Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 24: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
Line 137: Line 137:


*'''Comment: '''Is the 13th-century Jurchen empire considered part of China and the peoples considered Chinese? [[Special:Contributions/61.244.93.97|61.244.93.97]] ([[User talk:61.244.93.97|talk]]) 06:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
*'''Comment: '''Is the 13th-century Jurchen empire considered part of China and the peoples considered Chinese? [[Special:Contributions/61.244.93.97|61.244.93.97]] ([[User talk:61.244.93.97|talk]]) 06:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
:* Not really, but which of these actors were active in the Jurchen empire? [[User:Marcocapelle|Marcocapelle]] ([[User talk:Marcocapelle|talk]]) 06:32, 26 March 2024 (UTC)


==== Category:Montreal Metro artists ====
==== Category:Montreal Metro artists ====

Revision as of 06:32, 26 March 2024

< March 23
March 25 >

March 24

Category:Nightclubs in Brussels

Nominator's rationale: Merge for now as it currently has only one member article. – Fayenatic London 22:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Identical twin male child actors

Nominator's rationale: Dual merge. No need to diffuse by gender. The novelty is in the intersection of twinness and age, not their gender. Mason (talk) 21:32, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Identical twin child actors by nationality

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. Only one nationality in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 21:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Identical twin politicians

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between sibling status and occupation. Mason (talk) 21:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Saint Anthony the Great abbeys

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge or delete. This isn't helpful for navigation to carve out two abbeys that are associated with a saint Mason (talk) 13:31, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There shouldn't be two categories as this is largely a matter of WP:SHAREDNAME. It is merely a coincidence that one of the two articles does contain some legendary information about Saint Anthony the Great. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:19, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors

Nominator's rationale: Category:International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors currently contains one other article (International Roadmap for Devices and Systems is called a successor to the eponymous article's topic) besides the eponymous article. Although WP:OCEPON is imprecise, this category doesn't currently have "enough directly-related articles" within it that indicate the category was justified in its creation. Pngdeity (talk) 18:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ministers of Ilunga Government

Nominator's rationale: I looked through Category:National cabinets, and we don't seem to categorise ministers by cabinet membership. I think it would be akin to WP:PERFCAT. – Fayenatic London 18:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, if we would adopt and expand this concept (hypthetically) it would lead to overcategorization of politicians articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:19, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mexican-born author

Nominator's rationale: Delete, non-standard category. The member page is now in Category:Writers from Mexico City. – Fayenatic London 17:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Mason (talk) 21:37, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Members of the Confederation of Tribal Associations of Katanga

Nominator's rationale: Merge new category per article name CONAKAT. Both member pages are biographies of people who were politicians. – Fayenatic London 17:35, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Swiss evangelicals

Nominator's rationale: delete, "evangelical" has a very specific meaning in American Christianity which does not apply to these Swiss people. See also Evangelical (disambiguation). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:46, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The supposedly "very specific meaning in American Christianity" is exactly the same in most European Protestant countries and their languages, as Evangelicalism is at pains to stress. Looking at the contents of the cat, all Calvinist church people, it does seem to apply fine. Why do you think it does not? Johnbod (talk) 14:44, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Evangelicalism is typified by a personal born-again experience and the term wasn't used this way before the 18th century. It is not equivalent to Calvinism, and Calvinists in mainland Europe are hardly ever calling themselves Evangelical. Lutherans in mainland Europe do call themselves Evangelical, but still not with the same connotation as in the Anglo-American tradition. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:34, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unconvinced - the English term born again may be relatively recent, but the concept is not - see also Evangelicalism again. Historically, the vast majority of Swiss Protestants are Calvinists (the Lutherans having been agressively chased off the patch very early on). We certainly shouldn't be treating "Evangelicals" as an exclusively English-speaking group; even for here that would be outrageous. Johnbod (talk) 19:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It does not have to be exclusively English-speaking as I suppose there are a lot of evangelical converts around the world due to the work of American (and possibly British) evangelical missionaries. But that has nothing to do with the Swiss people in this category. Again, Evangelicalism isn't synonymous to Calvinism and mainland European Calvinists do not identify as Evangelicals. The closest to Evangelicalism we had in mainland Europe is Pietism. I agree that the word Evangelical is older than the 18th century, that is exactly why it is in the name of most Lutheran churches, but that has no relationship with the meaning of the word nowadays. The article Evangelicalism describes how the meaning of the word has evolved. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:31, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:French Baroque viol players

