Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 January 11

< January 10 January 12 >

January 11

Former baseball leagues

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 multiple categories per the proposal. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 21:43, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant after the end of these leagues. The category page text and parent categories will need to be manually merged. – Fayenatic London 23:27, 11 January 2022 (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:Religion-related WikiProjects

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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 03:57, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Same subject. Unnecessary duplicate level of categorization. Editor2020 (talk) 23:17, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There's a meaningful distinction between "WikiProjects related to Religion" and "Pages that are part of WikiProject Religion". * Pppery * it has begun... 04:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose "Category:WikiProject Religion" is for WP:WikiProject Religion, a specific wikiproject for religion. While "Category:Religion-related WikiProjects" is a categorization of wikiprojects, and is not about WikiProject Religion. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:24, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I see no point in merging every single Wikiproject on any religious topic into WikiProject Religion, as a workgroup, taskforce, or invisible element -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Keep per Pppery. --Just N. (talk) 19:54, 16 January 2022 (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:Christianity WikiProjects

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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 04:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplication of subject. Unneccessary duplicative level of category Editor2020 (talk) 23:13, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose "Category:WikiProject Christianity" is for WP:WikiProject Christianity, a specific wikiproject for Christianity. While "Category:Christianity WikiProjects" is a categorization of wikiprojects, and is not about WikiProject Christianity in particular. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment if you want to merge all these wikiproject together as workgroups or nonexistant elements, into WikiProject Christianity, this is not the way to do it -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:33, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -- The subject is parenting half a dozen projects on different aspects of Christianity, which are much netter kept separate. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:46, 12 January 2022 (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:Jewish-related WikiProjects

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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 04:01, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: duplication of subject Editor2020 (talk) 23:09, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose "Category:WikiProject Judaism" is for WP:WikiProject Judaism, a specific wikiproject for Judaism. While "Jewish-related WikiProjects" is a categorization of wikiprojects, and is not about WikiProject Judaism. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:33, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment if you want to merge all these wikiproject together as workgroups or nonexistant elements, into WikiProject Judaism, this is not the way to do it -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:33, 12 January 2022 (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:Types of fire

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 January 19#Category:Types of fire

Category:Works about race and ethnicity

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: purge certain sub-cats as discussed. E.g. Category:Jewish American novels should not be in Category:Novels about race and ethnicity; it belongs rather in Category:American novels by ethnic background (and is in that one already). – Fayenatic London 21:58, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Hopefully I did this correct enough, Twinkle doesn't seem to work for this.

