Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All current discussions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
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 15:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 68 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).

Opposed requests

[edit]
  • Sexual assault is a stand-alone article that does not redirect to sexual abuse, the definition of which states Sexual abuse is a term used for a persistent pattern of sexual assaults. I don't think they mean the same, but I'm hesitant to open up a full discussion on such a sensitive topic. It does seem that sexual assault doesn't have its own category, but does it need to? NLeeuw (talk) 20:48, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I was referring to the category Category:Sexual assault Mason (talk) 01:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold pending other discussion

[edit]

Moved to full discussion

[edit]

Current discussions

[edit]
Shortcut

October 9

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:Recipients of KLF Award

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Single entry, limited scope. Veldsenk (talk) 13:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The current title may be misleading implying that all those people died due to LGBTQ issues. Some of them, however, committed suicide for other reasons, such as Alexander McQueen. Proposed title would also be consistent with the Foo who died by suicide scheme: Category:College students who died by suicide‎, Category:People who died by suicide in prison custody‎, etc. Brandmeistertalk 08:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People of Mexican side in the Texas Revolution

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The current name sounds awkward and is confusing/inconsistent Mason (talk) 01:53, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:36, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I don't love the suggestion, but it is an improvement. Mason (talk) 11:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Mason's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. If we want to include only regular military personnel of Mexico, then the name should be Mexican military personnel of the Texas Revolution (somewhat equivalent to sibling Category:Army of the Republic of Texas personnel killed in the Texas Revolution, except that not all of them were killed).
  2. If we want to include regular military personnel AND irregular combatants, but exclude civilians, then Mexican Republic combatants of the Texas Revolution is the best option per Carguychris (& Mason).
  3. If we want to include all civilian, regular and irregular participants, then Pro-Mexican people of the Texas Revolution is the best option per Category:Pro-Russian people of the Russo-Ukrainian War and Category:Pro-Ukrainian people of the Russo-Ukrainian War. NLeeuw (talk) 06:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Southend-on-Sea (district)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: As per discussion at AFD for County Borough of Southend-on-Sea, the boundaries for the city and district are the same. Eastbourne is good example of this which has one category for the whole town and district.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 06:15, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eastbourne is not the same as it is completely unparished unlike Southend (and as noted below the district article was kept). Southend actually has 3 potential definitions that we could use namely the smallest being the part of the district which has "Southend-on-Sea" as the post town, the next smallest being the unparished area which roughly covers both Southend and Westcliff-on-Sea post towns namely excluding Leigh-on-Sea parish and the largest being the whole district. There is also Southend Urban Area but in 2021 the was urban areas/BUAs seems to have changed so it may not still exist. That said I'm not sure maintaining separate categories for the settlement/unparished area and district is helpful as categories are generally less granular than articles so it may well be better to just merge all into 1 category covering all definitions. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But the parished area (leigh) falls within the wider Southend UA border. If anything Leigh should have its own category? Davidstewartharvey (talk) 10:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes Leigh probably should have its own category namely for the area covered by the parish. We have other parishes with categories, see Category:Civil parishes in Essex. All the other articles that are in the unparished area could go in the categories for the settlement. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The latter category is for the traditional town of Southend-on-Sea, not the wider district. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In the case of somewhere like Colchester, where the boundaries of the district are outside the city boundaries I can understand having separate categories (Colchester (town) and Boroughof Colchester), but Southend District and city boundaries are the same. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 10:57, 26 September 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) 00:48, 29 September 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) 04:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Southend-on-Sea (district)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: As per AFD at County Borough of Southend-on-Sea, the boundaries between City and district are the same. Also there are individual category pages for suburbs of Southend.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 06:24, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The latter category is for people from the traditional town of Southend-on-Sea, not the wider district, hence the subcats of the district category. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • So what is the traditional town of Southend? Read any history book and the town is seen as the whole not its parts after they were absorbed into the district. Also Colchester only has one category, People from Colchester, and then separate categories for the other localities in the district, which Southend does with People from Westcliff-on-Sea and People from Leigh on Sea already existing. Therefore a district category is not required.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 11:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • We could use Category:People Southend-on-Sea (district) as a Container category with People from Westcliff-on-Sea etc linked to that? And have a separate People from Southend-on-Sea- much like London has?

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:09, 28 September 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) 04:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Department stores in Southend-On-Sea (town)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Southend is now a city. As per afd on County Borough of Southend-on-Sea, there is no differentation between the city and district boundaries.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 06:20, 21 September 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) 23:08, 28 September 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) 04:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Professorships in theology

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlaping underpopulated category Mason (talk) 03:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by auxiliary equipment failure

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category name is excessively vague and therefore violates WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. There is little agreement in the aviation community as to what constitutes "auxiliary equipment". Carguychris (talk) 17:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please suggest a merge target. Mason (talk) 21:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is difficult given the ambiguity of the current name. The sole current article in the category, TWA Flight 529, crashed due to an elevator failure. Perhaps Category:Aviation accidents and incidents involving flight control failure? The underlying issue is the lack of a consistent, unambiguous definition for "auxiliary equipment". "Flight control" is considerably easier to define, but is also ambiguous to some degree. All that being said, I'm also concerned that creating myriad aircraft accident categories by cause may lead to WP:ARBITRARYCAT and WP:NARROWCAT concerns. Carguychris (talk) 21:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's merge target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Religion in the Middle East

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: West Asia and the Middle East largely overlap, so we do not need both category trees. It is better to keep West Asia because it is consistent with other subcategories in Category:Religion in Asia by region. Sakakami (talk) 18:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge or reverse merge per nom and rename dependent on the merge direction. There is also this discussion which is still open. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly oppose - The reason these categories "largely overlap" is entirely because the regions themselves "largely overlap". An incovenient fact, perhaps, but a reality that Wikipedia is bound to respect - and that our categories must reflect. (There are many other overlapping category trees that we maintain simply because they reflect aspects of the real world.) Furthermore, the term "Middle East" is well-known to the great majority of readers, who are unlikely to be familiar with the term "West Asia". Anomalous+0 (talk) 07:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Anomalous+0's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's response to the objection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag the West Asian categories to allow for a reverse merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Church of Sweden clergymen in Colonial North America

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is extremely narrow. I think it should either be merged to 17th/18th century American Lutheran clergy or renamed to Church of Sweden clergy from the Thirteen Colonies Mason (talk) 03:28, 22 September 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) 02:13, 30 September 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) 03:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prohibition-era gangsters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These are really overlapping categories. Does anyone have ideas for how to make these two categories more distinct, or perhaps combine them? For the record. Prohibition in the united states was from Jan 17, 1920 – Dec 5, 1933, whereas the great depression was from 1929 to 1939ish. Mason (talk) 02:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
comment Merging in this way does not seem to be the answer, as it is not true that all Category:Depression-era gangsters also were active in the Depression era. Perhaps, someone can make a count of the actual overlap of articles, not just the time period overlaps. thanks Hmains (talk) 02:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Urdu-language women writers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between language, gender, and occupation, per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 13:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on NL's objection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that's the not question. The intersection is gender with language and occupation. I don't think this meets the criteria for EGRS, and there are no other categories at this intersection. @Nederlandse Leeuw do you have evidence to the contrary that Urdu-language women writers meet the criteria at the intersection? Aka is the "combination [] itself recognized as a defining topic that has already been established (in reliable sources showing substantial existing research specific to the topic), as academically or culturally significant in its own right"? Mason (talk) 02:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
About 49.300 results for "women urdu writers" in Google Scholar. Just to highlight a few:
  • The Role of Female Writers in the Promotion of Popular Literature in Urdu.
  • Women Reading/Women Writing: Anxiety and Āzādī in Twentieth Century Urdu Pulp Fiction
  • Female Voices: Women Writers in Hyderabad at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century: there has been a whole movement of female writers in Urdu, both of poetry and of prose
  • Images of Women in Urdu Novels Written by Muslim Women: An Analysis from A Feminist Perspective
  • Articulation, agency and embodiment in contemporary Pakistani Urdu poetry by women
  • Urdu women's magazines in the early twentieth century
  • Urban Women Rebels: Voices of Dissent in Urdu Popular Fiction
  • Feminine or Patriarchal: Story of Adam and Eve in Urdu Novels by Women Writers
Etc.
Also plenty of Google Books, e.g.
  • The Language They Chose: Women's Writing in Urdu Vol I: Fiction
  • The Language They Chose: Women's Writing in Urdu Vol II: Non-Fiction
  • Women's Writings from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh: The Worlds of Bangla and Urdu
  • Parwaaz: A Selection of Urdu Short Stories by Women
  • Portrayals of Women in Pakistan: An Analysis of Fahmīdah Riyāẓ’s Urdu Poetry
Etc.
So yes @Smasongarrison, I think I might have some evidence. Arguably, it's high time that this topic received its own stand-alone article. NLeeuw (talk) 05:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indian women translators

