Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 13

< January 12 January 14 >

January 13

Category:Wikipedians in Twin Cities, Minnesota

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians in Twin Cities, Minnesota (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: This category is only populated by one user and redundant to Category:Wikipedians in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area JayJayWhat did I do? 23:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I just realized that there is already a category called Category:Wikipedians in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area and the only user in the category I nominated is already in that category so not sure if a merge is necessary at all. JayJayWhat did I do? 01:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, in that case deletion is fully appropriate. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:17, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and above. Aza24 (talk) 23:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Leaked albums

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Leaked albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Being "leaked" is not a defining characteristic for an album. Prior to the move to standard worldwide release dates an album was available online prior to release due to the different in timezones. Per WP:LEAK it is often not encyclopedic to include that something was leaked - leaks are often poorly sourced and this effectively promotes illegal activity (the leaking of copyright content). I can't fathom a reason to search for leaked material using categories. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 23:11, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Pop-folk albums

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 February 5#Category:Pop-folk albums

Greek crossroads, neighborhoods, streets, and villages

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:40, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:People from Argithea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    • Propose deleting Category:People from Acheloos (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    • Propose deleting Category:People from Anatoliki Argithea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. We don't need any categorization by insignificant crossroads, municipalities, neighborhoods, streets, and villages. These should be grouped into larger areas, sometimes called "regional units" in templates, although that is apparently also translated as "peripheral units".
Multiple editors have tried to recategorize the articles under the parent municipality, and been reverted. Therefore, I'm proposing deletion without upmerging.
Moreover, any persons who have no references citing where they notably lived should never be categorized by such places.
Examples:
Note: We have also had a problem with re-creation of these after deletion, by subtle change of the 'o' in "from", in both cases by User:Antondimak (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs):
  • Category:People from Arta (municipality) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), re-created after deletion, then re-deleted again.
  • Category:People frοm Arta (municipality) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), re-created later the same day.
  • See also:
William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:06, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Already tried that, was reverted both times. The only 2 people in these categories have no such references, so should be removed entirely, and these categories deleted as empty.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Karditsa is a regional unit (something like a state in the USA). Acheloos is in Karditsa. The article says she was born in the regional unit of Karditsa. It's like saying somebody born in San Diego was born in California. Since this is causing such confusion I'm going to edit it to be more specific (as is done in the Greek article). --Antondimak (talk) 00:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Someone who is born in San Diego is born in California, since San Diego is part of California. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:25, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • You seem to be getting it. So saying "That is odd, the article <some person> says born and raised in California." doesn't make sense, since it isn't odd at all. The template can say "San Diego" and the article "California" with no contradiction. --Antondimak (talk) 09:32, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is factually incorrect. Calling Karditsa (regional unit) a metropolitan area (like the Athens of Thessaloniki metropolitan areas) is ridiculous, you can ask any Greek person about it. Regional units or "nomoi" are equivalent to states. Greece has only two metropolitan areas, those of Athens and Thessaloniki, but if tried to find the equivalent in the rest of Greece, it would correspond to the "demotikes enotetes" (translated as "municipal units"). This is very obvious if you're Greek, but probably quite confusing if you aren't, so I wouldn't act so confident. I'm tired of having to explain Greek geography. I don't know how I can prove this to you, you could open Google maps I guess and look at the "grey" of the city of Karditsa and compare it to the size of the regional unit. Greece is a unitary state, so we can't have the same representative standards as the USA, which is a federation, however regional units have "nomarches" (i.e. Governors). Municipal units have political representation as well, as municipalities in other countries. In 2011, in an attempt at centralisation, municipal units stopped electing mayors, but this again has to do with the country's unitary approach and isn't relevant. To use another unitary country as an example, France doesn't have a legislature for any of its departments. But again this conversation is becoming pointlessly complex. --Antondimak (talk) 14:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"As such, Greece is the equivalent of a state" As is France I guess following this logic. Also China before the de facto creation of a federal system in the 90s. --Antondimak (talk) 15:08, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • France is also the political equivalent of a US state. A French department is an administrative division, less than a full state. Actually, "nomarches" google translates into English as "prefect". In the US, that might be a county executive (or less) in stature, with 1/10th the population. In many cases, that is why upmerging to "(municipality)" may prove too small.