Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/Today

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion policies for the official rules of this page, and how to do cleanup.

Deletion tools
Policy (log)
Articles (howto · log)
Templates (howto · log)
Categories (howto · log)
Mergers
Page moves
Speedy
All speedy templates
Unfree files
Transwiki (howto · log)
All transwiki templates

Deletion of a category may mean that the articles and images in it are directly put in its parent category, or that another subdivision of the parent category is made. If they are already members of more suitable categories, it may also mean that they become a member of one category less.

How to use this page

[edit]
  1. Know if the category you are looking at needs deleting (or to be created). If it is a "red link" and has no articles or subcategories, then it is already deleted (more likely, it was never really created in the first place), and does not need to be listed here.
  2. Read and understand Wikipedia:Categorization before using this page. Nominate categories that violate policies here, or are misspelled, mis-capitalized, redundant/need to be merged, not NPOV, small without potential for growth, or are generally bad ideas. (See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Manual of Style.)
  3. Please read the Wikipedia:Categorization of people policy if nominating or voting on a people-related category.
  4. Unless the category to be deleted is non-controversial – vandalism or a duplicate, for example – please do not depopulate the category (remove the tags from articles) before the community has made a decision.
  5. Add {{cfd}} to the category page for deletion. (If you are recommending that the category be renamed, you may also add a note giving the suggested new name.) This will add a message to it, and also put the page you are nominating into Category:Categories for deletion. It's important to do this to help alert people who are watching or browsing the category.
    1. Alternately, use the rename template like this: {{cfr|newname}}
    2. If you are concerned with a stub category, make sure to inform the WikiProject Stub sorting
  6. Add new deletion candidates under the appropriate day near the top of this page.
    1. Alternatively, if the category is a candidate for speedy renaming (see Wikipedia:Category renaming), add it to the speedy category at the bottom.
  7. Make sure you add a colon (:) in the link to the category being listed, like [[:Category:Foo]]. This makes the category link a hard link which can be seen on the page (and avoids putting this page into the category you are nominating).
  8. Sign any listing or vote you make by typing ~~~~ after your text.
  9. Link both categories to delete and categories to merge into. Failure to do this will delay consideration of your suggestion.

Special notes

[edit]

Some categories may be listed in Category:Categories for deletion but accidently not listed here.

Discussion for Today

[edit]
This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024_September_23


September 23

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:Russian America

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, largely overlapping topics. In article space Russian America likewise redirects to Russian colonization of North America. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Oligarchy task force

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Nothing left here expect two blank pages. Gonnym (talk) 09:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Corporatism task force

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Nothing left here expect two blank pages. Gonnym (talk) 09:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fascism task force

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Nothing left here except a blank page. Gonnym (talk) 09:18, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ghanaian emigrants to Wales

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I really don't understand the point of a category like this. Firstly, this category has a single article and is clearly not helpful for navigation. Secondly, what's the point of subnational immigration categories? If you emigrate to Wales you're actually migrating to the United Kingdom and obtaining a UK visa. Merging to the populated parent category makes sense here. AusLondonder (talk) 08:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Drum Corps International members

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Marching drum corps, and Drum Corps International groups in particular, is not a defining trait for any of these people Why? I Ask (talk) 06:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Categories named after Canadian Premier League seasons

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The names of these eponymous categories should match the title of their main articles. RedBlueGreen93 20:35, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Classical guitar makers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between the type guitar and occupation. Mason (talk) 04:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Flemish battle painters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: overlapping categories Mason (talk) 03:12, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Modern musical instruments

[edit]

All arbitrary and original research; Wikipedia is supposed to be timeless. it's not like musical instruments have censors on them so that whenever they're picked up, a central database records their usage statistics; such a system would have extreme security and privacy concerns, at the very least. Also, many of these categories are small with no potential for growth. Graham87 (talk) 02:47, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prehistoric Asia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, it is unclear how the two categories are supposed to be different from each other. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:13, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge direction? (I will tag Category:Prehistory of Asia.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:48, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't have a preferred merge direction, maybe User:Nederlandse Leeuw has, one way or the other. I do notice however that not just Asia has this issue, it applies likewise to all other continents. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:29, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Short answer: I'm not sure what to advise here. Seeing my previous proposal for renaming Ancient Fooland to Ancient history of Fooland was a failure, I'm reluctant to to suggest any direction to take into making these catnames more consistent, certainly as long as the main article titles are not in some way WP:TITLECONned first. But that is a discussion that should probably take place elsewhere and not here.
Long answer
Purely by catname and main article names, Category:Prehistory by country seems to show Prehistoric Fooland is more commonly used than Prehistory of Fooland or Fooian prehistory. But there are some notable differences that should make us cautious to make a WP:C2C argument too quickly.
These three continents almost consistently have subcatnames like Prehistoric Fooland, usually (but not always) with correspondingly titled main articles:
Category:Prehistoric Europe by country > Prehistoric Europe
Category:Prehistoric Africa by country > Prehistoric Africa
Category:Prehistoric Asia by country > Prehistoric Asia
But, present-day countries have inconsistent article titles, so there's no easy WP:C2D argument to make here. To take Europe as an example:
versus
versus
A casual observation may be that Prehistoric Fooland is much more popular for articles on the British Isles, other islands and peninsulas, but Prehistory of Fooland seems more popular for areas in continential Europe those geographical borders may not be that clear-cut.
The other continents are more inconsistent, and we've got a lot of redundant layers, like
Category:Prehistory of Central America:
There is a lot of cleaning up we could do, but where do we even start? Like I said in my short answer, I think main article titles should be made consistent first if we want to harmonise catnames afterwards. WP:C2D stipulates that catnames follow main article titles, not the other way around.
NLeeuw (talk) 23:03, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Do people support a merge from "Prehistory of Foo" to "Prehistoric Foo"?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:50, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greek mythology by region