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between nationality, gender, and genre of writing, per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 13:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcoapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was basing the target on the fact that it's typically a parent category, but I haven't thought deeply about whether translators are also defined as being linguists. Mason (talk) 02:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Louisville Black Caps

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only one category layer. Both are basically the same team but changed their names. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The normal CFD jargon for "combine" is "merge". Is merging an acceptable alternative?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]



October 8

[edit]

Category:Society of Ukrainian Progressors members

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Emptied: no refs. No such society. Mistranslation? --Altenmann >talk 21:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Subatomic particle symbol templates

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Bot-created single-page cat. Looks like it just contains a helper for Template:Subatomic particle? Dunno if should merge into that cat, no opinion whatsoever, just listing bit of botcruft for cleanup. Slowking Man (talk) 20:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Early abbots by century

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: the earliest non-Christian (Buddhist) abbot that we have an article about is Yishan Yining who lived in the 13th century. These categories don't contribute to navigation until we have articles about earlier Buddhist abbots. All Irish abbots of this period were Christian abbots and can be added as subcategories thereof. It would be naieve to state that these Irish abbots do not belong in Christian abbots just because the Irish category name does not specify "Christian". Wikipedia should reflect the real world and not get stuck too much in its internal organization. The real world is that there weren't Buddhist abbots in medieval Ireland, they were all Christian. This nomination is of course without objection to recreation once we have articles about earlier Buddhist abbots. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:07, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. > It would be naieve to state that these Irish abbots do not belong in Christian abbots just because the Irish category name does not specify "Christian".
I never said that the individuals in the page don't belong in the Christian abbots category. I said that you shouldn't be conflating nationality and religion at the category level. Three things: I don't see why you're suggesting deletion, instead of merging. This deletion is going to break the abbot by nationality template. This seems premature, given that I asked you about this on your talk page. Mason (talk) 21:47, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jainism in India by city

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge for now, surprisingly few articles in this categories. By all means recreate when more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

North American Indigenous categories

[edit]
Rename Category:Anti-indigenous racism in North America to Category:Anti-Indigenous racism in North America
Rename Category:Genocide of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Genocide of Indigenous peoples of North America
Rename Category:Anti-indigenous racism in the United States to Category:Anti-Indigenous racism in the United States
Rename Category:Assimilation of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Assimilation of Indigenous peoples of North America
Rename Category:People of indigenous North American descent to Category:People of Indigenous North American descent
Rename Category:History of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:History of Indigenous peoples of North America
Rename Category:History of indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest to Category:History of Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest
Rename Category:Treaties of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Treaties of Indigenous peoples of North America
Rename Category:Wars involving the indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Wars involving the Indigenous peoples of North America
Rename Category:American people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:American people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Puerto Rican people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Puerto Rican people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Belizean people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Belizean people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Cuban people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Cuban people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Dominica people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Dominica people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Dominican Republic people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Dominican Republic people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Guatemalan people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Guatemalan people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Haitian people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Haitian people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Honduran people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Honduran people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Mexican people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Mexican people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Panamanian people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Panamanian people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Salvadoran people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Salvadoran people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Trinidad and Tobago people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Trinidad and Tobago people of Indigenous peoples descent
Nominator's rationale: Capitalize the word "Indigenous", as capitalization is the common practice in North America and on Wikipedia when referring to the Indigenous peoples of North America. This capitalization would be in line with the recommendations of the Associated Press, APA Style, the Chicago Manual of Style, the United Nations, and the Native American Journalists Association. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 16:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Museums with wikis

[edit]
Convert Category:Museums with wikis to article List of museum wikis
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining feature of a museum. It's probably interesting enough to be made into a list. Mason (talk) 12:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Addis Standard people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is the only subcategory in Category:Journalists by publication that has but a single article. Most of them have a fairly substantial number, though I did spot a couple with only 4 articles. 76.9.91.187 (talk) 09:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Majority-minority cities and towns in in McHenry County, Illinois

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is an empty category with a repeated "in" in the title, which is pretty much useless because its parent category contains two such entities and it's only gotten 16 views in its lifetime (equating to only slightly more than two every 115 days, which is really small). I'm not sure we really need it for those reasons. Regards, SONIC678 05:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pointers to WMF tools

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: None of these tools are maintained by the WMF. I suspect the creator meant "WMF Labs", but that name has been replaced by Toolforge now. Legoktm (talk) 04:23, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The category currently has four members, three of which are indeed Toolforge tools (Wikipedia:AfD stats, Wikipedia:Editor Interaction Analyzer, Wikipedia:XfD stats). Wikipedia:Quick intersection is not, but it's historical and it could probably just be upmerged to the parent (Category:Wikimedia Cloud Services) instead. I agree that this category should be called Toolforge rather than WMF.
However, Category:Toolforge tools already exists, with three members: User:Guy Keogh/verify is a soft redirect, Wikipedia:Tools/RAMP editor is historical, and Wikipedia:NPP Browser is a normal page. I don't think there's a significant difference between these two categories, or enough members that we need to subcategorize the "pointers". Therefore, instead of renaming, I propose to merge Category:Pointers to WMF tools into Category:Toolforge tools. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Government organizations of Indonesia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layer. This category doesn't help navigation Mason (talk) 03:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Second ladies and gentlemen of the Philippines

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NEOLOGISM, Second Ladies are not a thing in Philippine politics. We are not like the United States which uses such term. Second Ladies/Gentlemen at best are just a synonym for the Vice President's spouse, unlike the First Lady/Gentlemen who actually serves a role for being the host at the Malacanang Palace and is distinct from the Spouse of the President of the Philippines Hariboneagle927 (talk) 02:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nuclear weapons and the Russian invasion of Ukraine

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories. Upmerge. Mason (talk) 02:13, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pro–nuclear weapons activists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category that's not helpful for navigation. There's only one page in here. Mason (talk) 02:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Blackpink members albums

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There is no scheme for categorizing individual members solo albums by albums by members of groups, and each is already linked from the group's albums category Category:Blackpink albums (which appears to be the standard). For precedent, I found Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 February 19#Category:The Cars' solo albums. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 7

[edit]

Category:Sega Games franchises

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: "Sega Games" is not even its own thing, it literally just refers to Sega. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Reports on FOO

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Siblings are Category:Reports on finance and business. The rename makes it clearer that the subject matter of the report is education, rather than a report that educates or is a school assignment. For Health, the rename broadens the category to be more usable Mason (talk) 22:31, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Digital currency exchanges

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Cryptocurrency exchanges is the common term and matches with our Wikipedia article. Gheus (talk) 22:14, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Loss of Canadian citizenship by prior Nazi affiliation