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 15:18, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure how we get there, but France and Greece, as sovereign countries, are the equivalent of the US. Their first-level administrative divisions are the equivalents or US states in this regard, and the federal vs. unitary structure of government does not change that. France and Greece also have in common the fact that the French department/Greek prefecture level is in many practical aspect the first-level administrative division both legally and culturally since these were formed in the 1790s/1830s respectively. The French and Greek regions were created much later (ca. 1970s) to aggregate lower-level divisions. There are, in this regard, comparable to the unofficial Census regions of the United States (Northeast, Midwest, South, West) for cultural purposes, although they do have administrative powers and are undeniably the first-level administrative division. The 2010 Greek reform that renamed prefectures into regional units and split them into smaller ones, in the Athens suburb only, does not strip them from their status as the usual reference point by which Greek topics and Greek people would be identified. Place Clichy (talk) 17:21, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sadly, while national pride is understandable, much of what you've written is incorrect. You really don't seem to have grasped the scale.
    1. Each State is sovereign under the US Constitution, and the equal of France. Many are quite a bit bigger than France.
    2. I'm not as familiar with every state, but France has a consulate in Michigan.
    3. Michigan is a political division, not an administrative division.
    4. The first level administrative division of Michigan is the county. There are 83 Michigan counties.
    5. Detroit is a city wholly contained by Wayne county. Détroit began as a French fort and settlement.
    6. Michigan at 96,716 mi² is somewhat bigger than Britain at 93,628 mi², and much bigger than Greece at 50,949 mi². Many folks still think Britain is the equal of France, although it is falling into disfavor after Brexit. I'm unsure how Greece is ranked.
    7. A US census region would be more like Greece plus all the Balkans. Greece would be a tiny fraction.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 02:19, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There have been two prior attempts to delete Category:People from Acheloos by removing Efi Thodi and then deleting it as empty. If someone read the article's template they would understand that it doesn't say she's People from Karditsa (regional unit) in general, it clearly states "Vrangiana, Karditsa". For some reason that first word was ignored. In that case, if someone were to still be confused, they could simply read my relevant edit summary (the edit referred to in the rationale) where I responded to "only reference is Karditsa" with "Vrangiana, Karditsa. Vrangiana is in Acheloos.". I don't know what else to say to explain it. It's Greek geography. Last time I provided a government document to prove Vrangiana is in Acheloos. I don't know where this tendency to deny Greek geography comes from.
Regarding references: Categories are based on the content of the articles. If something is doubted, the issue should be brought up for it to be sourced or removed from the article, then the category change follows. Regardless, I have added two references regarding her place of origin, so this shouldn't be an issue.
"an obsolete, no longer existing place": At first I had no idea what this was supposed to mean, but I think I understand. You probably went to the article "Acheloos (municipality)" and read the first sentence. The short explanation is that no, it isn't "obsolete". It is a functioning "demotike enoteta", corresponding to what is usually called a "municipality" in English, but usually misleadingly translated as "municipal unit". In 2011 "deme" (misleading translation: "municipalities") were renamed into "demotikes enotetes" (misleading translation: "municipal units"). But still this wouldn't really matter, as it's used as a geographic identifier.
As for the second person, again we have the same problem as before, as seemingly the first word was missed. The article says he is from "Petrochori, Karditsa". Petrochori is in Anatoliki Argithea. William Allen Simpson seems to not have seen that, and tried to recategorise it to Imathia. Imathia is an entirely different region, and the confusion probably arised from the first sentence saying that the person acted as Governor of Imathia. I corrected that and explained all that in the edit summary, but I will in good faith assume that this again was just missed. The (stub) article is sourced, including this detail.
