Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 9

< May 8 May 10 >

May 9

Category:Propaganda by interest

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 04:33, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These categories seem to cover the same purpose. N.B. this is a Stefanomione category. Place Clichy (talk) 18:27, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:44, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - per nom. We have Category:Categories by topic, but not Category:Categories by interest. Also 'by topic' is more general than 'by interest'. Oculi (talk) 23:37, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. The by interest category covers the ideological content of the propaganda. This could be easily covered as its topic. Dimadick (talk) 10:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. The division between interest and topic is not well defined. With the note that Category:Propaganda by topic is currently a container category, this will have to be removed to accommodate the additional pages. - Andrewaskew (talk) 06:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Providence Public School District superintendents

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 04:33, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge to category:Educators from Rhode Island and category:People from Providence, Rhode Island. Small category (2 articles) that is unlikely to grow. User:Namiba 17:54, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:WikiProject Christianity user boxes

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 04:33, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Regular spelling of “userbox” without a space. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:43, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Mayors of Asbury Park, New Jersey

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep all except for Lakewood Township and Matawan, which will be upmerged as nominated due to size. bibliomaniac15 19:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Tiny categories, membership not likely to grow. Rusf10 (talk) 14:33, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep most, and merge two. The usual minimum size which editors apply per WP:SMALLCAT is 5 articles. Four of the categories listed already meet or exceed that threshold: Category:Mayors of Princeton, New Jersey, Category:Mayors of East Orange, New Jersey, Category:Mayors of Long Branch, New Jersey, Category:Mayors of Orange, New Jersey. Those are all clear keeps.
    Several of the rest have 3 or 4 articles, so it would take only 1 or 2 more articles to meet the threshold.
    That leaves only a pair of 2-article categories to upmerge: Category:Mayors of Lakewood Township, New Jersey and Category:Mayors of Matawan, New Jersey. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:17, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge four, Ridgefield and Verona only have 3 articles, they may be merged too. 20:49, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Question, shouldn't it be a dual upmerge? Marcocapelle (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dual upmerge (also to People from Foo) in cases where there are less than four (or perhpas 3) articles. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:22, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment- @BrownHairedGirl:Where is it stated that the maximum size for WP:SMALLCAT is 5? Also, none of these are likely to be expanded as the trend has been to delete articles about mayors that are not otherwise notable. I put a few of the articles in these categories up for deletion at AFD.--Rusf10 (talk) 16:51, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • That number isn't codified, but it is the threshold usually applied by editors in CGD discussions.
      As to possible deletions, CFD is not the place to discuss notability. WP:AFD is thataway. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm not arguing notability here. My point is that given the trend with these type of articles, the categories are more likely to shrink than expand.--Rusf10 (talk) 23:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep populated satisfactorily populated (all, but two) and dual upmerge remainder: Category:Mayors of Lakewood Township, New Jersey and Category:Mayors of Matawan, New Jersey Djflem (talk) 17:29, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: @BrownHairedGirl: and @Djflem:, would you be opposed to an upmerge of Ridgefield and Verona, each with three articles? Or is it worth keeping them for the sake of potentially meeting the threshold of WP:SMALLCAT and not losing the histories of those categories? bibliomaniac15 19:23, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I would oppose, tho not strongly. Both are towns of over 10,000 people, and in the US that sort of size of place tends to be well-covered, so there is a reasonable expectation of expansion. My concerns is not the history of the categories (which is trivial), but rather that the more stuff that is dumped into the 200-strong list at Category:Mayors of places in New Jersey, the harder it is to find anything there, and the harder it is to subcat it. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Would not oppose, but as mentioned, the the size of Category:Mayors of places in New Jersey makes less useful than subcats by municipalities.Djflem (talk) 05:42, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:American schoolteachers by location

