Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 24

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 24

[edit]

Category:Operations against organized crime

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: split Category:Operations against organized crime. Rename the rest as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:00, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with parent Category:Law enforcement operations. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 20:09, 24 October 2024 (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:Child pornography crackdowns

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Actual contents are mostly law enforcement operations. Those that aren't should be purged and relocated to other subcategories of Category:Child pornography. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 19:57, 24 October 2024 (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.

Empires and kingdoms of foo

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 1#Empires and kingdoms of foo

Category:Unassessed vital articles

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: deleted out of process. (non-admin closure)LaundryPizza03 (d) 01:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category Category:Unassessed vital articles is a project page! Also, I don't understand New Nominations, but I am pretty sure there aren't any. It is used for WikiProject Vital Articles, so why is it a canidate for speedy deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellow i am here (talkcontribs) 19:55, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The above comment was malformed and is now fixed. Speedy delete per C4. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 19:59, 24 October 2024 (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.

Early abbots by century

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:02, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: the earliest non-Christian (Buddhist) abbot that we have an article about is Yishan Yining who lived in the 13th century. These categories don't contribute to navigation until we have articles about earlier Buddhist abbots. All Irish abbots of this period were Christian abbots and can be added as subcategories thereof. It would be naieve to state that these Irish abbots do not belong in Christian abbots just because the Irish category name does not specify "Christian". Wikipedia should reflect the real world and not get stuck too much in its internal organization. The real world is that there weren't Buddhist abbots in medieval Ireland, they were all Christian. This nomination is of course without objection to recreation once we have articles about earlier Buddhist abbots. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:07, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. > It would be naieve to state that these Irish abbots do not belong in Christian abbots just because the Irish category name does not specify "Christian".
I never said that the individuals in the page don't belong in the Christian abbots category. I said that you shouldn't be conflating nationality and religion at the category level. Three things: I don't see why you're suggesting deletion, instead of merging. This deletion is going to break the abbot by nationality template. This seems premature, given that I asked you about this on your talk page. Mason (talk) 21:47, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge, as suggested by NL?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Apart from Byzantine abbots there isn't anything specifically medieval about abbots. Should we then also create a separate category for medieval Christian abbots, and for medieval Irish abbots? I don't think so, the century categories seem to suffice. Having said that, I have not nominated Category:Medieval abbots and it's probably too late to add this now. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:23, 24 October 2024 (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:Pages using the JsonConfig extension

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. It is WP:SNOWing and because the category will continue to grow over the course of the week – making cleanup take longer – I am ending this one prematurely. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:51, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Pointless tracking category - will eventually include literally every article with a citation. To implement this deletion, create MediaWIki:Jsonconfig-use-category with the text -. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:20, 24 October 2024 (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:Society of Ukrainian Progressors members

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. There is unanimous agreement that the category in its current form is unsustainable. Unfortunately, there is no clear consensus on what the appropriate change should be. In these circumstances, a WP:BARTENDER close is usually applicable; when there is a debate between renaming and deletion, the alternative usually is the bartender's choice. However, given the rename option was really "repurpose the existing category" and it was raised late in the discussion, I find that there is BARTENDER-consensus to delete the category. If anyone wishes to manually add any of the members to other categories (such as Category:Ukrainian Democratic Party (1904) politicians), they are welcome to (while, of course, observing policies such as WP:CATV). The current members of the category are Dmytro Doroshenko, Mykhailo Hrushevsky, Symon Petliura, Mykola Vasylenko, Volodymyr Vynnychenko, and Serhiy Yefremov. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:33, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Emptied: no refs. No such society. Mistranslation? --Altenmann >talk 21:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:16 Smasongarrison talk contribs (Dmytro Doroshenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist

      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Mykhailo Hrushevsky added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Mykola Vasylenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Symon Petliura added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Serhiy Yefremov added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Volodymyr Vynnychenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Now that the premature emptying issue is resolved, do people support a merge to Category:Ukrainian Democratic Party (1904) politicians (as suggested by Mason)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am not seeing anyone who supports the category's continued existence, so discussion on whether it should be deleted or merged is needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

<sigh> Comment. The discussion is thoroughly derailed. Not a single person in this category has refs that confirm the classification. Hence the deletion in the first place. --Altenmann >talk 00:42, 28 October 2024 (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:Second ladies and gentlemen of the Philippines

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NEOLOGISM, Second Ladies are not a thing in Philippine politics. We are not like the United States which uses such term. Second Ladies/Gentlemen at best are just a synonym for the Vice President's spouse, unlike the First Lady/Gentlemen who actually serves a role for being the host at the Malacanang Palace and is distinct from the Spouse of the President of the Philippines Hariboneagle927 (talk) 02:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More participation needed to form consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To further emphasize, there is no such role as "second lady" in the Philippine context, so the question whether it is a defining characteristics for its member articles is moot. Being a spouse is a different thing and if the intent of the article is to cover vice president spouses then a rename should be in order.. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 01:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still need more participation to form consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 18:58, 24 October 2024 (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:Events at Yankee Stadium