Regarding Arta, as I explained in the edit summaries (apparently nobody seems to read those, but they're quite useful), there was no decision regarding what would the structure should be, only a general "merge" decision. Essentially there was no final plan on what would happen. The merge was performed by a bot, which led to a buggy result. I changed the "o" in order not to fight with the bot. Again, everything is in those edit summaries. --Antondimak (talk) 00:09, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdrawing opposition. I won't put myself through this anymore. --Antondimak (talk) 12:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • As Acheloos is in Karditsa, and it seems we agree on that, then she does belong in Category:People from Karditsa (regional unit) when the Acheloos subcat is not kept. (And it should not be kept, per WP:SMALLCAT). The second person, as he has been governor of Imathia, he certainly belongs in that category too. Being "from" in Wikipedia categories is not limited to where people spent their youth. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Previously we talked about downmerging, which is the only viable option in cases like this, so that no information is lost. We don't categorise people by USA states but by cities. In a similar manner, we don't categorise people in Greece by regional units but by municipalities ("demotikes enotetes"). They are not "crossroads, neighborhoods, streets, or villages", they are usually collections of some dozen towns, one to three of them usually being relatively major, and they're the level of specification that's usually available in articles, both within and outside of Wikipedia. I have chosen it mostly for this reason when studying the sources for the thousands of Greek biographies in Wikipedia to categorise them, going by Wikipedia's spirit of being modeled on its sources. There are of course various other more "hands on" reasons for this being the case (some of which I explained in the previous discussions), but what should really matter here is that that's what the articles are doing, and the categories follow it. Wider categorisation is also anachronistic since these divisions are relatively recent (the provinces or "deme" only being formed in 2011), and I mention this since you yourself brought it up in the previous discussion. WP:SMALLCAT specifically says "Small with no potential for growth", which is demonstrably not the case here. These categories are growing constantly, and if they are deleted it will only result in them being recreated shortly after, when the available articles will have grown. A lot of these categories already have 5 or more articles as members, and deleting some now will only make the structure confusing and make it harder for editors who will have to recreate the smaller ones when they reach that amount. An example of that is the category we're talking about (Argithea). In the previous discussion it was considered for merging with Acheloos because it was its only member (and deletion since Efi Thodi had be removed again), but this is not the case anymore.
There is no indication that the second person resided in Imathia, since it is possible to govern from Athens. It therefore makes no sense to remove him from the category where he was born and lived and add him to the category of the province for which he was appointed Governor. --Antondimak (talk) 10:01, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • NOTE TO CLOSER — Please ignore the opposition from User:Antondimak (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), who has been documented subverting prior CfD decisions by recreating categories with unusual typography. And admits the deliberate action above.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 13:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • NOTE TO CLOSER The person who proposed this deletion, User:William Allen Simpson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), attempted to delete various similar categories by removing articles from them for no reason (or factually incorrect reasons) and then tagging them as empty. He did this for these three but also for Category:People from Archanes, Category:People from Pteleos, Category:People from Almyros, Category:People from Asterousia, and Category:People from Sourpi, from which he removed 5 articles (enough for the category to be retained even if there wasn't the clear potential for growth), in order to avoid discussion. He made many mistakes, intentional or not, and when I reverted them he ignored my explanation and tried to misrepresent my corrections as vandalistic. I have no idea why he is doing this, but it is disruptive. I have made clear both in the edit summaries and in this discussion why I recreated said category, and there was no opposition to it until now. --Antondimak (talk) 14:09, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The number of edits where I've accidentally forgotten an edit summary in 15 years is very small. That is not the case here. For previous discussions, note the "See also" in the nomination. The fact that nobody else noticed the odd "frοm" until now is an indication of hidden perfidy, not the lack of opposition in 2 nominations. Moreover, if there are more such cases, I'll ask that this user be suspended.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the 5 articles you removed from "Sourpi" there was no edit summary, and no obvious reason for their removal. Why you did that, I have no idea, but it constitutes vandalism. However the main thing I'm saying that you didn't read my edit summaries, or, as seems more likely, purposefully ignored them in order to misrepresent the situation. Your edits were *wrong*, some to a comical degree, which is absolutely understandable for someone editing outside their area of expertise, about something in a foreign country. I gave you the benefit of the doubt, thinking that you were just confused, that you somehow didn't notice the places in the articles where it was clearly stated were the people were from, but it seems I was wrong. The mistakes seem to have been purposeful (and again I have no idea why somebody would do this, I just woke up to a bunch of obviously mistaken edits and reversed them stating the reason in the edit summaries). About the nomination you're referring to, I will again say there was no clear result. There