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. bibliomaniac15 02:50, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:American schoolteachers by location to Category:American schoolteachers by state
Nominator's rationale: Per Category:American people by occupation by state. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:01, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In this discussion I am definitely in favor of convenience and I think it would be sad to create "by state" categories and remove territories from these "by state" categories if in practice they are of the same level. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also favour convenience, but if other editors don't share that view, then we just find the pages being removed from the category, which is the least convenient outcome of all. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:13, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The pedantic approach is not reasonable. The principle at stake here is diffusion of categories. When this diffusion is justified (you probably wouldn't want all the state categories at the root of American schoolteachers) and the principle of this diffusion is geography, there is simply no good reason to leave out Washington D.C., Guam etc. "DC is not a state" is no good reason, and e.g. a + sortkey is a perfect way to show for it. If we want to fight pedantism with pedantism, we should name such categories ...by state or territory or insular area or Washington D.C. or else ...by first-level subdivision. The trouble imho with by location is that it also applies to by city, by county, by region... categories when they exist. Place Clichy (talk) 07:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - as container; create subcats per BHG, following the example of Category:American people by location. Oculi (talk) 23:44, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but tag as a container; and provide a headnote explaining that it is for US States, territories, and DC. Category names are better for being brief. Matching Category:Politics of the United States by state or territory might be desirable in theory, but pedantic correctness on the status of DC seems to point away from that. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • cmt The frequent ways of handling Washington DC is put it into the parent category of the 'by state' category, so it I did now put it into Category:American schoolteachers Hmains (talk) 05:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cmt: I reversed this recategorization; it is not appropriate to make such a recategorization while a CfD discussion is open. UnitedStatesian (talk)
  • Keep as is Although there are a very small number of counterexamples, "by location" is the standard way that categories aggregate states with the federal district and with non-state territories of the United States; see Category:Fictional American people by location, Category:Companies of the United States by location, many, many others. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and use "by location" for all the similar categories instead of "by state", unless there is some good reason not to. Rathfelder (talk) 19:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Urban animals

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 18#Category:Urban animals

Category:Victorian-era submarines of the United States

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. to the "19th-century" scheme proposed by Peterkingiron. bibliomaniac15 19:25, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, "Victorian era" is not applicable to countries like the United States or Germany. These are overlooked categories that should have been included in this earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:00, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge A different country's period is not defining to Germany. RevelationDirect (talk) 23:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps Rename to Category:19th century submarines of the United States, etc. The use of Victorian is inappropriate. The relevant period for America is pre-Civil War / Civil War to WWI; for Germany Confederation / Empire. No objection to merging but I thought an alternative target might be offered. The difference between my target and the subject is the odd year after 1900, which is hardly significant. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to 19th-century per Peterkingiron (but hyphenate the century adjective). If not, Double merge for the first one at least, to Category:Victorian-era submarines, which already contains non-British Empire members directly, and should probably be nominated for renaming to 19th-century. – Fayenatic London 21:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 11:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment No objection to the 19th century rename proposal above. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Miami-Dade County Public Schools teachers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 27#Category:Miami-Dade County Public Schools teachers

Category:Documentaries about bisexuality

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. MER-C 14:14, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge per WP:SMALLCAT, only two documentaries in this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:28, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete an "about" category, without an object view of how much "about" the subject must be and what reliable sources tell us it's at least that much. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:27, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That might be a reason to delete all "about" categories, however it is not a reason to remove content from those trees at random just because they happen to be discussed at CFD. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 11:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Documentaries about same-sex marriage

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. MER-C 14:13, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:30, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete an "about" category, without an object view of how much "about" the subject must be and what reliable sources tell us it's at least that much. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:27, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That might be a reason to delete all "about" categories, however it is not a reason to remove content from those trees at random just because they happen to be discussed at CFD. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 11:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Documentaries about lesbians

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. MER-C 14:13, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory and one redirect. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:33, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete an "about" category, without an object view of how much "about" the subject must be and what reliable sources tell us it's at least that much. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:27, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That might be a reason to delete all "about" categories, however it is not a reason to remove content from those trees at random just because they happen to be discussed at CFD. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 11:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Economics paradoxes

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Paradoxes in economics. bibliomaniac15 19:36, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Economics paradoxes to Category:Economical paradoxes
Nominator's rationale: per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 April 4#Category:Mathematics paradoxes. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 04:47, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split rather than rename. Some are paradoxes in economics (i.e. in economic theory), for example Bertrand paradox (economics); others are practical economic paradoxes, for example European paradox. They are incomparable with each other. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:59, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Economical is not the adjectival form of economics. Oculi (talk) 12:00, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marcocapelle's suggestions make sense; economical in my mind means "thrifty" or "low priced", not anything having to do with the "economics" as a subject but that may be different on the other side of the pond. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 11:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Elections in Hino, Tokyo