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep but purge the seasons. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:47, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE, we do not categorize events by the venues they were held at. Bearcat (talk) 14:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Bearcat. Moreover, a season is not an event and all of the season articles should be removed, regardless of the result of this discussion.--User:Namiba 18:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Disagree. Those should remain. A season is a collection of events/games pbp 18:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your definition of a sports season as a singular event is contrary to widely established consensus on Wikipedia. A season includes far more than just "a collection of events/games." It involves obtaining players and much more. Moreover, the games themselves did not occur solely in one place. They occurred in dozens of stadiums.--User:Namiba 18:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Yankees' home games occurred in Yankee Stadium, so I don't see what the problem is. You make it as though NONE of a Yankees' season occurred in Yankee Stadium, which is incredibly ridiculous. And I don't care what consensus is, consensus can change. I don't have to goose-step to it pbp 12:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Bearcat and Mason. No one has presented a cogent argument why Yankee Stadium should be an exception from WP:OCVENUE. It's a stadium in NYC where NYC baseball teams have routinely hosted games. What's exceptional about that? Additionally, I agree with Namiba that's it's nonsensical to categorize an MLB team's season as if it took place entirely in one venue. Carguychris (talk) 19:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as with recent CfD's on event-by-venue categories: 1 & 2. It's a perfectly good defining characteristic. The cited clause of OCVENUE has no rational basis. Agree with removing the season articles though, per Namiba's comment that a season is not an event. Toohool (talk) 20:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Without the seasons, there are very few events in this category.--User:Namiba 20:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Added more articles to the category. Toohool (talk) 22:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The stated reason for discouraging categorizing events by venue is that the categories would become too large, per WP:OCVENUE. I'm unclear if the second paragraph of the editing guideline still has community consensus but, even amongst those that support the concept, I don't think category size is the the real concern. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As per Purplebackpack89 and RevelationDirect. Boxing matches are categorized by venue and I see no reason why a general category should also exist. Sam11333 (talk) 08:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note this category confuses two different stadiums, both of which are named Yankee Stadium. Most of the events in this category occurred in Yankee Stadium (1923), not the present stadium.--User:Namiba 13:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If kept, a category split certainly make sense. RevelationDirect (talk) 17:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair other venues have been rebuilt but have just one category for events. MGS and Wembley Stadium to name just two. Sam11333 (talk) 21:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid reason to keep a category.--User:Namiba 17:44, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's true, but if we agreed that this category was defining, I don't think whether or not to split it would be that controversial. RevelationDirect (talk) 18:39, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus to delete the category, but if kept should it be purged of season categories?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:54, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It helps readers navigate between events that have been held at Yankee Stadium. Rlendog (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The general concept of "place" is always defining. For small towns, we'll marge different sports into one category, while medium sized cities will have sports specific breakdowns. One isn't more or less defining, it just depends on how much diffusion is appropriate given the number of articles to avoid WP:NARROWCAT.
For major cities, using a more specific defining location is a useful way to diffuse categories to aid navigation. (Whether you agree or not, I hope that helps clarify.) RevelationDirect (talk) 18:23, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I generally agree but, in this case, we already diffusing by borough. The Bronx category is not particularly overpopulated.--User:Namiba 14:53, 28 October 2024 (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:Geography of the Republic of Hawaii

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not useful for navigation, and its current entries don't actually belong in the category, since they're about the current state of Hawaii. If we had articles particularly focusing on the Republic of Hawaii's geography (such as its administrative subdivisions) this might be useful... but we don't. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:43, 24 October 2024 (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:Sherbrooke teams

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:35, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Small categories (just the article and a subcategory for players) which hinder navigation. Both are already in Category:Defunct ice hockey teams in Quebec. If anyone feels like doing a mass nomination, the vast majority of sub-categories here could probably be merged as well.--User:Namiba 15:13, 24 October 2024 (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:21st-century diplomatic conferences (Afghanistan)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 1#Category:21st-century diplomatic conferences (Afghanistan)

Category:Brunel University London

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The university has changed name after joining the University of London, see Brunel University of London. Elshad (talk) 09:26, 24 October 2024 (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:History of Landskrona by topic

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only four subcategories, and after the merge the target will only have 6 entries. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:14, 24 October 2024 (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:Centuries in Landskrona

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 24 October 2024 (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:Pacific Ocean theatre of World War II

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Main article uses this spelling variant. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 04:09, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the countries most obvious in this area are english variant spelling locations (it wasnt simply the US presence that were components of the action) suggest that both the article and category are given the credit of the non-us spelling JarrahTree 05:50, 24 October 2024 (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.