I haven't followed every branch, but one example: Category:Books about race and ethnicity leads to Category:Novels about race and ethnicity which leads to, among others Category:African-American novels, Category:Hispanic and Latino American novels and Category:Jewish American novels. My point is that, IMO, none of these by necessity are 100% about race and ethnicity, take for example Category:Novels by Isaac Asimov. Some serious cutting seems to be in order.Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:41, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems that articles directly contained in categories like Category:Jewish American novels and Category:Jewish American plays do properly belong with a parent cat like Category:Books about race and ethnicity, in that they are about Jewish culture or themes, not merely written by Jewish authors (in fact, it seems some of the works in these categories were authored by gentiles). The problem is that this is not consistent with the subcategories contained in these cats, such as Category:Novels by Isaac Asimov. I would suggest removing these by-author subcats, and making it clear in the category descriptions that the category criteria are based on the content of the work, not the identity of the author. We could even rename the original categories to something like "Plays with Jewish themes", or "Plays about Jewish culture", if that clarifies the scope. Additionally, if it's seen as a useful categorization, we could split off separate categories for works by the race/ethnicity of their creators, like Category:Novels by Jewish Americans (compare, e.g. Category:Literature by African-American women). Colin M (talk) 21:17, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That makes sense. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:27, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why are works that portray the culture or themes of groups classified as "minorities" in the US about "race and ethnicity"? If these works explicitly address question of inter-community relations, that's fine, but a work e.g. about Jewish life in the US is per se just as "race and ethnicity"-related as works by majority descendants from the first settlers from the British Isles portaying "white" American life. Does The Catcher in the Rye appear in a subcategory of Category:Works about race and ethnicity? –Austronesier (talk) 18:55, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    One good reason for this apparent inconsistency is WP:CATVER. I doubt you'll find reliable sources that refer to Catcher in the Rye as a "white novel" or a novel about "white culture", whereas there are lots of RS that will refer to works as belonging to the corpus of Jewish-American literature or African-American literature or whatever. Colin M (talk) 18:04, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, why are "works [...] belonging to the corpus of Jewish-American literature or African-American literature" "works about race and ethnicity"? –Austronesier (talk) 20:24, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    They aren't necessarily. The fact that a phrase like "Jewish-American literature" is ambiguous (possibly referring to writing by Jewish-Americans, or about them) is the central issue at hand here. Colin M (talk) 21:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The central issue is whether works about Jewish-Americans etc. are a priori about "race and ethnicity" at all. A work about "race and ethnicity" is a work that topicalizes race/ethnicity-related themes such as identity, discrimination, segregation, assimilation, inter-communal relations etc. A work that simply covers people from an individual group does not automatically do that. The category discussed here is not Category:Works by artists from U.S. minority groups nor Category:Works covering themes about U.S. minority groups, or whatever they may be called. –Austronesier (talk) 11:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Come to think of it, in the fiction subsections, where do you draw the line? Fantasy often has all kinds of races running around, sometimes with a real-world analogy on purpose. Some of Asimovs novels have Earth-humans being oppressed by not-Earth-humans, and then there's the sentient robots. Is The Churkendoose about race and ethnicity? Then again, following WP:CATVER will probably help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, inclusion in Category:Works about race and ethnicity should be based on WP:CATVER. If an RS says that a work by a writer of whatever ethnic background is about race and/or ethnicity, then it can be included in the main category (or in a subcategory grouped by artistic genre). For the parent category of Category:Jewish American novels etc., if understood to be about the ethnicity of the author, we should better follow the naming convention of Category:American culture by ethnicity.
    The question of sorting by topic or author however is tricky; just look at African American literature and Jewish American literature. While the former is conceptualized based on authors, the latter strongly goes by topic. –Austronesier (talk) 13:07, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Purge subcategories per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle: which subcategories are you referring to? I see two possible solutions to the problem presented in the nom depending on what you see as the appropriate semantics for categories such as Category:African-American novels. We could either remove such categories from parent cats such as Category:Novels about race and ethnicity (if we think membership should be based on the background of the author), or we could remove subcats like Category:Novels by Octavia Butler (if we think membership should be based on the content of the works). Colin M (talk) 18:11, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Background of author/content of work is indeed a good question (or make different 2 cats for them), and "the answer" is not obvious to me. Off the top of my head, background of author seems easier. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:26, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove subcategories per nom. Category:Jewish American novels etc. do not belong here. If individual works in Category:Jewish American novels etc. are actually about "race and ethnicity", they can be directly assigned to the main cat. –Austronesier (talk) 20:27, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Purge subcategories per nom and above discussions. IF you're from say, Pakistan, you don't have to write about being from Pakistan; you may much more likely write about life, love and everything else. Place Clichy (talk) 22:27, 11 February 2022 (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 based on works by John Green (author)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 04:23, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Main article is now just John Green. Saturdayopen (talk) 19:40, 11 January 2022 (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:Novels by John Green (author)

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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 04:26, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Main article is now just John Green. Saturdayopen (talk) 19:07, 11 January 2022 (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:Wikipedians who use VSCodium

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) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: VSCodium is a redirect to Visual Studio Code. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:22, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Speedy if possible. --Just N. (talk) 20:05, 16 January 2022 (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:Cosmology articles needing infoboxes

