Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 March 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 24 March 26 >

March 25

[edit]

Category:Caesarea (Israel)

[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: Rename to Category:Caesarea, Israel - jc37 16:06, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Although there is a disambiguation page Caesarea (disambiguation), Caesarea is the primary topic. If not accepted as the primary topic, then reformat names as Category:Caesarea, Israel (like Category:Acre, Israel). – Fayenatic London 22:03, 25 March 2021 (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:Springfield College (Massachusetts)

[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: no consensus (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 09:31, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to match article (Springfield College). User:Namiba 13:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose b/c probability of a lot more Springfield Colleges in the US or Commonwealth have to be taken into account. Just hazard they haven't come on the scene. And certainly it's useful to have the location by naming the US state. --Just N. (talk) 14:58, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What do you "haven't come on the scene?" Springfield_College_(disambiguation) clearly shows that this is the only institution by its name, though there are some with similar names. --User:Namiba 15:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 21:14, 25 March 2021 (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.

Former countries on the Italian Peninsula

[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: option B rename. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:37, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Option A
Option B
Nominator's rationale: rename for consistency. Note that the name "Italian states" in Category:People executed by Italian states was chosen earlier in this discussion, but perhaps some editors in the discussion overlooked Place Clichy's comment about the existence of Category:Former countries on the Italian Peninsula. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:38, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Laurel Lodged, Place Clichy, Carlossuarez46, Good Olfactory, Rathfelder, Peterkingiron, Justus Nussbaum, Johnpacklambert, and William Allen Simpson: pinging contributors in earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:38, 25 March 2021 (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:HuffPost bloggers

[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: no consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not a defining category. Contains a few celebrities (Bill Gates, David Cameron), a few people notable for opining elsewhere (Cenk Uygur) and a few random other people based on the interests of the category creator. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:37, 25 March 2021 (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:Wellcome Book Prize

[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: no consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:33, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category for a literary award, which is being used not just to classify winners but also shortlisted or longlisted nominees. I'm formulating this as a "delete or purge?" question, because I'm not personally familiar enough with this award to take a stand as to whether it warrants winner categorization or not — but regardless of whether or not we deem an award notable enough to keep winner categories, we most definitely do not ever apply award-related categorization to non-winning nominees, not even for super-mega-notable awards like the Booker or the Oscars. So at best this needs to be purged of all the non-winning entries and retained only for actual winners, and at worst it needs to just be deleted outright. Bearcat (talk) 12:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A subcategory for nominees would absolutely not be "ideal": there is no other award in existence — not even the Booker or the Oscars or the Nobel Prize — for which we categorize non-winning nominees as such. Bearcat (talk) 15:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Clicking through the winners, they are already very prominent and generally mentioned the award with other honours which falls well short of WP:OCAWARD's requirement that "should exist only if receiving the award is a defining characteristic for the large majority of its notable recipients". (There are billions of people on Earth that did *not* win and they are not remotely defined by not winning so rename and purge per Marcocapelle if kept.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:00, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I agree that this seems a significant award for recipient careers. But purge all those short list and long list names for being WP:OCAWARD. --Just N. (talk) 12:50, 1 April 2021 (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:City nicknames by city name

[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: Rename both - (Category:Lists of city nicknames has been tagged for renaming for 10 days as well.) - jc37 17:18, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It's a category of lists, something the current title doesn't bother to mention. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:01, 25 March 2021 (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.

Anti-Catholicism by country

[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: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, only 1-3 articles per category. Incidentally articles may be manually merged to a subcat of Category:Catholic Church by country but most articles really do not belong there. Some articles may be added instead to a subcat of Category:Protestantism by country. The subcategory of Category:Anti-Catholicism in Japan is already deeper down in the tree of Category:Anti-Catholicism so it does not have to be included in the merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and purge it has groups or victims of groups that are against Western ideologies that are more in the nature of anti-all-Western-religions or anti-Christian, and not specifically anti-Catholic and pro-Protestant. Those articles should be purged. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all for Now These aren't aiding navigation today but no objection to recreating later if they show the growth potential Inter&Anthro anticipates. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:42, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I don't think Inter&Anthro is talking about potential expansion, but noting that the categories are missing articles which already exist. He has mentioned specific movements of the past which were Anti-Catholic but are missing from the categories. For example the Spanish Constitution of 1931: "The new Constitution, among other laws, is described as having been anticlerical. While it afforded broad civil liberties and democratic representation, it abolished privileges associated with the Catholic Church, and did not explicitly protect Roman Catholic interests or rights. As anticlerical sentiment had been growing for decades, it culminated in escalating mob violence against the Church which the new government was unable to curb. This resulted in severely strained church-state relations, noted as a significant cause of the breakdown of the Republic and of the Spanish Civil War." 04:44, 26 March 2021 (UTC)Dimadick (talk)
      • Anti-clerical is not the same as anti-Catholic. As the word says anti-clericalism is against the clergy (and is often a political issue), anti-Catholicism is against Catholicism as a whole (and is often a religious issue). Most occurrances of anti-Catholicism can be found in Protestantism and in Eastern Orthodoxy, Spain is an unlikely place to find it. Anti-clericalism on the other hand does not even have to be against Catholic clergy per se (although it is used in Catholic context most of the times). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all for being unclear and an invitation for partisan and opinion entries which propagate victim role of catholicism. E.g. the new law changing developments in Ireland after finding out about cath. clerical child abuses etc could be such a cat. For WP:Neutral's sake: Delete! --Just N. (talk) 13:06, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support all for now but without prejudice as to their later recreation should volumes merit it. 19:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Execution