is a tree of categories, and there was no idea of what the general solution would be. A bot was put to do the job, and it resulted in a literally buggy category. I brought up the issue in the next discussion, saying a consensus on a general solution should be reached, but there wasn't enough interest. --Antondimak (talk) 15:04, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Of all the 16 subcategories of Category:People from Karditsa (regional unit) only one has more than 2 articles. We build categories up from the articles, not down from administrative boundaries. Karditsa is clearly an area big enough to have a reasonable number of articles. The others, apart from Category:People from Karditsa should be deleted. Antondimak appears to be intent on disruptive editing. Efi Thodi has been returned to a category, Category:People from Acheloos of a municipality, or small settlement, which no longer exists and of which she is the only member. This is not even where the article says she comes from. Rathfelder (talk) 15:55, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • What you are doing, and I really believe you are doing in good faith, is disruptive. Efi Thodi has been removed from the proper category many times. At least one of these was done by William Allen Simpson in a deliberate attempt to delete the category. I return her not because it is disruptive, but because people seem to be keen on removing her without reason. So much that I had to provide a government document saying Vrangiana is in Acheloos. I keep saying it over and over again, but you would rather keep moving it around rather than just believe me (or at least the document I provided). Acheloos still exists of course, the name of this type of administrative division just changed in 2011. It didn't get nuked, it's still a geographical division (what we care about) and a functioning administrative division. The categories are continuously growing larger, and many that had or two members the last time we had this discussion now have reached the unofficial threshold of 5. SMALLCAT specifically says they need to not have the potential for growth. --Antondimak (talk) 16:11, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow this is a lot of stuff to read. But I haven't yet seen a serious objection to merging to Category:People from Karditsa. If 2 articles have been written since the start of Wikipedia, it is unlikely that we will reach 5 articles any time soon, which means that the regional unit is a far better geographical level for a collection of biographies. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:57, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Of the two articles one was written last month. I assure you that these categories are constantly growing. Last time were were discussing a merge of Category:People from Argithea with Category:People from Acheloos. This Acheloos isn't the sole subcategory anymore. --Antondimak (talk) 22:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • They are not villages they are larger units. Anyway, believe me that they do grow. We don't have to guess I see it happenning. And even if that weren't true, merging up to the regional unit is excessive. --Antondimak (talk) 07:19, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Rathfelder and Marcocapelle: Over my 40+ publications, I've had several Greek co-authors and collaborators. (All are now in the US.) After consultation, (regional unit) is not where we should upmerge. They are parallel to the old Prefectures, but in many cases are merely parts of larger metropolitan areas such as Athens. (See my example above with Chicago, Detroit, and San Diego.) So our upmerge target should be the Region, not the regional "unit". We can probably delete all of the regional units as they become empty. In any case, as has been confirmed by Rathfelder, most of these have no WP:RS; those need to be purged again (as I'd already done previously).
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:50, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright at this point I will have to bring this in. I don't know who you asked, but, apart from Athens and Thessaloniki, there are no metropolitan areas in Greece, and the prefectures/regional units are nothing close to that. Ask one of them if Achaea/Aetoloacarnania/Arcadia could be considered anything close metropolitan areas. Because I was concerned about something like this happening, and since it's so obvious to a Greek person, but pretty hard to prove if the other party doesn't trust you, I asked a question over at Greek Reddit about it. Simple question: "Would you consider prefectures (we still call them that unofficially) to be equivalent to metropolitan areas, like Athens and Thessaloniki, or for example Rome, or wider regions, such as for example Abruzzo?". The result was, as expected, a unanimous choice of the second option. It's crazy I have to go so far, like the other time I had to search government documents, but I guess we're reached that place. And I'm sorry to say that, but at this point I can't even trust that what you say is true, and that you actually consulted someone. --Antondimak (talk) 15:27, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. In a follow-up to my comments in the associated discussions 1 and 2, I expect the nominator to come up with a clear rationale of which categories are to be kept or deleted rather than the misture of red and blue links and flame discussions. Place Clichy (talk) 17:21, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The nominator requests deletion of these three. That's very clear. The two articles need to be grouped into larger areas, probably "Greece". But we won't know until we've sorted out some of these tiny ones. The nominator is not participating in the "flame discussions".
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 01:40, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Mayors of places in Chile

