Category:Government ministers by country and I don't see why these would be two separate categories. It makes sense to merge "Canadian ministers" (which isn't the typical Minister of x of Country title) to the target from my point of view instead of throwing all the positions into a deeper category. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Striking my old vote; I explanation below makes sense and I didn't put the two together. Lean oppose with a preference to rename category. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus appears to favor a rename, but some discussion on the rename target would be helpful :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:27, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In Canadian usage, "ministry" would definitely refer to the organization headed by the minister, not the office of the minister.--Srleffler (talk) 08:08, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, @Srleffler, @Hey man im josh, that's a fair point. In which case I think the correct phrasing would be "ministerial positions". "Minister" is only one title usually referring to the head of that department. "Ministerial positions" would cover all the different positions like "Registrar General" or "Deputy Leader" or "Associate minister" or "President of the Council" and so on. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:48, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like that a lot actually. To be clear, we'd do Category:Ministerial positions of Canada? Hey man im josh (talk) 13:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hey man im josh, I found the closest similar category to be Category:Ministerial offices in the United Kingdom. It matches up so yes. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:17, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, @Bearcat, @Srleffler, @Hey man im josh. Pinging for an overall opinion for Category:Ministerial offices in Canada which would match the above mentioned UK category. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me Bearcat (talk) 19:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no strong opinion one way or the other on this category.--Srleffler (talk) 22:19, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Works for me. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prejudice and discrimination in fiction

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 3#Category:Prejudice and discrimination in fiction

Category:Fictional Bengali Hindus

edit
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:XY, this is an unhelpful category redirect. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Khwarezmid rulers

edit
Nominator's rationale: More consistent with other articles and categories about the region (like Category:People from Khwarazm)‎. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 18:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films about First Nations people

edit
Nominator's rationale: Recently created category not offering a particularly obvious distinction from its parent. Since every film in Category:First Nations films is about First Nations people by definition, it's not fully clear what would distinguish a First Nations film that belonged here from a First Nations film that didn't. Note as well that Category:Films about Native Americans, the most seemingly equivalent category to this as word order goes, is not a subcategory of a broader "Native American films" parent, but is itself the base category for films with Native American themes, characters and settings, and thus a sibling to Category:First Nations films rather than an uncle.
Also, Category:First Nations films is one of the categories that will likely need renaming per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 26#Category:First Nations, but as the issue has to do with ambiguity arising from the term's increasing usage in Australia, its new name will need to have the words "Canada" or "Canadian" in it somewhere, so reverse merging this the other way isn't the answer to that. But even if and when that does get renamed, this still won't be necessary as a separate subcategory of it. Bearcat (talk) 16:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Houses 1100-1500

edit
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: merge, these are mostly isolated single-article categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:43, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Optical microscope components

edit
Nominator's rationale: I don't see a reason to have both of these categories. Most of the entries in Category:Microscope components are particular to optical microscopes. I would be amenable to deleting Category:Microscope components instead and putting this category in its place. Srleffler (talk) 13:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To put my rationale another way, if properly populated Category:Optical microscope components would suck nearly all the entries out of Category:Microscope components and leave the latter pointless. While there are other kinds of microscope, I doubt there is much need to categorize their components. Better to have one category that covers microscope components in general. An alternative would be to have only a narrower category that is particular to optical microscope components, with components of other types of microscope left uncategorized.--Srleffler (talk) 14:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Microscope components per COMMONNAME, even though they will all be optical. Other microscopes are the exception to this, and they can be placed in sub-categories. We thus avoid a parent container empty of anything except subcategories. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not all components of microscopes are for optical microscopes, such as for electron microscopes? Keep. 46.18.177.138 (talk) 13:24, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We are all aware of that. Can you think of any components of a non-optical microscope that would have a Wikipedia article and would be worth categorizing as "microscope components"?--Srleffler (talk) 18:11, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/merge per nom. This intersection is unhelpful. Mason (talk) 21:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes, plenty. We already have half a dozen with articles. SoCategory:Electron microscope components justifies itself as a sub-cat of Category:Microscope components in a way that optical doesn't. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Noblemen

edit
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need an intersection between men and nobility under EGRS? I'd be find with this if it were limited to specific titles. But, as this is coded, I foresee this becoming a mess if we have untitled male nobility by nationality categories. Mason (talk) 12:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1501 establishments in Venezuela

edit
Nominator's rationale: Category:1501 establishments in Venezuela is a single-member category which is unhelpful for navigation (and Category:1500s establishments in Venezuela would have the same problem if that was the upmerge target). Upmerge for now to the century level and delete the categories which will then become empty. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:18, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ukrainian occupation of Russia

edit
Nominator's rationale: Inherently flawed category; categories about military occupations do not contain occupied settlements, as the category can become rapidly out of date, especially in an ongoing war such as this one, and editors should not be expected to add or remove this type of category every time a settlement is captured or by either side. Typically, as is the case with Category:Russian occupation of Ukraine, these categories contain articles about the occupations themselves, not occupied settlements, but for this topic there is only one article pertaining specifically to the occupation, the main article on the only oblast which is partially occupied. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 11:43, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete both?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Beijing Municipal Committee of the Chinese Communist Party

edit
Nominator's rationale: Three eponymous categories for political committees, each only containing the eponym with no other content at all. As always, everything that exists does not automatically get its own eponymous category just to recursively contain itself -- these would be fine if there were at least four or five spinoff articles to file in any of them besides the eponyms, but are not needed for just one thing. Bearcat (talk) 11:24, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible that given 2 days I could quickly write these entries to keep these categorized? TinaLees-Jones (talk) 11:52, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is the population enough to keep the categories?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Numbers not in Wikidata

edit
Nominator's rationale: To move where the articles have been recategorized to via the {{Cite The Numbers}} temp. Consistency with Category:The Numbers ID different from Wikidata. Trailblazer101 (talk) 05:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy redirect. There's no need to discuss this, especially since the proposed target "rename" already exists as a category, meaning the only thing that needs to happen is a categoryredirect. Bearcat (talk) 13:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Older discussions

edit

The above are up to 7 days old. For a list of discussions more than seven days old, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All old discussions.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/All_current_discussions&oldid=1202523150"