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is extremely awkwardly named. I've made a tentative attempt, but I'd be really open to alternatives. Mason (talk) 22:22, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:03, 28 September 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) 20:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge is fine with me. Mason (talk) 21:17, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's the difference between Category:Loss of Canadian citizenship by prior Nazi affiliation and Category:Nazis deported from Canada? Looking at their members, they mostly overlap but not entirely. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:European theatre of World War II people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The vast majority of these categories are not defined by the European theater of ww2 or Pacific theater. These are primarily people who are European or Asian nationals, but not associated with the specific military campaign. If not merged, it should be purged of nationals. Mason (talk) 21:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So do you mean that it's acceptable to associate people with a war but not with a military campaign? The problem is the original categorization of World War II people was too confusing and full of redundancy. In my opinion, the 'theater' categorization is merely a categorization by region to clarify the category and make it show what are the most important and relevant under the subject. Aronlee90 (talk) 02:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • They're not associated with a campaign. Jews of World War II‎ are not defined by the European military campaign. You're conflating region with military campaign. Not everyone in a region is associated with the war. If you wanted to break it down by region. What about Europeans who fought in the pacific? Would they go in both campaigns? This just doesn't seem helpful for navigation as it conflates several category trees.Mason (talk) 03:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No clear consensus to merge; discussion on that point as well as Mason's alternative suggestion to purge nationals would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:54, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Populated places in the Middle East

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: the Middle East and West Asia are very overlapping. All subcategories are already in Category:Populated places in West Asia. Sakakami (talk) 18:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Anomalous+0's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:20, 20 September 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) 23:59, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to tag Category:Populated places in West Asia.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Centuries in the Southern Nigeria Protectorate

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, the Southern Nigeria Protectorate mainly existed within one century, all content is already in the two decade categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of statutory instruments of the Welsh Assembly

[edit]

Category:Fictional populated places in Mexico

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The only article in this category is not about a fictional location, but a short story. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional jackals

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains two articles that are about fictional jackals, the rest are either works that should not belong in a fictional character category, or are redirects. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Events at Yankee Stadium

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE, we do not categorize events by the venues they were held at. Bearcat (talk) 14:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Morley–Ellenbrook line

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The main page has been moved due to a name change, so the category should be too. Steelkamp (talk) 10:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the operator of the line https://www.metronet.wa.gov.au/news/latest-news/hello-ellenbrook-line agrees with that JarrahTree 10:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This trust has now been merged and renamed, see the article at Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust Elshad (talk) 10:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Diseases and disorders

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This was moved to the current name via a 2008 decision with very little discussion. However, the main article is disease, not diseases and disorders. This makes the category not match the article. I believe it should be moved back to the broader "Disease" to match the main article, which does not only include individual diseases but also the entire topic of disease. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This category tree is suppose to include chronic disorders, not just diseases. Mason (talk) 14:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mason: The article disease states that a disorder is a form of disease. Disorder (medicine) is not an article. That means the current title is redundant. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. This rename makes it seem like you're removing disability and related concepts from the tree. Even if that isn't your intent, I see no advantage to this rename beyond brevity. I actipate numerous removals of people with disabilities from the child categories, as well as the removal of chronic disabilities. Moreover, I do not want to have to argue that Autism is a disease rather than a neurological difference. Mason (talk) 22:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Brevity is established Wikipedia policy, see WP:CONCISE. On the other hand, having something not cause offense to people is not. In fact the opposite is true, see WP:NOTCENSORED. So if the argument is that classifying many things under a disease banner will cause offense, it isn't really a policy-based reason. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have missing my point. @Zxcvbnm I am trying to avoid have people misunderstand the category. "I actipate numerous removals of people with disabilities from the child categories, as well as the removal of chronic disabilities." This means that I expect many people to misunderstand that disease includes disorders. And I do not want to have to explain to people that over and over again that this definition is broad. WP:CONCISE says that the goal is to "balance brevity with sufficient information to identify the topic to a person familiar with the general subject area." What I am saying is that the new name does not provide sufficient information, and that for example, Autism is not some term people intuitive consider a disease. Mason (talk) 21:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like this is a thing that can be explained in the category's description. For example, "This category also contains things typically referred to as disorders in common parlance. Do not remove X and Y". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:AAGPBL teams

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only two articles and one category in each. Already covered by other categories so no need to merge. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Namiba, in that sense you can make one for every team, plus a category for managers, but I don't think that will be good for navigation at all since only one team - the Rockford Peaches - was around long enough to have at least five managers. As I noted, these are all well covered with other categories in Category:All-American Girls Professional Baseball League so why keep?
@Marcocapelle, what do you think? I know you changed your vote but still. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should make one for every team. I'm personally trying to expand the categorization scheme for women's sports (see Category:Women's sports by populated place.)--User:Namiba 14:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Collaborators during World War II occupations

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This name is *really* confusing. I suggest changing it from occupation to (people) to make it clearer that this is about individuals. I'm very open to alternatives. Mason (talk) 13:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British Asian actors

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. The practically same category was deleted un British actors of Asian descent http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_April_20#Category:British_people_by_ethnicity_and_occupation Pinging @LaundryPizza03: from last discussion. Mason (talk) 14:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Labor disputes in Ghana

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now: Only one page in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 23:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Updated the target after the speedy move).--Ymblanter (talk) 07:31, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Ghana is a distinct country and has a specific strike within the category. I think it would be damaging to remove this category and to try to homogeneous it with the broader continent of africa. The lack of more then one strike is more reflective of a systematic bias towards focusing on north america and europe rather than a lack of historical strikes. Thanks, User:LoomCreek (talk)
  • That bias will probably exist, but the only remedy is having more articles about the topic. As long as that is not the case the category is just a hindrance in finding related articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:15, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are now two articles in the category, the Positive Action campaign which involved a nationwide general strike in 1950 and a played a critical role in Ghana's independence years later. I plan to expand the article to cover all the specifics around it. So I think at this point removing the category would most definitely be detrimental.- LoomCreek (talk) 14:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are too many tiny categories in this tree. Nothing is findable right now. You're welcome to make continental categories if you think that would help. But I think your time is better spent crafting articles. Mason (talk) 21:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Southern United States independence activists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These seem to be highly overlapping Mason (talk) 04:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Transgender by country

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Following Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 13#Category:Transgender in Russia, it seems the problem is Transgender being an adjective, rather than a noun word or noun phrase. Then I think transness is a good alternative solution, as that's the most accepted noun for transgenderness in English, similar to the Francophone equivalents transidentity (transidentité) or transitude, which are less common in English. Another option would be "Transgender topics", which would be more recognizable. --MikutoH talk! 01:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alternative - either Transgender topics or Transgender people. I definitely don’t like transness - as the dictionary entry says, it’s about a condition and that just sounds worse, being transgender isn’t a condition defined by one’s transness, which is why it’s also listed as synonymous with other such terms that are similarly considered to be pejorative nowadays. Raladic (talk) 05:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support transness I don't see a good alternative to that that makes sense.★Trekker (talk) 10:00, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, but oppose the name "Transness". It's unclear to people who are not familiar with the topic. Either of the alternatives are fine with me, such as Transgender topics in FOO, Transgender rights in FOO, etc. I'd need convincing for Transgender people in FOO because it will get mixed up with FOOian transgender people (a.k.a. nationals of a country who are trans. Mason (talk) 20:09, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    it may suggest but so would these. --MikutoH talk! 21:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Would you want to change those categories to Womenness? I think that Transgender topics is a better solution than Tranness. Mason (talk) 21:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think MikutoH's point is that, e.g., Category:Women in Canada could be mistaken for its biography-holding subcategory Category:Canadian women. Despite that potential ambiguity, that naming structure is, to my ears, miles better than changing the parent to Women's topics in Canada. I think the same applies here.--Trystan (talk) 12:47, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, prefer transgender topics for now. The adjective has bugged me for some time, but I haven't been able to come up with a better term myself. Transness is too specific and rather obscure. I thought of Transgender issues in Foo, but that conveys a non-neutral tone. Topics sounds a bit meta/redundant (every Wikipedia category covers a topic), but is probably the best option, unless someone can come up with something else. --Paul_012 (talk) 02:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for transgender topics in lieu of a better suggestion. Both the current titles and transness are confusing titles, with the latter being just an obscure neologism.
  • Support Transgender people in Foo. It would be consistent with Category:Women by country, which uses Women in Foo and not Women's topics in Foo. 1857a (talk) 23:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Transgender people in Foo per 1857a. That is in inescapably the best and clearest description of the unifying topic of the subcategories and articles these categories contain. Transgender history is the history of transgender people, transgender rights are the rights of transgender people, etc. The category description can specify to use the Fooian transgender people subcategory for individual biographies.--Trystan (talk) 12:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Transgender topics for now. Language is evolving quickly here so we may have to revisit this, but this seems like the clearest and neutralist terminology for now. (Open to altnernatives except for "transness" which seems unclear to me.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Local politicians by nationality