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:37, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, just one, two or three articles in each of these categories and they are not part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for Now While these places would have had more than five mayors in their history, most will be non-notable. No objection to recreating any if they ever get up to 5+ potential articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 23:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Filmed killings

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: do not rename. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The term killings is not the best creative term for this category and Homicides or Murders is the more used words for wikipedia categories and articles involving a killing of another human being. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 20:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As the creator of that category, this has already been discussed on my talk page [1]. The Term "killing" is a term that also includes justified deaths. The term "murder" only applies to unlawful killings. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:11, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's why Homicides would be a perfect alternative to "killings" in this situation. And here we'll have a consensus with multiple incoming editors ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 21:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Homicide is defined as "the deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another". That would not apply to deaths in war (the fallen soldier) or non-humans (the elephant). So both murder and homicide are inappropriate. Although I had some part in the naming, I do agree that Filmed killings may seem a bit awkward to some. Perhaps Filmed deaths might be better, with the sub-categories left to clarify the type of "death".Gulbenk (talk) 22:28, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be clear though. Category:Filmed deaths already does exist as a parent category. I do agree though that the category I created sounds a bit awkward. I was a Noob, and I had not read the categorization guidelines. Maybe we can come up with an alternative? Scorpions13256 (talk) 23:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep just to pick one at random we have Killing of Latasha Harlins which was ruled in court to be an involuntary manaslaughter. Does that actually fall under homicide? Also, when I first saw this category, I thought this would be limited to deaths deliberately caught on intentionally made film. That killing in question (note we use killing in the title, so it is a used term), was caught on grainy security camera footage. In fact, I think this dispute about what to call things in which people are killed is going to encompass a lot of articles. What we can determine is someone died and the death was caused by the action of other people (although some cases even that is disputed), so killing makes sense. Homicide and murder relate more to legal culpability, and will not cover all these incidents (especially since several of them are military actions).John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep unless a better name can be found - and neither of the current suggestions cuts it. Clearly not all of these are murders, and homicides are also unlawful killings (and that's not even to mention the one, um, pachydermicide(?) article). Grutness...wha? 01:52, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "killings" is the NPOV term, unlike the one being proposed for explorers. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "killings" does not require us to sort out the legal aspects of each death. Dimadick (talk) 11:58, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the title as it is. Homicide is a narrower definition & murder even more so. This cat includes articles about lawful killings, including state executions & killings in military conflicts. It also includes accidental killings. Jim Michael (talk) 11:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Caprica (TV series) characters

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:34, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. Also merge to Category:Lists of science fiction television characters by series‎ and Category:Science fiction television characters as needed. TTN (talk) 18:06, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Blake's 7 characters

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. Also merge to Category:Lists of science fiction television characters by series‎ and Category:Science fiction television characters as needed. TTN (talk) 18:05, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Robotech characters

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:30, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. Also merge to Category:Lists of science fiction television characters by series‎ and Category:Science fiction television characters as needed. TTN (talk) 18:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Dark Angel (American TV series) characters