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. MER-C 14:13, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge per WP:SMALLCAT, only one article in the category. A second merge target is not needed since the article is already in Category:Mayoral elections in Japan. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for Now Too small to aid navigation. No objection to recreating if we ever get up to 5 articles. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:11, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Heads of Moscow Governorate

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. MER-C 14:13, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose merging Category:Heads of Moscow Governorate to Category:Governors of the Russian Empire Governorates and Category:Moscow Governorate
Nominator's rationale: upmerge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Thanks to User:Place Clichy for spotting this. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:10, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support this is a useless intermediate level with only one subcategory. Place Clichy (talk) 13:18, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Betar football clubs

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep in light of a possible requested move. bibliomaniac15 19:11, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See all other articles and categories for Beitar rather then Betar.
  • Please start an RM at Talk:Betar, dependent on the outcome of that I will withdraw my oppose. If Beitar appears to be the preferred spelling, Category:Betar should be nominated as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 15:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Films set in Whoville

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 18#Category:Films set in Whoville

Category:Things named after Nursultan Nazarbayev

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. The category contents will be posted on the talk page in case anyone wants to listify. bibliomaniac15 02:33, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting Category:Things named after Nursultan Nazarbayev
  • Propose Deleting Category:Things named after Heydar Aliyev
  • Propose Deleting Category:Things named after B. R. Ambedkar
  • Propose Deleting Category:Things named after Julius Caesar
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SHAREDNAME
These categories are exactly what they sound like, textbook WP:SHAREDNAME. And most of these were created by a banned sock puppet. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:20, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to defend the JFK category for containing actual purpose built memorials not just random things named after him ... but then I clicked on the category. All the street names and high schools in that category are not fine. RevelationDirect (talk) 10:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The articles are about colleges, airports etc and should be notable as such (or be deleted). For example, Caesars Entertainment Corporation meets WP:NCORP and the article doesn't even mention Julius Ceasar. DexDor (talk) 19:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all (and if something does not belong, just fix it). I don't see WP:SHAREDNAME to be about these types of categories but as UnitedStatesian pointed above, a random name, such as "Chris". Having an easy to search and navigate category system is beneficial for the project. --Gonnym (talk) 14:34, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SHAREDNAME includes "Avoid categorising ... by characteristics of the name rather than the subject itself." and includes the example of Churches named for St. Dunstan. Many such categories have been deleted (example). Name-based characteristics are also non-defining in all/most cases. Categorizing things by their name would open up all sorts of issues such as things that are renamed or have multiple names. DexDor (talk) 18:35, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:America's Cup Hall of Fame

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. A list of the pages currently in the category is available on the talk page if anyone wants to create a list. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 04:33, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:America's Cup Hall of Fame
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD and WP:OVERLAPCAT)
The America's Cup Hall of Fame is an award started by the Herreshoff Marine Museum in 1992, often for people who participated much earlier. Most the articles mention the America's Cup generally right in the intros but generally mention this award later in the articles so it doesn't seem defining. All of the people I clicked on were already in Category:America's Cup sailors or other America's Cup categories based on their role, so this commingled category seems less useful for navigation. We already have the winners listified here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:20, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
*RFC There is an open request for comments on proposed changes to WP:OCAWARD. Your input (pro/con/other) is always welcome here. -RD
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Germany's Sports Hall of Fame inductees

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. A list of the pages currently in the category is available on the talk page if anyone wants to create a list. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 04:32, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Germany's Sports Hall of Fame inductees
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)
The Germany's Sports Hall of Fame was founded in 2006 and received a lot of press for inducting a few Nazis. A large majority of these winners participated in the Olympics way before 2006 and are already well categorized under Category:Olympic competitors for Germany. There are a few non-Olympic athletes here but they all seem well categorized: Joachim Löw under the FIFA World Cup, Emanuel Lasker under Chess, and Wolfgang von Trips under Formula One. A large majority of these article don't even mention the award so it's clearly non-defining. The contents of the category are already listified here within the main article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:20, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
*RFC There is an open request for comments on proposed changes to WP:OCAWARD. Your input (pro/con/other) is always welcome here. -RD
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_May_9&oldid=960277768"