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistensy with (grand)parents, some cousins/siblings, and some children. --MikutoH talk! 01:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that I've made a couple of minor modifications to fix obvious spelling errors ("Keynian" instead of "Kenyan", "New Zealan" instead of "New Zealand", "Belguian" instead of "Belgian"). Bearcat (talk) 01:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I apologize for the mistakes. However, New Zealand is the adjective for NZ people: Category:New_Zealand_politicians. We need to rename the entire category tree if that's right. --MikutoH talk! 01:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say it wasn't. But you typed "Zealan", as in without the d on the end of it. Bearcat (talk) 02:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OOps sorry I confused it. Yeah it was a typo, my keyboard may have eaten it. --MikutoH talk! 02:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This nomination appear to be based on the expectation that, for example, Category:Local politicians in Ireland is intended as a set of local politicians from Ireland. When, as far as I can tell, it is a set of local politicians in Ireland. (Citizenship and nationality are not, presumably, the same thing as representation or location. In Ireland, for example, while local representatives must be "ordinarily resident in Ireland" (..) "You do not have to be an Irish citizen".) Are we happy that all of the members of all of these categories are grouped by nationality (as implied by the nom). And not by location/representation (as implied by the category names)? In short, are "local politicians by nationality" the same as "local politicians by nation"? (I'm not personally sure they are...) Guliolopez (talk) 10:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose
    1. Country is not the same as nation.
    2. as noted above, the current categories are about politicians in a country, not from a country (or nation)
    3. Specific to Australia, Local government in Australia is a thing. I'd read "local politicians" as being the ones who live near me (or the people they represent) rather than living near where parliament sits or being "parachuted in" to a safe seat. That is particularly about state and federal politicians, local government is much more local in Australia, particularly in some states.
--Scott Davis Talk 11:57, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For previous similar discussions, see:
Mitch Ames (talk) 12:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. Not all politicians in Foo have Fooinan nationality. Sakakami (talk) 14:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Based on WP:CATNAME it looks like the current format of <political office> in country is correct but I have no objection to the proposal as it brings these categories into line with parent/grandparent categories, particularly Fooinan politicians. Those opposing the nomination maybe confusing citizenship/nationality with adjectival/demonymic forms for countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Obi2canibe (talk • contribs)
  • Oppose per above commenters. The issue here is that nationality and residency are overlapping but not completely identical conditions — because most countries do permit immigrants (usually, but not necessarily always, immigrants who have naturalized as citizens) to hold political office, there can be a difference between where the person is "from" and where the person did the politics. The intention of Category:Local politicians in Canada, for example, is that the person did the politics in Canada — whereas Category:Canadian local politicians could potentially have to include a Canadian-born-and-raised person who moved to Brazil and did local politics in Brazil, and thus was a "Canadian who did local politics" but not a "person who did local politics in Canada". But the latter is what we're after here, not the former. Bearcat (talk) 21:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Executed Italian fascists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: 2x upmerge. Non-defining 3x intersection between cause of death, nationality, and political orientation. Notably, there's no Category:Executed fascists category tree. Mason (talk) 00:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Some of these people were executed not for ideology alone. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --MikutoH talk! 02:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 6

[edit]

Category:Yuliy Meitus

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous category and unnecessary layer for a single article already in an appropriate subcategory for compositions. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 22:15, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:German abbesses

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Oppose. I was indifferent. My inclination would be to upmerge Category:German Christian abbesses to Category:German abbesses , but I don't feel strongly about it. However, now that I've looked closer, I've realized that there were several other categories in here. I've reverted the changes where Marco placed Category:10th-century German abbesses, Category:11th-century German abbesses into German Christian abbesses. Mason (talk) 18:34, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • That does not make sense. All German abbesses of these centuries were abbesses of Christian monasteries. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:47, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that you weren't transparent that you moved the categories deeper into the tree. You could have argued that the categories overlap, which is a reasonable argument. However that's not what you nominated here; you said that the category was a redundant. The category is called Category:11th-century German abbesses, not Category:11th-century German Christian abbesses. Mason (talk) 00:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bantu

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Bantu does not have a primary topic so a better title for this category should be used. Maybe Bantu (culture)? Open to suggestions. Gonnym (talk) 13:57, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Back to the Future (franchise) soundtracks

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category only contains redirects to the Music of the Back to the Future franchise page. Theknine2 (talk) 13:45, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Free compilers and interpreters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category:Compilers and interpreters is basically a hybrid of Category:Compilers and Category:Interpreters (computing). The overwhelming majority of articles only fit in one category, and the few that don't can be in both categories. Category:Free compilers and interpreters should be split into two new categories for the same reason. I also propose adding "open source" to the names of the new categories, since that's what the current category is being used for, and just "free" is vague. Zerbu 💬 13:09, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1859 establishments in the Kingdom of Lagos

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, this is a single-article article, which is not very helpful for navigation, and we do not even have a category tree Category:Kingdom of Lagos. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:03, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Mason (talk) 21:18, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jainism by city

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:10, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, but would it make more sense to use the broader category rather than Jainism in Asia by city‎? Mason (talk) 21:18, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 5

[edit]

Category:Artistic swimming at the 1994 Asian Games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: having the same name as the main article based on this discussion Talk:Synchronized swimming at the 2014 Asian Games#Requested move 30 May 2022. Sports2021 (talk) 21:19, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mexican California

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename per what is presumably the main article of the category. Mexican California redirects to Alta California. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Mason (talk) 18:35, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British music logos

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Limited scope (contains just one entry and one subcat) with likely limited expansion. Exists without an established Category:Music logos tree that also seems too limited to exist. Upmerge to Category:British logos. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Medieval Indian Jain writers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There's really not enough content to justify diffusing Indian Jain writers by century, even without raising the question of whether we should intersection nationality and relgion and occupaiton under EGRS. Perhaps Medieval Indian Jain writers to allow for some structure in the Indian Jain writers tree. Mason (talk) 18:09, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lady Sovereign

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unneeded level of categorization per WP:OCEPON; the two subcategories are interlinked providing sufficient navigation. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:TOBE

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: With an article and a template, this doesn't qualify for C2F but this is a completely unnecessary category for the existing content. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Yachtracing-stub

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Merge into Template:Sailing-stub. Only 36 usages and the term sailing (also an Olympic sport) covers yacht racing, windsurfing, kitesurfing, model boat racing, dinghy racing etc.

