Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 April 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< April 3 April 5 >

April 4[edit]

Category:Animal rights advocates[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 to Category:Animal rights activists and Category:Animal rights scholars, then delete. @Tryptofish: please set up and populate the new categories manually, then let me know and I will set a bot to delete the old category with its celebrity endorsers. – Fayenatic London 09:17, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The existing Category:Animal rights advocates correctly says that persons should be placed in the category only if it is a defining characteristic. However, editors very frequently add to this category celebrities for whom it is far from being a defining characteristic, simply because the celebrity has expressed an interest. Such celebrity biographies are by far the majority of pages in the category. I am therefore proposing to split off a separate category for celebrity endorsers, to which such pages should then be moved. I recognize that an alternative option would be to simply remove all such pages from the category, but my experience is that this would be a never-ending task. Having a more accurate category would be a more effective way to put pages in the correct category. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:43, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose creation of "Celebrity endorsers of <cause>" categories - per WP:NON-DEFINING, WP:DNWAUC etc - and, in particular, the massive potential time-sink of discussions about whether or not statements by a celebrity put them in a category of this type. I support purging the existing category. DexDor (talk) 19:39, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point, and that may well be a better solution. If someone with the appropriate automated tools could do the selective purging, I'd be happy to keep watching the category and try to keep it under control. But I have to warn you that there will also be a time-sink of editors who insist on re-adding the category because they found a source that has the celebrity saying that they support animal rights in some way. There's a lot of such sourcing. One editor's "advocate" is another editor's someone-defined-by-something-else. I think that for some editors, putting well-known people into the category is a way to POV-push that the animal rights movement is big and important. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:39, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -- Celebrity is a POV issue, as to who qualifies. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:12, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and purge category instead, per DexDor. Limit existing category to those for whom animal rights advocacy is a defining characteristic. Neutralitytalk 23:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Question, because I really don't know. What is involved in purging the category? Is there a way to do it with some amount of automation, rather than manually and tediously? Because if there is, I'd be very happy with just doing that, and putting a stronger statement about defining characteristics at the top of the category page. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:02, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to Category:Animal rights activists (over redirect) in order to have more clearly defining inclusion criteria, and purge celebrities and other people who weren't activists. Note that the category belongs to the activists tree already, and the category page discussion page reveals substantial discussion about the correct category name. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:26, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • How active does a celebrity have to be to qualify as an activist?Rathfelder (talk)
    • I don't think that a rename to Activists will work. Many of the people who properly belong in the category are academics and/or theoreticians, who do not necessarily become involved in activism. And, as noted, a celebrity can be briefly involved in activism without it being a defining characteristic. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:33, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • While the latter is what actually matters, it should be a defining characteristic. So academics should be moved out together with celebrities. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:08, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • In the past, the consensus has been against making that distinction. But if editors feel that it is useful to make that distinction now, maybe a different split would be a better solution: to Category:Animal rights activists and Category:Animal rights scholars. By doing away with the Advocates category, we would be making it a little more obvious to exclude persons who simply said once that they are in favor of animal rights, and to explicitly limit the new category to persons for whom a defining characteristic is a long-term activism. I'm beginning to think that this may be the best solution. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:20, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just listed this as requesting a close. It looks to me like there is consensus to split the category into Category:Animal rights activists and Category:Animal rights scholars, and to seriously prune the former, to restrict it only to persons for whom it is a defining characteristic. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:23, 9 May 2017 (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:Mythological sword fighters[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. – Fayenatic London 08:55, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To harmonize with Category:Swordsmen, the head article swordsman and simultaneously make it more succinct. Brandmeistertalk 20:31, 4 April 2017 (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:January 2017 events in Turkey[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: withdrawn, it turns out there is a categorisation system by month, January 2017 events by country, but this category hadn't been put into it and was incorrectly filed in the "2017 in country" system. Fixed. BencherliteTalk 13:04, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of Category:2017 in Turkey and its subcategories (in which these two articles are already present), no need to subdivide by months as well BencherliteTalk 12:31, 4 April 2017 (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:Harpists from New York City[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 17:19, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: /Upmerge needless intersection of harpists by city. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:33, 4 April 2017 (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:Jazz musicians from Cincinnati[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 17:25, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: /Upmerge to both parents. No need for this granular of an intersection of occupation, genre and city in Ohio. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:35, 4 April 2017 (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:German people from the Polish part of Silesia[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. – Fayenatic London 08:50, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:NARROWCAT. Most people here are footballers born in Poland (in the historical region Silesia) and playing in Germany. Category:Polish emigrants to Germany should suffice for this. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:14, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Merely being from the geographic region of Silesia does not necessarily equate to being of ethnic Silesian descent, and we would need even less to categorize people by which country's portion of Silesia they were born in. Bearcat (talk) 18:06, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge somehow. Silesian is not an ethnicity. Silesia has been a political football over the centuries: anciently Polish; then belonging to (Austrian) Bohemia; then Prussia; then given to Poland after WWII. I assume the residents of Germany's lost territory are entitled to claim German citizenship. A lot of the people in the category appear to have Polish surnames, so that their ethnicity must be questionable. At the end of WWII, a lot of Germans from lost German territories migrated to Germany, as "displaced persons". I would oppose deletion for well-populated categories such as these, as it loses data. The possibility of categories for displaced persons and their descendants might exist, but I suspect that this is not what these are about. My preference would be to make them "People from Silesia", if that is accurate. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:40, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- non defining (see WP:CATDEF). Nobody would be described in the lead as "X was a German from the Polish part of Silesia". As a side note, I came across a number of discussions on cats related to Silesia. Such excessive cross-categorisation of "former German territories in the East" strikes me as somewhat POV. K.e.coffman (talk) 16:25, 22 April 2017 (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:Las Vegas musicians[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 after category has been emptied already (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 17:30, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Evidently a random assortment of members of Category:Musicians from Las Vegas and musicians who had a residency there (altho notably missing several like Celine Dion or Britney Spears). ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:24, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I'm guessing this was created out of a misguided distinction between "Musicians who are from Las Vegas" and "Musicians who are known for performing in Las Vegas but aren't originally from there", but that's not the category system's concern. Bearcat (talk) 18:08, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge back to Category:Musicians from Las Vegas and purge if necessary. Merely having performed there is NN and offends WP:PERF. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:43, 9 April 2017 (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:Organizations based in Jaffa[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 17:32, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Jaffa is not a separate city - it's part of Tel Aviv. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:05, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. Rathfelder (talk)

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:Recipients of the Silver German Cross[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. – Fayenatic London 08:57, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining (see WP:CATDEF) as none of the recipients were known for this award. The "Silver" grade was awarded for "for distinguished non-combat war service", so more of a "nice job" award. Created by Special:Contributions/Folks_at_137 who started many such categories. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:02, 4 April 2017 (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:Recipients of the War Merit Cross, 1st class[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. – Fayenatic London 08:59, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining category (see WP:CATDEF) as none of the recipients are known for having received this decoration. Created by Special:Contributions/Folks_at_137 who created many such categories. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:58, 4 April 2017 (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:The View (U.S. TV series) cohosts[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 (non-admin closure) feminist 16:12, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We don't categorize by performers per show. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:41, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:OC#PERF and past precedent. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:29, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as WP:PERFCAT. Speedy G4 if somebody can locate confirmation of my nagging suspicion that we've deleted this exact thing before under a slightly different name. Bearcat (talk) 18:10, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:PERFCAT; accordingto a quick check I did on the histories of a few of these articles, this specific category hasn't yet been deleted, so G4 is irrelevant. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 19:29, 9 April 2017 (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/2017_April_4&oldid=1074283769"