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:28, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. Also merge to Category:Lists of science fiction television characters‎ and Category:Science fiction television characters as needed for the list and article. TTN (talk) 18:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Lexx characters

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article. Also merge to Category:Science fiction television characters. TTN (talk) 17:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Male scientists

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. Category was empty at the time of this close. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:26, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Male scientists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Ineligible category per WP:CATGENDER (esp. "Do not create separate categories for male and female occupants of the same position"). Also, its only content is Category:American male scientists of Indian descent, which is also under discussion for other reasons. Whatever the result of the other discussion, there is no need to merge any content to another occupational category. Place Clichy (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete male and female scientists don't do "science" differently, and soon to be empty. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:20, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:41, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete textbook example of a WP:CATGENDER violation. Scorpions13256 (talk) 05:04, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is a very clear violation of our rules on categorization and gender. It is historically just a little less a violation than Category:Male politicians, and in the present era may be even worse than that category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:57, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as others have already said. -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:26, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This category has been emptied. Liz Read! Talk! 02:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:American businessmen of Indian descent

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:25, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose merging Category:American businessmen of Indian descent to Category:American businesspeople of Indian descent
  • Propose merging Category:American men of Indian descent in health professions to Category:American people of Indian descent in health professions
Nominator's rationale: Guideline WP:CATGENDER states that gender-specific categories could be implemented where gender has a specific relation to the topic, but that every gender (e.g. female) category does not need to be balanced directly against a male category, especially when historically the vast majority of people associated with a position have been male. The guideline explicitly writes: "Do not create separate categories for male and female occupants of the same position". This is the case for businesspeople and people in health professions, also noting that we do not have any other male-only category for businessmen or health professions besides these. Place Clichy (talk) 16:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Mohanabhil (talk) 05:40, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support these male specific categories are not justified.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:58, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Betazoids

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 to Category:Star Trek alien characters and Category:Fictional telepaths
Nominator's rationale: Only one article. Looks like maybe merge it to Category:Fictional telepaths as well. TTN (talk) 15:07, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, double merge. I don't see scope for a useful list in this case; there was a list in the article Betazoid before user:EEMIV redirected it in 2013. – Fayenatic London 22:10, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Cardassians

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 28#Category:Cardassians

Category:Sports venues in X

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:22, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Small cat for a smaller cities that are unlikely to grow. User:Namiba 14:19, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for now. I have strong doubts that any of these categories will get above 5 in this decade, but I cannot fully rule it out further in the future, but there is no reason to think they will grow unless a bunch more such venues are constructed, and there are no short term plans for such large scale building projects that would make these categories needed anytime before 2033 at the earliest.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:01, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Hawkeyebasil

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:21, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Hawkeyebasil (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Category grouping images by author rather than by subject. Nothing to merge as all images are also in Category:NZCF ranks and insignia. YorkshireLad  ✿  (talk) 13:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Baseball venues in Texas

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:19, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We generally do not sort by region because they are not well-defined. The Waco, Beaumont, and Lubbock categories have less than five articles. User:Namiba 13:37, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge the region categories are too hard to define, the city ones are too small.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Motorcycle records

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 - The Bushranger One ping only 04:00, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category contains biographical articles and individuals who set world records in motorcycling. It does not contain articles about the records themselves. I have moved it to Category:Sports world record setters and the rename proposal is based on the name format for the other subcategories of that category. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:47, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to match actual category content. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:14, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete we shouldn't be categorizing people on setting undefined records in something or another. Sports is rife with statistics and nearly every day someone sets a record in something. No doubt, you could add the oldest living folks as the holders of longest streak of not winning a motorcycle race, etc. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:37, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • RenameDoes not make sense with current title. –Cupper52Discuss! 10:17, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename since the articles are on people not motorcycles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:12, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