I have also proposed renaming yacht racing stub templates to sailing stub templates, which I'm waiting for feedback. Pelmeen10 (talk) 16:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:UCLA Department of German faculty

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question/alternative: Is there a way to populate it? The merge target is extremely crowded, and diffusing by department/disciple is helpful. If not able to populate, I think we should repurpose the category to align with the European Languages and Transcultural Studies Faculty that does exist at UCLA [1]. Mason (talk) 18:22, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Transportation in the Californias

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only one page in this underpopulated category. I don't think this is helpful for navigation at the moment. Mason (talk) 14:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Carcharocles

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Otodus is the current accepted name, so it only makes sense to have the category at the correct location. NotAGenious (talk) 13:44, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Veterans of the Stonewall riots

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, the term "veterans" is quite specific but does not appear in the articles. "Participants" seems more neutral. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with renaming, on a side note this category appears to contain only one side when both sides are veterans/participants... I will be remedying that oversight by including relevant law enforcement veterans/participants. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 14:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with renaming and broadening the category's scope. Mason (talk) 18:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of Albania

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, there are only two subcategories and very little content in each. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chairmen of Trade associations of the Netherlands

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unclear what the purpose of this category is, most of the articles it has been added to are about politicians. It is the only category of this name for any country. Unhelpful for navigation as not within a specific category tree. AusLondonder (talk) 07:20, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Critics of veganism

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OPINIONCAT. Web-julio (talk) 05:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Olympic Games swimming controversies

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I think we should purge and selectively merge this category because olympic swimming controversies are vague, and we don't really have enough content in Swimming controversies that are non-olympic to justify diffusing Mason (talk) 12:25, 19 September 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) 00:21, 27 September 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) 04:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is that most of the pages in Olympic Games swimming controversies aren't really about specific controversies. Mason (talk) 18:39, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Game jam video games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Having been initially created as part of a game jam is not defining for these games. While it can be an interesting factoid that shows how game jams help inspire developers, my guess is that most players of Celeste, Inscryption, etc. don't know or care that it originated in a game jam, and it certainly isn't mentioned prominently in the gaming media. That makes this category fail WP:NONDEF. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Just because some players may not know the game originated from a game jam doesn't invalidate that there is recognization of what game jams produce in the industry as a whole, so this is a defining category. Also, "not mentioned prominently in gaming media" can be disproven with sources, [2], [3], [4] etc. --Masem (t) 03:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't read the first two sources but the third is surely irrelevant for this discussion. It proves notability of the topic, but it does not prove that it is defining for e.g. Amnesia Fortnight 2012. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What I meant is that it is not typically mentioned when the gaming press talks about a particular game. Of course, game jams are notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If it's needed to show how games created through game jams are recognized post release as such games, it becomes a matter of picking examples, and this will depend on the impact of the game and relationship to coverage.
    A well known game is Inscryption and those sources are plenty eg [5], [6], [7]. Or Goat Simulator, [8], [9], [10].
    The idea is comparable to how a projects originates such as in Category:Crowdfunded video games and even to a degree of Category:Indie games (though here this has no question of being defining). The implication that players may not care about these is short sighted since these are a significant vector of new games into the industry and the industry recognizes the importance of game jams. — Masem (t) 19:17, 19 September 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) 00:50, 27 September 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) 04:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Grand Theft Auto mods

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Out all 4 of pages in this category, only 2 of these are individual mods: Multi Theft Auto and FiveM (FiveM is a redirect by the way). "Hot Coffee" is just a name for a minigame, it isn't its own mod and Grand Theft Auto modding is just for the modding in general. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:45, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean keep. Smallcat is no longer a policy. Four seems like enough to keep a category. And Hot Coffee requires a mod to access. Mason (talk) 02:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hot Coffee 'requiring a mod to access' does not make Hot Coffee itself qualify as a mod. Grand Theft Auto modding is about the modding in general, rather than one specific mod. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 00:36, 28 September 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) 04:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge I agree that it simply isn't necessary at this time due to small size, though I disagree Hot Coffee is not a mod. Reliable sources all refer to it as a mod due to the enabling being via a mod and Wikipedia cannot just go with what someone decides it isn't. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:04, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Centuries in Landskrona‎

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, most articles don't belong in a history category but rather in e.g. a buildings and structures category. The articles that do belong in a history category are so few that they can easily put together in a single category. For reference: only 5 of the biggest world cities have their own 15th century category next to Landskrona. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Category:21st century by city has a lot of city categories. Leaning Oppose. Gonnym (talk) 12:30, 27 September 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) 04:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women local politicans

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Change to Fooian/Xian per parents. --MikutoH talk! 04:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 4

[edit]

Category:Lostwave

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: "Lostwave" is basically an ill-defined currently trendy Internet term that refers to music of unknown origins, which can also refer to completely lost works such as Ready 'n' Steady, or songs that are only known based on fragments, which seems to be the most common as listed on the page. While it is definitely "real" insofar its a term people use and there is something of a community around it, the fact it isn't clearly defined to begin with, and almost completely overlaps with "Lost musical works", "Rediscovered musical works" or "Works of unknown authorship" doesn't really make it suitable as a category. Iostn (talk) 22:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Distinct phenomenon from lost musical works, which are pieces and recordings of music which secondary sources can attest existed at one point, but no longer do. Support renaming to Music of unknown origin, which unlike the trendy "Lostwave" is a time-tested phrase in academia. DigitalIceAge (talk) 19:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Memoirs by American prison officers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization. The category has two entries which could easily be upcat to Category:American memoirs and Category:Memoirs by prison officers Vegantics (talk) 21:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Riize

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only album articles which are already sufficiently categorized in an albums subcategory for the group. This is an unnecessary eponymous parent per WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 03:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CATMAIN does not provide any rationale for keeping eponymous categories but simply provides instructions on how to categorize articles within an eponymous category should one exist. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 05:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The new subcat are just image files, which would already be placed in individual articles, and the group would be more defining to SM Rookies than the other way around. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There have been 4 subcats added to the root category: Category:Riize songs, Category:Riize EPs, Category:Riize album covers, and Category:Riize audio samples. RachelTensions (talk) 05:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another article was just created & added. RachelTensions (talk) 06:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 October 4#Category:Riize.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:19, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Spacecraft endings

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There does not appear to be such a thing as a "spacecraft ending". I suggest renaming to correspond with spacecraft retirement, which can be the main article of the category. I do realize that will necessitate the removal of various subcategories, but as-is, it is too vague overall and does not correspond with any actual terms. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NCT Wish albums

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Two redirects which are articles already in Category:NCT Wish songs. Information provided in the song articles do not further elaborate on the single albums to justify both albums and songs categories. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 03:55, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait some discussion needs to happen elsewhere as to whether the two articles should be reclassified as "single albums" rather than just "single" - I believe for consistency sake they should probably be migrated to the “single album” format which would be valid for this category.
Either way, the artist has an EP being released in about 5 hours that will inevitably have an article created in the extremely near future (within hours) that will belong in this category which could change the direction of this deletion discussion before the nomination can run its course. No point in going through a week worth of deletion discussion if by the end of it the nomination rationale that all the votes are based upon will no longer be valid. RachelTensions (talk) 04:10, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Steady (NCT Wish EP) has now been created and added to the category. There are now multiple articles using this category. RachelTensions (talk) 08:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Two redirects and a subcategory as of relisting. Is this enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:17, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Actors who are Wheelchair Users