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between style, nationality, and specific kind of designer. Mason (talk) 01:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose re French Baroque viol players. These musicians constitute a distinct sub-genre of music and the reader who starts with e.g. Marin Marais would like to easily find other persons who belong to the same school. If Wikipedia would allow to easily search for people who belong to categories Baroque musicians AND viol players AND French musicians it might be redundant, but that's not the case, right? even if it was possible, this category is much more accessible. Meizy (talk) 08:12, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stong Oppose both, and please don't mix different noms this way! What we should do is delete the ridiculous Category:French Baroque people, and the Italian and Spanish equivalents - oh, I see you just set these up today - bad idea. We could rename along the lines of the main article, French formal garden, but French Baroque garden style dominated Europe for over a century, & is highly defining. Unsurprisingly, all of the French viol players except for two contemporary Early Music players, are in the Baroque sub-cat, and it is useful to keep them separate. This was another speciality of the French Baroque period, which effectively ended with it. Gardeners are not normally treated as "artists", and I don't think we should start now. I can't for the life of me see why it is ok to have Category:French Baroque painters (which it is), but not ok to have Category:French Baroque garden designers - please explain your thinking here. Johnbod (talk) 03:57, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Johnbod First, I didn't see this as different noms, hence the bundling. 2nd, I only made the French Baroque one to match the rest that already existed. 3rd, neither of these French FOOian categories had non-nationality specific categories. There is no Baroque garden designers or Category:Baroque viol players. An alternative would be to create/broaden these into parent categories, which I would be fine with if there's sufficient content. Mason (talk) 14:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Or better yet, do nothing at all! You haven't answered my question on the grounds of the nom. One could easily set up Baroque garden designers and Category:Baroque viol players, but I think the first would only have a French sub-category, plus a handful of English and other names. The whole Category:Baroque people tree should be deleted, or at least renamed to something like Category:People in the arts during the Baroque period, which is what it is trying to be. Nobody ever uses this term, and we don't have any similar categories - Category:Gothic people (ok - for Goths), Category:Mannerist people, Category:Neoclassical people, Category:Romantic people, Category:Impressionist people. Johnbod (talk) 14:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What do you mean? "you haven't answered my question on the grounds of the nom." You asked me to explain my thinking; I did explain my thinking see 1,2,3. Furthermore: the nomination says non-defining intersection. So I don't know what "grounds" you're asking for. But I did answer the question you asked. Mason (talk) 21:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:47, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Polish painters of Jewish descent

Nominator's rationale: I think we should broaden this category to be able the broader vocation of Jewish Polish artists (instead of being a specific kind of artist). If not broadened, the category should be renamed to Jewish Polish painters. Mason (talk) 05:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:20, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Massacres of men

Nominator's rationale: delete, the main article of the category is Androcide but the articles in the category aren't related to Androcide. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom Mason (talk) 12:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, that's a really weird nonsensical reason to just suddenly delete a well-populated category with 141 pages. Besides we also have Category:Massacres of women. AHI-3000 (talk) 20:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Boxing matches in Las Vegas

Nominator's rationale: The vast majority of these matches actually took place outside of the Las Vegas city limits. User:Namiba 01:17, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would prefer it fit neatly into Category:Sports competitions in the Las Vegas Valley--User:Namiba 12:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:07, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional coffeehouses and cafés

Nominator's rationale: There is only one article that belongs in this category, Monk's Café. The rest are either redirects or not actually about the fictional restaurants themselves. Easily contained within Category:Fictional restaurants. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Purge and merge, quite a few articles are about works about coffeehouses which is something else. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:21st-century Panamanian men

Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. Unhelpful for navigation to only have one category in here. Sole category member already in FOOian-century Panamanian singers‎ Mason (talk) 16:19, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:14th-century Chinese male actors

Nominator's rationale: I think we should repurpose this category to include actresses/male actors of any nationality. Right now there's only one or two people in each, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason (talk) 18:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Is the 13th-century Jurchen empire considered part of China and the peoples considered Chinese? 61.244.93.97 (talk) 06:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not really, but which of these actors were active in the Jurchen empire? Marcocapelle (talk) 06:32, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Montreal Metro artists

Nominator's rationale: A non-defining characteristic. User:Namiba 23:10, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All of the artists who are from Quebec and/or Montreal are now appropriately categorized. Several artists are not from Quebec.--User:Namiba 17:04, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as non-defining. No objection to a list if someone wants to create one. - Eureka Lott 18:45, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Expressways in Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China

Nominator's rationale: Two articles only. One of the articles is about an entirely hypothetical motorway as indicated in the entry, the other hypothetical by and beyond the straits. Rename to hypothetical expressways of the People's Republic of China. 121.202.28.169 (talk) 12:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Julian Edelman

Nominator's rationale: Only contains the lead article and Super Bowl LIII, insufficient for an eponymous category. (WP:EPONYMOUS) – Fayenatic London 08:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:04, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, regardless of how many Super Bowls he played in. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 04:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:21st-century Andorran people by occupation

Nominator's rationale: Only one category in here, should be broadened to not be limited to occupation Mason (talk) 05:03, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Inactive anime conventions

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining. The convention isn't yet defunct. Mason (talk) 03:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep. Having an "inactive" category puts the spotlight on conventions that have lapsed. I have seen conventions before which give no official "defunct" message. The only way of telling in these cases is through a stale website. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:41, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, that's a useful piece of information, but I don't think that counts as WP:DEFINING. Mason (talk) 14:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I see it as a way to make life easier for editors monitoring the convention articles. There really is no net gain by getting rid of it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian LGBT people by province or territory