[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: merge and redirect as WP:OVERLAPCAT. I will put Category:Executed people into the other parent Category:Killings by type, although that one may also need reviewing. There may be scope for a category on summary executions, which would belong in Category:Extrajudicial killings by type. – Fayenatic London 08:07, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Categories that are largely overlapping. Execution redirects to Capital punishment. There is nothing in the nominated category that couldn't reasonably be in Category:Capital punishment, and in fact much of it already is. Retaining a category redirect could be reasonable. This is a creation of User:Stefanomione, which may mean something to some users. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:23, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This merely leads to the conclusion that the term "execution" is ambiguous: it usually means execution of capital punishment but in certain context it can also be equivalent to killing. It may be useful to create Category:Summary executions for cases like Nicholas II (not as a subcategory of Capital punishment). But it is not yet clear to me why these Summary executions are a reason not to pursue the proposed merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:47, 11 April 2021 (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:Royal Guelphic Order

[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: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:29, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING (WP:PERFCAT and WP:OCAWARD)
The German Kingdom of Hanover issued the Royal Guelphic Order as house order. Because Hanover and Great Britain were in personal union and shared a monarch for almost 200 years, the vast majority of recipients are British with no connection to Hanover or Germany. Commander of Australian Forces Robert Nickle, Scottish surgeon Charles Bell, and English linguist Graves Haughton are not remotely defined by this award. (Even amongst the small minority of recipients associated with Hanover, the award just gets a passing mention: 1, 2, 3.) Two of the classes were already in separate list articles and I created a collapsible list for the third right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that this was given out widely in England to people with no connection to Hanover is the basis for the nomination. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:06, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The whole point of an encyclopedia is that you learn something about a topic. Categorization requires defining characteristics to ensure you learn something more about the characteristic by reading the articles. But articles about recipients of an award hardly ever provide any additional information about the award, for example they hardly ever mention the specific reason why someone was receiving the award, they hardly ever elaborate on the event of someone receiving the award (although there are some exceptions like with the Nobel prize). All of that also applies to the award categories nominated here. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:46, 13 April 2021 (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:Recipients of the Nicolau Lobato Order

[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: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OVERLAPCAT and WP:OCAWARD)
We don't have an article on the Nicolau Lobato Order but all three of the articles in this category are politicians from East Timor who are already well categorized somewhere under Category:East Timorese politicians. The articles mention the award in passing and it doesn't seem defining. I listed the current category contents right here so no work is lost if anyone wants to create a main article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As for not having an article about the Ordem Nicolau Lobato [de], that does not mean it is not notable, just that no one has written it yet in English Wikipedia. There may only be 3 people in the Category:Recipients of the Nicolau Lobato Order so far, but the German Wikipedia category has 24 people, not all of whom are politicians. The small number in this category in English Wikipedia seems to be more a question of the small number of articles about notable East Timorese people than anything else.
I thought the point of categories was to help find information, such as people who were born in a certain year, in a certain place, have a particular occupation, or have received a particular award. As Help:Categories says, "Categories allow readers to navigate through Wikipedia and find related articles." As WP:OCAWARD is written, this category and many others would need to be deleted, but I question whether doing so would actually help readers navigate Wikipedia and find related articles. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:48, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@RebeccaGreen: Just saw your question. I certainly don't think the Nobel Prize or Order of Australia categories are non-defining. We also have many categories like the ones we deleted for the Order of the Smile and Wrestling Observer Newsletter Hall of Fame that make navigation difficult by creating category clutter. If I look at the 35 award recipient categories at the bottom of the Emperor Akihito article, I see more Orders of the Smile than Orders of Australia. Based on WP:OCAWARD I've been working to carefully move some award recipient information out of the category space and into the article space so that no information is lost. (The same information can work in one but not the other because of the different inclusion criteria: WP:DEFINING for categories vs. WP:NOTABLE for articles.) It's tougher here though since there's not a main article in which to listify the category contents. - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:59, 6 April 2021 (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.
  1. ^ Wheaton, Wil (October 27, 2015). "you can't pay your rent with "the unique platform and reach our site provides". Archived from the original on October 28, 2015. Retrieved October 28, 2015.
  2. ^ Huckeba, Stacie (December 6, 2017). "The Top Ten Reasons You Should Work for Free – Unless You Are Wil Wheaton". HuffPost. Archived from the original on May 3, 2020. Retrieved April 27, 2020.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_25&oldid=1021895285"