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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Cosmology articles needing infoboxes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Unused maintenance category, and most cosmology articles don't need an infobox. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Just another case of some Wikipedian got lost and his installations remain unused. Take it with a smile. --Just N. (talk) 20:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 20:08, 16 January 2022 (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:Buried in Bydgoszcz

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. – Fayenatic London 21:47, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Buried in Bydgoszcz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Previously deleted before. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 15:08, 11 January 2022 (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:Public Utilities Commission elections

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: Speedy delete per author request (non-admin closure) * Pppery * it has begun... 04:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Public Utilities Commission elections (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Errantly created title SecretName101 (talk) 12:13, 11 January 2022 (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:Non-English Teams in the FA Cup

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. – Fayenatic London 21:45, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Non-English Teams in the FA Cup (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: I believe this is a non-defining category, as for almost all the teams in the category, there is little or no mention of playing in the FA Cup in their respective articles, because it isn't a key part of their history. Note: This was discussed briefly at WT:FOOTY, and will notify them at that discussion Joseph2302 (talk) 12:10, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I was going to say listfy, then spotted the list in the category, which does a much better job. An interesting attribute, but not a defining one, and probably WP:OVERCAT by performance too. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:19, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- This is largely a historic category, apparently going back to a period when there was not a separate league in Wales, so that Welsh clubs were eligible for the FA Cup. It also seems to list a few Scottish and Channel Islands clubs. This is a somewhat misleading category, as they are non-English clubs that have played in the cup, not ones that currently do so. I would have suggested listifying, but this is unnecessary, as the existing list does the job much better. If I had prepared the list, I would have placed the two Channel islands sections together. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:46, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - not needed. GiantSnowman 17:42, 12 January 2022 (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:Rugby union players from Kidderminster

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) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 article. Luis9595 (talk) 10:12, 11 January 2022 (GMT)
  • Merge -- also the Redditch category, which only has three articles. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Happy with a merge here, although has anybody checked that there aren't any other Kidderminster born rugby players, as the category creator didn't always add all players to categories. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:49, 12 January 2022 (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:Lists of honors and awards received by presidents 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. – Fayenatic London 21:43, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of honors and awards received by presidents of the United States to Category:Lists of awards and honors received by presidents of the United States

Nominator's rationale: Streamline category name with article names. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 08:05, 11 January 2022 (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:Naturalised soccer players by nationality

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:Naturalised association football players by nationality. – Fayenatic London 21:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: – It should not be restricted to countries that use the term 'soccer'. Many countries in the world that do not use that word have ever had those type of players too. Neutral term 'association football' should be applied instead. Then, not sure if 'naturalized' or 'naturalised'. The category was left in Category:Naturalized citizens by nation and Category:Naturalised sports competitors, which is puzzling.--MonFrontieres (talk) 05:12, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The main category Category:Naturalized citizens by nation has multiple subcategories that used "naturalised". We shouldn't be defaulting to US spelling, especially when it's other parent category uses "s": Category:Naturalised sports competitors. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but with s. We have two subcategories, Australia and Hong Kong, in both of which the usual spelling is British English. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:56, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Which should be retained (although the Hong Kong one uses 'z'). Local categories follow local rules, global ones do not. Oculi (talk) 20:09, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with s we shouldn't default to US terminology and spellings, so use naturalised (as we would do for other countries that use that ENGVAR). Also, it's consistent with parent category Category:Naturalised sports competitors. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:25, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Seeing a little more in detail, the article Naturalization should be renamed Naturalisation to make consistent with the 's' option.--MonFrontieres (talk) 14:53, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • support 'Naturalized association football players by nationality' as above - although I would prefer to delete this and the sub-categories, not defining OVERCAT, and not a standard category in this sport (hence why there are only two entries). GiantSnowman 17:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @GiantSnowman: you might want to nominate the subcategories for deletion in a separate fresh discussion, as this discussion focused primarily on renaming. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:29, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but with s. --Just N. (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2022 (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/2022_January_11&oldid=1074914052"