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Capitalization. Fram (talk) 11:26, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This was after talking to two actors who are wheelchair users. Like Blind or Deaf actors, chair users have their own identity, and they have particular access needs which makes accessing the profession of acting particularly problematic. They seemed to be a category missing from Actors with Disabilities... which is a title that is questionable. I know quite a lot of Disabled Actors and although they are actors first, being a Disabled Actors has two useful interpretations. From a cultural standpoint they are a community, which is why when the Disabled Artists Alliance was formed, over 300 disabled actors and theatre creatives who lobby against cripping-up in the UK, they chose the name, because from a social model of disability perspective they are also disabled by the ableist attitudes and assumptions when it comes to casting. GRF (talk) 11:47, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is this really a defining intersection? There are no other occupation categories in Category:Wheelchair users other than sports which is something different. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:04, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's an interesting point, but when you consider visibility of disability in dramatisation, people see the chair. There is an an actor with cerebral palsy who ambulant wheelchair user called Zak Ford-Williams. He has appeared on stage not in his chair, but as he can only stand for a limited amount of time, and his movements are so exhausting, his time on stage is all he can manage on the day because of a combination of pain and fatigue. He creates an illusion of not being disabled by pushing what he is capable of. He always takes a bow from his chair at the end of the performance and talks about the reaction of the audiences who make assumptions about him, and about this being a political act and post modernist in itself, and a wheelchair is a symbol of that. It is as important as any other portrayal of visible disability, and we have categories for other disabled actors, why not wheelchair users? GRF (talk) 17:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Merge per Pppery. If kept, rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per Pppery to Actors with disabilities and Wheelchair users. Technically, using a wheelchair is not a disability (so egrs doesn't need to apply), so the comparison to being blind or deaf doesn't work amazingly. And even if it did count, the argument posed by Garethfw is for keeping disabled actors. Mason (talk) 23:28, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is this about a social, cultural, medical or political perspectives. If it is about diagnosis, how do we confirm hidden disability actors with for example dyslexia have a diagnosis, or self-diagnosed, self-diagnosed or "identify as..." which is not strictly medical, it is cultural. Then how do we deal with deaf, Deaf or hearing impaired actors? Here we have medical, cultural and political models.
    I have dyslexia and ADHD (you have to trust me and I have a full diagnosis from two psychologists nd a psychiatrist, or so I say...), but if I was an actor the audience would not know I was disabled and if I declared I was there is no evidence apart from self-identity, which cannot be verified. So having a visible disability, or having the aspects of a condition being visible so the audience label me as "disabled" such as having one arm, that is both political, cultural and to a degree medical, although they are seeing a trait without knowing the condition. Which is where wheelchair users come in, although they have different conditions they can experience common barriers both in social attitudes as well as physical ones, and as such they are a community and have an identity, so this is social model of disability, and political model, regardless of medical.
    I'm really confused because it is confusing as the categories do not seem to align with any particular model of disability. GRF (talk) 18:19, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am not seeing opposition to renaming if kept, but should this category be merged/deleted? If so, should we merge or just delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:13, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video games about aircraft

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These are overlapping categories. THe merge target is older and was merged into this one outside of the cfd process. Mason (talk) 00:24, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment These cannot be overlapping categories as Category:Aviation video games currently does not contain any content. I also believe you are saying I should have renamed Category:Aviation video games rather than creating a new category. Though these two categories are technically different, as the name and subcategories have or had a different structure, also Category:Helicopter video games wasn't a part of Category:Aviation video games before I redirected the category. Furthermore the category Category:Video games about aircraft is very small, just saying. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:22, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You removed all the content from the Aviation category. All of the excuses/explanations you've listed does not justify circumventing the CFD process. Mason (talk) 16:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
QuantumFoam66 (talk) 23:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Stop double voting. The issue is that you circumvented the CFD process and are now suggesting delete because you don't like the verdict. Mason (talk) 04:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that I just added Airplane Mode (video game) which would appear to be your supposed "needle in a haystack" given that it's about aircraft but has nothing to do with piloting them. This only further proves my point. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zxcvbnm Are you opposing combining the categories, opposing the name, or endorsing circumvention of procedures? I'm fine with a merge and rename to the original. The issue is that there are two categories, and the Aviation video games category is much older, so it's edit history should be preserved. Mason (talk) 03:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One is not much older than the other, both were created in the last 2 years, so there is not really a need to preserve history eithe way. I support maintaining the current status quo, while deleting "aviation" to avoid confusion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Aviation video games, which I will note is currently a {{category redirect}}.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: People supporting a merge, do you support deleting Category:Aviation video games?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 18:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral on deletion. I think that should be a seperate Cfd from this one. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chemical looping technologies

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There are one two pages in this category, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 12:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will drop a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'll emphasize the message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Engineering. And thank you to DMacks for your help so far!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reasoning for this, looking at both associated articles, they describe oxidizing reactions (one literally for combustion and the other for a process of reformation/gasification (which is creates gases like H2/N2/etc.)) The name (if applicable) could be renamed to something to the effect of oxidative looping, combustion looping, process looping, etc. Process is probably the most broad and applicable — ChemicalBear (talk) 01:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC) 01:01, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DMacks, Marcocapelle, and Smasongarrison: thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I realize that this has been relisted twice already, but I think this needs more thurough discussion and consensus seems very close. I will ping people again :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 18:33, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DMacks, Marcocapelle, and Smasongarrison: thoughts on the above? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 18:33, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I had the expertise. I'm fine with either a rename suggested by content experts or a merge. Mason (talk) 21:30, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I obviously object to ChemicalBear's rationale, since I found about a half-dozen other articles on this approximate genre (whatever it's called), as noted in my previous comments about adjusted scope, most of which are not about combustion or simple oxidation, and one that is not even a chemical process at all, but all that have a coherent topic of the cycling process. DMacks (talk) 08:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Como, North Carolina

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 17:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British patrolwomen

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Duel upmerge these intersections doesn't meet the criteria for defining under WP:EGRS. One note: For Women Merseyside Police officers Either dual upmerge under egrs or broaden to Merseyside Police officers. Mason (talk) 23:27, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Necrothesp's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would need to know more about how the intersection between Women Police officers and the met is defining. Just because they're both important on their own doesn't mean that the intersection is. What does @Necrothesp think about repurpsong Category:Women Merseyside Police officers to Merseyside Police officers? Mason (talk) 21:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Solent_University (and sub-categories)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The university has changed its name and the alumni category link on the wikipedia page has been incorrectly updated, so is currently going to a blank category page Mystery Cat (talk) 15:07, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean a Blank Category page? Mason (talk) 21:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies. I mean a category page which hasn't been created yet - they changed the name in the link without checking if that category existed. It's 'see also' at http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Southampton_Solent_University#Notable_alumni Mystery Cat (talk) 09:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Computer science award winners

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These two categories currently have almost the same content and ideally should have exactly the same content. I couldn't find any existing documentation about which one is preferred, so I'm proposing merging one way but we could merge the other way too. Shardul.chiplunkar (talk) 14:29, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Members of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is superfluous. If you're a member, you're a knight, and vice versa. M.O.X (talk) 09:05, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Daniel the Monk's objection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 12:52, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Polish expatriates in the Czech lands

