Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 July 23

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< July 22 July 24 >

July 23[edit]

Category:Film Markets[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: RenameTimrollpickering 21:11, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No reason for this to be capitalized. Nardog (talk) 15:35, 23 July 2018 (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:Big Brother (TV series) templates[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. Timrollpickering 15:06, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The parent article is Big Brother (franchise) so the category should match the article's naming. Gonnym (talk) 10:43, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. Wasn't this speediable?  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:41, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No idea how to do that. Using the drop-down menu only let me do 1 category and this way. --Gonnym (talk) 13:04, 29 July 2018 (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:Commercial baking[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. Timrollpickering 09:33, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Two small categories with substantial overlap. Rathfelder (talk) 09:04, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, absent some compelling reason not to. Looks like an accidental fork.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:42, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom but the two articles about food additives ought to be purged. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:41, 25 July 2018 (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.

Sri Lankan people by occupation and ethnicity[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. Timrollpickering 12:51, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
other Sri Lankan categories by ethnicity and occupation
Nominator's rationale: rename per WP:EGRS, we do not create categories that are a cross-section of a topic with an ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexual orientation, unless these characteristics are relevant to the topic. The latter is not the case here. This is follow-up on this earlier nomination that I started without realizing that the issue is much more widespread. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all these. When we have eg Category:American people by ethnic or national origin and occupation I would like to know whether the nominator is beginning the gargantuan task of deleting all such, or whether there is something in particular about Sri Lankan ethnicities. Oculi (talk) 09:33, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all per nom, and per the guidelines in WP:EGRS. I'd like to read the logic linking Sinhalese ethnicity and, say, being a dentist. Place Clichy (talk) 16:26, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose The nominator has failed to add deletion notices on most of the nominated categories and failed to notify interested parties. WP:ETHNICRACECAT, which is part of WP:EGRS, states that "Ethnic groups are commonly used when categorizing people; however, race is not. Ethnic groups may be used as categorizations, even if race is a stereotypical characteristic of the ethnic group, e.g. with African-Americans or Anglo-Indians". As a result there are hundreds of ethnicity based occupation categories. And yet the nominator has singled out Sri Lankan categories for deletion. This stinks to high heaven and is deeply offensive. Are Sri Lankans ethnic groups inferior to other ethnic groups in Category:People by ethnicity and occupation such they shouldn't have categories? Why doesn't the nominator nominate the sub-categories in Category:African-American people by occupation or Category:Jews by occupation or Category:Hispanic and Latino American people by occupation or Category:Arab people by occupation? If the nominator wants to get rid of ethnic based categorisation he needs to nominate all - in excess of 700 - sub-categories of the following rather than singling out a particular groups:

--Obi2canibe (talk) 22:02, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • You fail to see that the major problem is the intersection. Ethnic groups may be used as categorizations means that it is perfectly fine to categorize an article in both Category:Sinhalese people and Category:Sri Lankan dentists. Hovewer, it is not fine to categorize articles as Sinhalese dentist, because nobody self-define themselves as Sinhalese dentist, or Tamil dentist, or Anglo-Indian dentist etc. See WP:OCEGRS, and the general rules stated at WP:CATV, for more guidelnes. Place Clichy (talk) 01:38, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. there is no reason that these occupations differ by ethnicity and much of the list above is ripe for merger as well. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:09, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • (as nom) 1) Agree with opposers that a lot of work needs to be done here, this apparently got out of control. But we need to start somewhere and with "animals by country" we have a nice precedent of gradually merging a massively huge undesirable categorization scheme, see here in conjunction with all similar nominations before. 2) Good suggestion to notify WP:ETHNICRACECAT, I'll do that instantly. 3) About race and ethnicity, the difference is that categorization by race is not done at all, while we do categorize by ethnicity but not in unrelated intersections. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If your rationale for deletion is sound you should be able to delete all 700+ categories in one nomination rather than picking off the small fry one by one. What happens if, when you get around to nominating one of the large fish, such as Category:African-American people by occupation, the debate decides that the categories should be kept? Will the minnows that had been deleted in previous nominations be recreated? Or will we have a system of apartheid in Wikipedia where some ethnic groups can be sub-categorised by occupation but others can't?--Obi2canibe (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom, we don't cross-categorise based on ethnicity, and certainly not for occupations. Ajf773 (talk) 09:55, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are more than 700 cross-categorisation of ethnic groups by occupations.--Obi2canibe (talk) 22:58, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Sri Lankan covers (principally) two ethnicities Sinhalese and Tamil. The Tamil ones are likely to self-identify as "Tamil". They speak different languages and were for a long time engaged in a civil war. WP should not forcibly merge them with each other. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:30, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge some (and recat. articles as needed), so people are in an ethnic cat. and a national one, but not a hybrid. Sinhalese is the native ethno-linguistic group of Singapore. Many Tamil families have moved there and are now several generations there, but it is one of the major ethnicities of India and native to India. It doesn't make much encyclopedic sense to have "Category:Sri Lankan Tamil architects‎". It's a pointless intersection. If we're going to keep "Category:Tamil architects‎", someone being categorized in that and in "Category:Sri Lankan architects‎" handles it. But we should keep the Sinhalese" categories (not "Singaporean Sinhalese" or "Sinhalese ... of Singapore") ones for the same reason. If we're going to have ethnic categories and national categories, then have them. We have no use of "ethno-national" homunculus categories, and really should get rid of a lot more of them.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:38, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems you are under the misconception that "Sri Lankan Tamil" is an artificial intersection of Sri Lankan and Tamil. Sri Lankan Tamils are a recognised ethnic group in Sri Lanka (the second largest ethnic group in the country). They have lived in Sri Lanka for more than two millennia. They are distinct from Indian Tamils of Sri Lanka who are more recent arrivals - less than two century - and live in a different part of Sri Lanka. So Sri Lankan Tamils are an ethnic group like Sinhalese, not some "ethno-national homunculus".--Obi2canibe (talk) 22:52, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Per this reasoning, Category:Sri Lankan Tamil people is eligible (because it is a distinct ethnicity), but the intersecting occupational categories still are not. Place Clichy (talk) 09:29, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep as is no valid reason for deletion of these article navigation tools Hmains (talk) 02:32, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Care to elaborate? Nominator has stated a reason (for merging, not for deleting), which is absolutely valid under WP:EGRS and WP:OCEGRS. Also, if you are looking for "article navigation tools", you may look towards navigation boxes instead. Place Clichy (talk) 09:29, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Merging a category has the same effect as deleting it since it will no longer exist as a navigation aid. WP has multiple navigation tools, of which categories are the most extensive and reader useful from their ability not only to go from one article to another, but their ability to go from one category to another (and top down or bottom up or across). Navigation boxes only get you from one article to another. In any case, use of one tool does not preclude use of another. The point is to help readers, not to achieve some kind of purity. Hmains (talk) 15:24, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see what you mean by "some kind of purity", but creating random categories with the losest possible subjective connection is not a way to "help readers", just as it wouldn't be for articles. Wikipedia deserves to have a high standard, although very inclusive, in terms of what is acceptable content, for articles, categories and other content. This is where the WP:OCAT guideline is coming from. Therefore arguing that there is "no valid reason for deletion", while there is plenty, is an empty argument if not more elaborated. Place Clichy (talk) 22:00, 30 July 2018 (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.

Sri Lankan sportspeople by occupation and ethnicity[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. Timrollpickering 12:49, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per above nomination. Merging is not recommendable in this case, because sportspeople are already in a by-sport subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. These are irrelevant, unless these sportspeople would play in ethnic-based teams, in which case the team or club could probably be linked to an ethnicity category, but not the players themselves. Place Clichy (talk) 16:26, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As above plus why have Sri Lankan ethnic groups been singled out for deletion but not other ethnic groups within Category:Sportspeople by ethnicity?--Obi2canibe (talk) 22:04, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom; the objection by Obi2canibe is the damned if you do, damned if you don't problem. If all were nominated, some folks would object to something and nothing would get done. Let's pick them off piecemeal to actually move this forward. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - per Obi2canibe. The nom as it stands merely removes a sub-tree seemingly at random from Category:Sportspeople by ethnicity. Oculi (talk) 01:43, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. We should not cross categorise ethnicity and occupation as that is deemed a non notable quality of any person. Ajf773 (talk) 09:56, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Sri Lankan Tamil should be retained. I suspect the Chetty, Burgher and Malay communities will prove too small to merit separate categories. These should be upmerged to an appropriate Sri Lankan category and an ethnic people category. The Burgher item needs to be Sri Lankan Burgher, as "burgher" has other uses. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:34, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the ethnicity+national ones; keep national ones and ethnic ones that are not a confused mixture of the two.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:40, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep as is no valid reason for deletion of these article navigation tools Hmains (talk) 02:34, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Care to elaborate? Nominator has stated a reason, which is absolutely valid under WP:EGRS and WP:OCEGRS. Place Clichy (talk) 09:29, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:EGRS and WP:OCEGRS are opinion summaries that result from discussions here and not a rationale for doing anything in a specific case. Hmains (talk) 15:28, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure what is meant with an opinion summary, afaik this is a guideline. More importantly, what is specific about this case? Marcocapelle (talk) 18:27, 31 July 2018 (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.