OMX

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 29#OMX

Mayors of places in the Czech Republic

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, placing the article in Category:Mayors of Karviná‎ in Category:Mayors of places in Czechoslovakia. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, just one or two articles in each of these categories and they are not part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The first one has 1 entry, who was a mayor in Czechoslovakia, not in the Czech Republic. We need to be careful in how we apply this categorization.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • If there is consensus for it, we may create Category:Mayors in Czechoslovakia and apply the nomination as a split. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support All Except Karviná‎ The only one that seemed to be serving as mayor pre-split was Wacław Olszak so certainly merge the others as nominated. We could either keep Category:Mayors of Karviná‎ or create the Czechoslovak category. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:04, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Having created Category:Mayors of places in Czechoslovakia and emptied Category:Mayors of Karviná, are there other objections?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Family of Frédéric Chopin

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:16, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: to match the established convention at Category:Families of classical musicians Aza24 (talk) 02:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nomination.--Smerus (talk) 10:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I have always found the naming convention in the family tree very unsatisfactory. As a parent category is Category:Frédéric Chopin the usual rules of category naming would insist on the unambiguous Category:Frédéric Chopin family. However I see this is not the established convention (in some cases there are several contenders in the family for the category name, eg Category:Douglas family, so it could be Kirk or Michael's family ... really very unsatisfactory as there must have been other Douglas families eg this one, and these: Sharman Douglas, Lewis Williams Douglas, James Douglas (businessman), James Douglas Jr. - 4 generations). Oculi (talk) 11:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename for consistency. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:50, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Clearer scope. Dimadick (talk) 12:00, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Western classical music styles

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:16, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: based on how we treat the Classical music article and the category:Classical music, we don't use "Western" so it shouldn't be used here either Aza24 (talk) 01:53, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to match the article name. That may or may not be the best (although I know people who inisst Classical Music should be used for one sub-genre, and who if push came to shove would probably favor Western art music styles, however that should be brought about by renaming discussion on the article, that is where we will gather the needed expertise and be able to balance the power of Commonname v. accuracy.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Western Classical music instruments

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Western Classical music instruments to Category:Classical music instruments
Nominator's rationale: based on how we treat the Classical music article and the category:Classical music, we don't use "Western" so it shouldn't be used here either Aza24 (talk) 01:52, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to match the article name. That may or may not be the best (although I know people who inisst Classical Music should be used for one sub-genre, and who if push came to shove would probably favor Western art music instruments, however that should be brought about by renaming discussion on the article, that is where we will gather the needed expertise and be able to balance the power of Commonname v. accuracy.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:15, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Music catalogues

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 28#Category:Music catalogues

Category:Musical eras

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to "Classical music eras" – that is the established scope of this category, but not made clear by the current name. "Classical music eras" is preferable to "Western classical music eras" due to us not using Western for the classical music article and category. Aza24 (talk) 01:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename Clearer to aid navigation. - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:51, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nomination.--Smerus (talk) 10:56, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:54, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Recipients of the Order of Antonio José de Irisarri

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Recipients of the Order of Antonio José de Irisarri
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Grand Crosses of the Order of Antonio José de Irisarri
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)
These 2 categories have 2 articles total and I'm not sure why either of the recipients actually received the Order of Antonio José de Irisarri, a Guatemalan award. The two articles are very different (Fredrick Chien is a Chinese politician and Federico Urruela was a Guatemalan diplomat) but both mention this award in passing so, whatever it was for, it doesn't seem defining. There wasn't a list so I created one right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:17, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Recipients of the Merit Order of the Bavarian Crown

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Recipients of the Merit Order of the Bavarian Crown
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)
The Order of Merit of the Bavarian Crown was intended for "civil servants, non-nobles, and foreigners" and includes the following:
With all three groups, the award is generally mentioned in passing so it doesn't seem defining and the diverse reasons for issuing the award creates a mish-mash of articles unlikely to aid navigation. There wasn't a list so I created one right here in the main article for any readers interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:17, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, another obvious case of WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete even more overcategization by award. Award categories should be limited to ones like the Nobel Prize, where saying that the person received the award is going to occur in even the shortest biographical sketches you can find on the person. Instead we have some people who have over 15 award categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_January_13&oldid=1073192907"