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, if kept it should become Category:Polish expatriates to Bohemia, Czech lands is an anachronistic term. But there is no expatriates to Bohemia tree, so better to upmerge. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle Why did you empty sibling Category:Danish expatriates in the Czech lands out of process? There is a Category:History of the Czech lands and a main article Czech lands. You may not personally like the term, but it is well-established in historiography, as it would be an actual anachronism to use "Czech Republic" to refer collectively to Bohemia, Moravia and Czech Silesia before 1993. I think you'll need a better justification to upmerge this category and to ECOOP its sibling than that you perceive Czech lands to be an anachronism. Alternatively, all 4 people might fit into Category:People from the Kingdom of Bohemia, as they all appear to have lived in Prague between 1198 and 1918, so that might be a fine alt merge? NLeeuw (talk) 04:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With respect to the Danish sibling, there was one article in it and I removed it because of the content of the article. That had nothing to do with "Czech lands", otherwise I would simply have added the category to this nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well yes, I could agree to a dual merge to Category:People from the Kingdom of Bohemia and Category:Polish expatriates. That would be per WP:MFN because Category:Polish expatriates in the Czech lands is currently somewhat underpopulated with just 3 members, not because there is something wrong with the term Czech lands.
Princess Louise of Denmark (1875–1906) was born in Copenhagen and moved to Ratibořice Castle in the Kingdom of Bohemia, where she lived from 1896 to 1906. How does that have nothing to do with "Czech lands"? Either way, in this situation, the category should have been nominated for deletion/merger or something, not emptied out of process without stating a reason.
Nevertheless, we could probably agree on a dual merge here as well: to Category:People from the Kingdom of Bohemia and Category:Danish expatriates (or Category:Danish emigrants as you already did). NLeeuw (talk) 15:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Response to NL's latest suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 12:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bordeaux tramway stops

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I'm not familiar with public transportation in France but it looks like these categories are duplicates of each other. Since this category is the only category in Category:Tram stops in France by system, it seems wiser to merge this category rather than doing a merge in the opposite direction. Liz Read! Talk! 17:50, 18 September 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) 19:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on chris_j_wood's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 12:40, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Graph algorithms

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Needs to be called either that or Category:Graph (discrete mathematics) algorithms, per graph (discrete mathematics) and WP:C2D. The latter seems more awkward, though. 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional terrestrial planets

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Whether a planet is made of rock is rarely ever defining to a fictional work, as compared to a real-life planet, and is typically the default for notable fictional planets. They could be made of glass, steel or unobtainium and it would essentially make no difference. Therefore this category is fairly unnecessary and should be merged. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:10, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Provisional governments in Indonesia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Name of category does not match the (only) subcategory. Also, there has only been one provisional government n Indonesia, so this category is unnecessary Davidelit (Talk) 03:22, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, every country was own Provisional governments, that for every user detect how the sentral of goverment controled as centralized system. Putu Suhartawan (talk) 03:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete accompanied by unrelenting creation of red link categories in the Indonesian project shows a lack of clarity as to english meanings, and already existing categories and subject. Strongly suggest there is inadequate demonstration as to any understanding WP:ABOUT and WP:NOT JarrahTree 04:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Futhermore - since nomination editing and adding to the category show a very limited understanding what the meaning in english actually is in the context that the nominator has stated above.JarrahTree 04:11, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, now I see it. "Provisional" instead of "provincial." -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 05:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:LGBT+ Wikipedians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The parent article has been renamed to LGBTQ (RM discussion) last month and the related WikiProject has now also been renamed to WP:LGBTQ+ (RM discussion of the community) after another discussion, so following WP:CONSUB and WP:C2D, I propose the user category also follows suit, aligning with the sentiment of the WikiProject that the community has embraced LGBTQ+. Raladic (talk) 03:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:11th-century Somali people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Opposed for speedy.C2C: parent is Somalian people by century, but @Marcocapelle: makes good points that "Category:Ethnic Somali people and the country Somalia did not exist yet in the 11th and 12th century. " Mason (talk) 23:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a bit problematic because there is also Category:Ethnic Somali people and the country Somalia did not exist yet in the 11th and 12th century. On top of that it is unclear whether Somalian would include or exclude current Somaliland. So I think it is better to re-parent these categories, move them from the Somalian to the Ethnic Somali tree. Also rename the 13th to 19th century categories to "Somali". For example in the 13th century category there is someone in the Maldives who was probably an ethnic Somali. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 25 September 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) 00:48, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:SpaceX astronauts

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Prior to September 2024, all astronauts listed in Category:SpaceX astronauts had simply flown on a SpaceX capsule launched on a SpaceX Falcon 9 launch vehicle. Now, with the completion of the recent private spaceflight mission Polaris Dawn, two SpaceX employees—Sarah Gillis and Anna Menon—have been astronauts (while employed by SpaceX) on this recent commercial spaceflight. It would be confusing to categorize the two of them as merely the sense of astronauts who have flown on SpaceX equipment, as they are also SpaceX employees, and are categorized in Category:SpaceX employee astronauts. (more emplyees are planned to fly on future spaceflights). N2e (talk) 17:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More participation needed to form consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:24, 25 September 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) 00:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Toxic enzymes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category isn't very helpful with only one page in it. Mason (talk) 20:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's also not meaningfully different from Category:Protein toxins and can be merged/redirected into that. ― Synpath 11:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Related: while updating Category:Protein toxins with Botulinum toxin I found Category:Biological toxin weapons - a bizarrely named, small category with mostly protein toxins within it. I removed the small molecule toxins from it and think it should be merged to Category:Protein toxins. ― Synpath 12:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should we merged?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Typo in my last relist comment. I meant to ask "Should we merge?"
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indonesian bureaucrat

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Absurdly general (and ungrammatical) category, potentially encompassing 10 percent of the population Davidelit (Talk) 00:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 280 million people - not practical to even consider potential issues, the existential issues arising from a singular designation is not what wikipedia is about JarrahTree 00:49, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, we need the real data about how the bureaucrat doing coruption culture for being normal, the realiable source is the best think for learning how the coruption growth. Putu Suhartawan (talk) 01:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - wikipedia categories are for an on line encyclopedia, not a WP:SOAPBOX. A closer examination of existing categories, and a more clearer understanding what WP:ABOUT might mean, the new categories being created are superfluous, and not help for what an average reader might learn about Indonesian politics or culture; the clarification of what already exists in the Indonesian project might help. JarrahTree 04:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tourist attractions in Salem

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: IS empty. The one entry was not relevant, so was deleted Isoceles-sai (talk) 08:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:23, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The 100 most prominent Serbs according to a committee of academicians at the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is an overcategorisation that duplicates an existing list (The 100 most prominent Serbs) and is an example of an essentially arbritrary WP:TOPTEN, and is not a defining characteristic of the included persons. We definitely do not need both a list and a category here. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:10, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 3

[edit]

Category:Cult leaders

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category was deleted previously, but G4 speedy deletion was declined due to the age of the previous discussion. That's understandable, but the reasons for the previous deletion are still relevant: This kind of category is a magnet for POV pushing and BLP issues. In spot-checking I found multiple cases where the category was applied to articles where the term "cult" did not appear anywhere in the article text, and at least one BLP where the related content was a brief mention of the subject denying an allegation of cultism. Even when use of the label is documentable from reliable sources, it is often contentious. Categories don't have the nuance to handle this designation well, so they should not be used for it, just as we have decided not to use biographical categories for some other contentious labels. RL0919 (talk) 23:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Over the Hedge video games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Entirely contained within Category:Over the Hedge. Either we have two categories with three entries or one with six. We do not need the entries in this category to be contained within both. (Oinkers42) (talk) 18:32, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Brazilian exporters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The only category for exporters by country, does not appear to necessarily be accurate for sole subject in the category who operated a port. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 18:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films directed by Nancy Walker

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There has only ever been one item in this category, so the category seems to lack a reason for existing. No additional information is gained from this categorization that is not already in the sole article within it. The director died 32 years ago, so there will never be another film to be added to this category. Nicholas0 (talk) 17:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comedy directors