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These categories are for mythology relating to the places rather than mythology necessarily originating in those places, as the current titles imply. There are many Greek myths about places didn't originate in those places and many for which it is impossible to know where the myths originated. Some of the subcategories of Category:Greek mythology by region already follow the proposed naming convention. Mclay1 (talk) 12:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The rationale proposes a distinction without a difference. Additionally, renaming these will make them harder to search for, since there are already too many entries for "Mythology" to display in the search window, while most of the articles using demonyms appear right away when someone starts to type them. Consistency is not a strong argument when balanced against convenience. A handful of these names may not be familiar to readers, but readers who are familiar enough with the topics to be searching for them would probably recognize them; and many of the proposed names are equally objectionable.
For instance, "Mythology of Elefsina", rather than "Eleusis", since inexplicably the entire history of ancient Eleusis is covered under the unrecognizable modern name of the town; "Mythology of Corfu", as though "Corfu" were the name of a place one encounters in classical history or mythology; "Mythology of Corinthia", when "Corinthia" is the name of a modern administrative region of Greece that did not exist in antiquity; "Mythology of Arcadia, Peloponnese", as though any other Arcadia would have distinctive mythological topics; "Mythology of Salamis Island", when Salamis was never so called "Salamis Island" in antiquity and will not generally be encountered under that name, and there is no corresponding mythological topic for the other Salamis, in Cyprus. P Aculeius (talk) 12:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categories are not named based on the convenience of searching for the category name; most readers are not finding categories that way, and helping users get to them quickly is not a consideration. First and foremost should be accuracy, and these current names are not accurate. There is a distinction between the mythology relating to a place and the local mythology of the people from that place, but there is of course overlap and the proposed names work for both.
Secondly, using the modern names of the places would be consistent with the rest of the category trees for those places (we use "Greece" and not "Hellas"); however, if it would be better to use the ancient names of the places, we can do that rather than discarding the entire rename for that reason.
To address two specific ones: Corinthia is used for the ancient region (see Regions of ancient Greece#Corinthia), and the disambiguation in the category tree for Category:Arcadia, Peloponnese is necessary to distinguish it from other places called Arcadia. We generally keep subcategory names consistent for clarity even if they wouldn't be ambiguous. Just because we don't currently have mythology categories for other places of the same name, doesn't mean it wouldn't be confusing without disambiguation. Mclay1 (talk) 11:48, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will concede that the searching convenience is not a strong argument for categories, the way it would be with article titles. But the proposed titles are still counter-intuitive, so it is not entirely irrelevant; and if your argument is for consistency, then both categories including the subject and their corresponding articles should begin with the name of the place represented, rather than a generic word such as "mythology". When you're researching mythological subjects, do you look under "Greek Mythology" or "Mythology of Ancient Greece"? "Norse Mythology" or "Mythology of the Norse?"
There may be an argument to make for moving some of these titles, where the demonym is not as familiar as the name of the place, e. g. "Mythology of Cyprus, Epirus, Salamis" may be more logical than "Cypriot, Epirot, Salaminian mythology", but this would be the case for only a few of them, which again demonstrates that consistency, while not entirely irrelevant, is less helpful for determining titles than natural language.
With respect to the modern names, they are simply anachronistic in speaking of subjects from antiquity, and virtually all scholarship written in English over the last three centuries will use Greek- and Roman-era names in preference to modern ones. In some cases such as "Greece", there is a further convention of Anglicization, but it forms on the Roman-era "Graecia" rather than Greek "Hellas". But you will have trouble finding any scholarship referring to the "Elefsinian mysteries", or similar descriptions, and if there is any, it will probably be in recent translations of modern Greek works.
I will retract my criticism of "Corinthia", finding that the term is used for the territory belonging to Corinth in antiquity. However, "Corfu" is as anachronistic as "Elefsina" and even less recognizable; and consistency within category trees is a weak argument for disambiguation when there is no risk of confusion. Nobody says "Arcadia, Peloponnese" or "Salamis Island", and there is no need to do so in these category names just because disambiguation is unavoidable in other contexts.
It's not merely that we don't currently have categories for mythology of other, similarly-named places, but that it is unlikely that such categories would exist in the first place. For instance, the Salamis in Cyprus would presumably be covered under the mythology of Cyprus; and there is no other ancient Arcadia that would have any distinct mythology; the barely-known Cretan town is usually called "Arcades", and other places called "Arcadia" were not established or did not bear the name until after paganism was stamped out. The strongest argument for disambiguation would be "Thebes, Greece", but the corresponding article and category on the mythology of Thebes in Egypt are under "Theban Triad". There is not much risk of confusion, and a hatnote would probably be sufficient to help anyone who arrives at the wrong topic.
To re-iterate, consistency is not a strong argument for renaming categories that are already unambiguous, particularly when the extant names are what readers would most likely expect to find; and in many cases renaming them to be consistent with each other would make them inconsistent with article titles that readers would expect to encounter. It would be better to deal with these on a case-by-case basis. P Aculeius (talk) 14:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More participation needed to form consensus; additional comments would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:37, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I do not have an opinion about "fooian" versus "of foo", generally, but I concur with P Aculeius that we should not use modern names when it conflicts with common names of ancient Greece as used by classical scholars. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:03, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still need more participation :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:40, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video games about aircraft