Nominator's rationale: Although these were previously deleted per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 February 27#Category:LGBT people from Canada by province or territory, that was a full decade ago, and thus I don't feel comfortable just speedying them without a new discussion.
This is, however, still a violation of WP:OCLOCATION -- there is no defining relationship between one's province of birth and their LGBT identity per se, but the parent category (which is already well-diffused on other criteria) doesn't need this for size control purposes either.
As always, just because the United States does something does not automatically mean Canada has to match it: the US is almost ten times larger than Canada by population, and thus has at least ten times as many articles to worry about, so the existence of an "X by state" scheme does not mean Canada automatically has to imitate it with an "X by province" replication. Many of the people so categorized, further, do not possess notability claims that are all that closely tied to their province of origin: Jann Arden and k.d. lang and Tegan and Sara are not notable as Albertans per se, they're notable as national or international pop stars whose birthplaces have almost nothing to do with their grounds for notability; Betty Baxter attained her notability in British Columbia, not in Alberta; Jeffrey Bowyer-Chapman is notable as a Hollywood actor, not as an Alberta actor; and on and so forth.
These, further, were created by an editor who has a history of being a serial overcategorizer who's had a lot of things taken to CFD, and does not have any established record of being any sort of expert in what categories Canada does or doesn't need.
These just don't pass the tests that would justify this scheme: the intersection of these people's province of birth with their LGBTness isn't defining in and of itself, but the parent category is already so well-diffused that it doesn't need this for size control either. Bearcat (talk) 02:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle. But, because non of the categories are tagged with non-diffusion, we'll need to ensure that these people are in the relevant parents. Thus they should be selectively merged into Category:People from FOOian province and a relevant Category:Canadian LGBT people child category. Mason (talk) 03:13, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:ISIS-K terrorist incidents in Afghanistan

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. No need to have a category with a single event. Mason (talk) 01:28, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It's not just this category. There are parent categories that just hold this category. Kind of like a house of cards. Liz Read! Talk! 03:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Attacks on public buildings in 2024

Nominator's rationale: duplicate category Mason (talk) 01:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Emigrants from British North America to the United States

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary level of intermediary categorization between a category and its natural parent. As I've noted more than once in other past CFD discussions, "British North America" was never a polity in its own right -- it was just a collective geographic term for all of Britain's colonies in North America, but each of those colonies was its own standalone thing and there was never any overarching entity called "British North America" that they were all subordinate parts of. That is, it was not like "England + Scotland + Wales + Northern Ireland = United Kingdom" or "Massachusetts + New York + New Jersey + California + Wyoming + 45 other US states = United States", it was always like "Thailand + Vietnam + Laos + Cambodia + Burma = Indochina" or "Jamaica + Haiti + Montserrat + St. Kitts + the Bahamas + Puerto Rico + Cuba = Caribbean". An umbrella term for multiple separate things in a region, not a "parent" term for subordinate parts of a unified thing.
There is exactly no point in history at which it was ever incorrect in any way to refer to a resident of Toronto or Montreal as "Canadian", or correct in any way to refer to them as "British North American" instead, because that simply isn't how those terms worked: Canada, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, Jamaica, et al were always each their own things, and "British North America" was just an umbrella term, and was never the nationality of any Canadian, New Brunswicker, Nova Scotian, Newfoundlander or Jamaican in any sense.
Of about 80 people in here when I found it, every last manjack one was directly recattable as Category:Pre-Confederation Canadian emigrants to the United States or one of its subcategories -- so that category can just directly stand as its own direct subcategory of the merge target, without needing this as an intermediary, because "British North America" never existed as an intermediary thing between "pre-Confederation Canada" and "British Empire". Bearcat (talk) 01:17, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, and the dozens of CFDs that have been surrounding this point.Mason (talk) 01:19, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale is not wrong, and nominator is incidentally highly knowledgeable on the subject of Canadian history. Upper Canada, Lower Canada and the united Province of Canada each had their own legislative assemblies, New Brunswick had its own legislative assembly, Nova Scotia had its own legislative assembly, Newfoundland had its own legislative assembly, and on and so forth — but never was there ever any such thing as the "Legislative Assembly of British North America" at all. Each colony had its own direct one-on-one relationship with the motherland, and there was never any overarching "British North America" layer of government between them. Bearcat (talk) 19:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the record, I would not object to renaming the subcategory to British North America, but that would require a different discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:09, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bank bombings in Afghanistan

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge, this is an extremely narrow cat. Only one event is in this entire tree. So I'm proposing deleting the parent cats at the same time. Mason (talk) 01:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The same category creator created 15 separate categories for one article on a military documentary film. And I could never track down what article that was because the categories were all empty. They are now all CSD C1'd. Liz Read! Talk! 03:17, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge/delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Attacks on civilians during the Israel–Hamas war

Nominator's rationale: Dual merge. Vaguely defined. This category has considerable overlap with Category:Civilians killed in the Israel–Hamas war Mason (talk) 01:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, we do not have any other "attacks on civilians" categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_March_24&oldid=1215626639"