[edit]
Added subsequent to initial creation of CfD
[edit]
Nominator's rationale: While we're talking about directors versus actors, I feel the same principles as those outlined in WP:PERFCAT, and which resulted in the deletion of multiple "comedy actors" categories[11] may apply here. DonIago (talk) 14:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose American comedy film directors & British comedy film directors, which diffuse American film directors & British film directors, respectively.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  14:16, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • If these need to go, then the parent Category:Comedy film directors (which you haven't tagged as part of this) also needs to go. I'm not wedded to the need for it, but there's absolutely no argument to be had that the parent is fine and only the subcategories are a problem: if it's fine, then subcategories for countries with a large enough number of entries are automatically fair game under it, and there can be absolutely no serious argument that only the subcategories are a problem if the parent isn't. There additionally can't be any serious argument that the US and the UK should get subcategories but Canada shouldn't, either — national subcategories aren't applied on any basis more refined or subjective than "has enough entries to support one", so there can't be a serious argument that American and British directors should get subcategories while Canadian ones shouldn't. So either we need to delete the parent category as well, or they all have to stay. Bearcat (talk) 14:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    With all due respect, I don't see any suggestion here that I might have simply overlooked the existence of some categories that should be included here. You're welcome to add those in if you feel they should be part of the conversation. Please assume good faith. Do you have an argument other than, "Why are some categories included but related categories missing?" DonIago (talk) 14:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    With all due respect, the non-inclusion of directly related categories that are subject to the same issues as the included categories is a relevant and germane point in a CFD discussion. There's simply no reason why these should all be deleted at the same time as the parent Category:Comedy film directors being kept — if the parent is acceptable, then national subcategories for countries with a large-enough number of entries for them are inherently acceptable as well, and if the national subcategories aren't warranted then the parent category isn't warranted either — and any person in any of these categories could simply be readded to the parent category at will by any editor at any time, which would inevitably be followed by these categories getting recreated because the parent category had become large enough to need diffusion into subcategories again (which is the reason why these even exist in the first place: because the parent category existed and needed diffusion). So my point stands, and I will brook no further clapback about it — it's not my job to add related categories to this discussion, it's your job to either add the related category or explain why you think it's different. Bearcat (talk) 16:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How very collaborative of you. I'll add the additional categories shortly. DonIago (talk) 16:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, WP:PERFCAT is about specific shows in which subjects participate. That is quite different than genre, which we are discussing here. Frankly I think diffusion by genre is more relevant than by location (which is also being done in this tree, at least in the US). Marcocapelle (talk) 17:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I guess I'm not sure I see the practical difference, in this case, regarding whether we're talking about categorizing actors by genre versus categorizing directors by genre? I realize categories are generally inclusive rather than exclusive (i.e. just because a director directed comedies and is categorized as such doesn't mean they didn't also direct in other film genres), but the same could be said about the actor categories as well. TL;DR why would "actors by genre" be bad but "directors by genre" not be bad? You say that PERFCAT is about specific shows, but in the CfD that I linked to the consensus appears to have been that genre does constitute a type of performance. I'm also, as I was with the prior CfD, concerned that we risk opening the door to creating multiple additional "Director by genre"-style categories. Is it really a defining characteristic in most cases (I'm genuinely asking here; my instinct is that most directors have directed films from various genres, but maybe I'm wrong)? ETA: I do see that we do have "Film directors by genre"...I'm going to keep the scope of this limited rather than make it all-inclusive at this time, as a test case. DonIago (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American comedy actors

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: As per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 4#Comedy actors, this is a WP:PERFCAT violation; actors shouldn't be categorized by the genre(s) in which they've appeared. DonIago (talk) 13:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Companies disestablished in 1788 by country

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Empty (and parent cat has only one entry) — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 11:00, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British companies disestablished in 1788

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: empty with little chance of use — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 10:59, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Electorate of Württemberg

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, the Electorate of Württemberg lasted only three years and none of the articles are specifically about the electorate except the eponymous article. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Music in Landskrona

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vietnamese jazz

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The subcategory in here is for jazz musicians who are Vietnamese, not musicians who play Vietnamese jazz (is there even such a thing?). StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 06:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Summer camps in fiction

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category #1: Single-entry category that conflicts with its parent category. Category #2: Redundant category layer that only has a single subcategory. Category #3: Category containing only a single article. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:31, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films directed by Caroline Labrèche

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Two related categories for co-directors of the same film. Per longstanding consensus, a filmmaker has to have a biographical article about the person before they get a "Films directed by" category to batch their films together -- but neither of these two people have a biographical article at all, so these aren't both necessary for the same single film. Bearcat (talk) 00:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, it might have been different if there were e.g. five articles in this category, but then at the same time it would have been more likely there was an article about Caroline Labrèche and Steeve Léonard too. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 2

[edit]

Years in Shigatse

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, this tree exclusively contains buildings and structures which we never put directly in a year category. For countries we have "establishments by year" categories but I have never seen that for cities. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Middle Eastern-Jewish culture in the United States

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The categories overlap significantly. Sakakami (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Molothrus

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate topic UtherSRG (talk) 21:03, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge – I don't think a genus's scientific and common names have different meanings as categories. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People with chronic fatigue syndrome

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To match the renaming of the main article from "Chronic fatigue syndrome" to "Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome"; and using ME/CFS so as not to be too long. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 19:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Neighborhoods in Mbarara

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation with a single article, better categorised within the larger category. AusLondonder (talk) 19:10, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films directed by Francis Annan

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per longstanding consensus, a filmmaker has to have a biographical article about the person before he gets a "Films directed by" category to batch his films together. Unlike Bob Carlson below, however, that rule wasn't followed here: Francis Annan's lack of a biographical article isn't because it got deleted, it's because no biographical article ever existed in the first place. So without a biographical article about Francis Annan to parent this, we don't need it for just one film. Bearcat (talk) 17:51, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, it might have been different if there were e.g. five articles in this category, but then at the same time it would have been more likely there was an article about Francis Annan too. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films directed by Bob Carlson

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per longstanding consensus, a filmmaker has to have a biographical article about the person before he gets a "Films directed by" category to batch his films together. While that rule was followed here, in that Bob Carlson did have an article at the time this was created, it subsequently got prodded for being improperly sourced and has never been recreated since -- so if he doesn't currently have a biographical article to parent this category, then we don't need to retain the category for just one film. Bearcat (talk) 17:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, it might have been different if there were e.g. five articles in this category, but then at the same time it would have been more likely there was an article about Bob Carlson too. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Recipient of the Duke of Gloucester's Cup

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: C2A, plural "recipients". Wikishovel (talk) 17:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Battles involving the Jats and Category:Buildings and structures of the Jats

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: We do not categorize battles and structures by caste and have deleted Indian princely states (kingdoms) which were categorized as such as well (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 4#Caste based princely state categories). A deletion here should naturally follow. Gotitbro (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Technology CEO Council

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Another category for an organisation which does not even have its own page. Category contains people associated with the organisation, but is again not even mentioned on all of the subjects within the category. AusLondonder (talk) 04:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Technology Council of Australia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category for an organisation which does not even have its own page. Category contains people associated with the organisation, but is not even mentioned on all of the subjects within the category. AusLondonder (talk) 04:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
agree Ivan191navi (talk) 07:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Financial regulatory authorities of Anguilla

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category for regulatory authorities which contains just one authority and is unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 04:16, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
unhelpful for navigation? are you stupid ? Ivan191navi (talk) 07:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Defense engine manufacturers by country

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Contains two country sub-categories, the companies within those categories do not appear to exclusively "defense engine manufactures". Title of the category doesn't really make sense. AusLondonder (talk) 03:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
doesn't really make sense... so wikipedia also does not make sense. you are stupid Ivan191navi (talk) 07:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that great contribution there, Ivan191navi. AusLondonder (talk) 17:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cyclists from Harbin

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Also merge with Category:Sportspeople from Harbin. Category only contains 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 02:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Police raids to LGBTQ venues

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Wrong preposition, does not match Category:Law enforcement operations. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Police raids on Islamists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Wrong preposition, title does not match parent category. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:00, 2 October 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 "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/All_current_discussions&oldid=1202523150#Current_discussions"