Sri Lankan politicians by occupation and ethnicity[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. Timrollpickering 12:49, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per above nomination. Merging is not recommendable in this case, because politicians are already in a by-party subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. If any of these politicians adopted a by-ethnicity political line, they would better be categorized by a party or movement category rather than a biographical ethnic category. Place Clichy (talk) 16:26, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As above plus why have Sri Lankan ethnic groups been singled out for deletion but not other ethnic groups within Category:Politicians by ethnicity?--Obi2canibe (talk) 22:05, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per my comments above. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - per my comments above. Oculi (talk) 01:44, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per my comments on sportspeople (above). Peterkingiron (talk) 17:35, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the ethnicity+national ones; keep national ones and ethnic ones that are not a confused mixture of the two.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:40, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep as is no valid reason for deletion of these article navigation tools Hmains (talk) 02:35, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Care to elaborate? Nominator has stated a reason, which is absolutely valid under WP:EGRS and WP:OCEGRS. Place Clichy (talk) 09:29, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:EGRS and WP:OCEGRS are opinion summaries that result from discussions here and not a rationale for doing anything in a specific case. Hmains (talk) 15:28, 27 July 2018 (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.

Sri Lankan priests by occupation and ethnicity[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. Timrollpickering 12:49, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per above nomination. Merging is not recommendable in this case, because priests are already in a Catholic or Anglican subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete If these categories were linked to a religion where ethnicity or caste is important, such as hinduism, they would make sense. It is not the case, as this is for Anglican and Catholic priests. Once again, this category is an attempt at diffusing Sri Lankans by perceived (rather than self-defined) ethnicity, which is in infraction of WP:EGRS. Place Clichy (talk) 16:26, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As above plus why have Sri Lankan ethnic groups been singled out for deletion but not other ethnic groups within Category:Priests by ethnicity?--Obi2canibe (talk) 22:06, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and per my comments above. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - per my comments above. Oculi (talk) 01:45, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • REname to Category:Sinhalese Christian priests‎ to make it clear that this is not about Hindu or Buddhist clergy. Purge of necessary, but my sampling only found (Anglican) Church of Ceylon and Catholics. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:40, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Category:Singhalese Christian priests and Category:Tamil Christian priests could be good ideas, but they are still ethnic+occupation intersections, while are undesirable according to WP:OCEGRS. The only exception is if that combination is itself recognized as a distinct and unique cultural topic in its own right, which I doubt is the case here. Place Clichy (talk) 09:19, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the ethnicity+national ones; keep national ones and ethnic ones that are not a confused mixture of the two.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:40, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep as is no valid reason for deletion of these article navigation tools Hmains (talk) 02:36, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Care to elaborate? Nominator has stated a reason, which is absolutely valid under WP:EGRS and WP:OCEGRS. Place Clichy (talk) 09:29, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:EGRS and WP:OCEGRS are opinion summaries that result from discussions here and not a rationale for doing anything in a specific case. Hmains (talk) 15:29, 27 July 2018 (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:Garfield videos and DVDs[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. Timrollpickering 09:34, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one item, WP:SMALLCAT. (Full disclosure: I merged the former articles– Garfield's Holiday Celebrations, Garfield's Fantasies, Garfield's Travel Adventures, Garfield Cat Tales– in this category into the current one item; but in nearly a year not a single one of the mergers has never been challenged or reverted; time has effectively ratified it). Ribbet32 (talk) 03:14, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge per nom.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:41, 24 July 2018 (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/2018_July_23&oldid=853536531"