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

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

Category:History of the Jews in the Middle East

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge or reverse merge, and keep a redirect, Middle East and West Asia are very overlapping concept. I will tag both categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. ME includes all of Turkey and Egypt, but not the South Caucasus. WA excludes parts of Turkey and all of Egypt, but includes the South Caucasus. Ergo ME =/= WA.
I could possibly get behind "Middle East and West Asia", but that's a mouthful. Keeping separate ME and WA lists seems the better alternative. Lewisguile (talk) 12:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • ME is a subcat of WA, which is certainly defensible. But much of the content of WA is clearly ME. If we decide what ME actually covers, say it in a note, & rearrange accordingly, won't that fix things? Johnbod (talk) 17:44, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can and should decide what these terms cover for the purposes of the category, and say that. We should be doing that for all such ambiguous terms, such as Central Europe etc. Otherwise chaos. Johnbod (talk) 11:42, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:50, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think a more holistic solution is needed here, but more participation is needed to form consensus in this particular discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Appalachia-stub

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Stub template which populates the WikiProject category Category:Stub-Class Appalachia articles. Fewer than 60 members and Category:United States stubs is a very full tree, so unlikely to be helpful as either a stub category or a stub container category. Delete the template and re-sort the contents. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:21, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although it certainly needs revisiting for proper application to further entries, this template is not in violation or contradictory to any guidelines shown. It has well over 100 applicable pages and US Stubs is rather broad. Appalachia is a fairly large geographic and cultural region, so generally speaking I'd say it's relevant enough to warrant a stub template.
Obviously, I created it so I'm particularly biased; still, I'm opposed. Dionysius Millertalk 18:07, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you want the official guidelines, see WP:NEWSTUB. In particular, new stubs should be proposed first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, where we need to demonstrate that this is not redundant to more specific stub templates.
I am also not saying articles should use {{US-stub}}, I am saying things should use stub templates which feed into Category:United States stubs. For instance, this template is currently transcluded at Kentenia State Forest. However, we have the very specific {{HarlanCountyKY-geo-stub}}. I don't see how a more generic stub type is helpful here, and if it is we need to create an actual stub category (following NEWSTUB). HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:7thC-document-stub

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Orphaned stub template with no associated category. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:17, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think I made that template for some stub article I came across if my memory serves me right. I don't care about that template now that the page has been deleted, so delete it is.
(Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 02:59, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not0nshoree, reasonable. Just as a note for the future, new stub types should be proposed following the procedure at WP:NEWSTUB. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:30, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Subdivisions of the Dutch Republic

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge this underpopulated category Mason (talk) 00:46, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Military of Curaçao

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge this underpopulated category Mason (talk) 00:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Economy of Loosduinen

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated categories, upmerge for now to the former village, Loosduinen. There's only one page per category, and the vast majority lack relevant parent categories. Mason (talk) 00:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Field guns by company

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. This is a redundant category layer with only on parent category. Mason (talk) 00:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/Today&oldid=931652817"