Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 September 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< September 6 September 8 >

September 7[edit]

Category:Equatoguinean expatriate women's footballers[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The result of the discussion was: withdrawn (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 04:57, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

:* Propose deleting Category:Equatoguinean expatriate women's footballers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary intersection of nationality, sex, sport, and sub-genre of that sport. Upmerge to the women's and expatriates parents. (Note that there is no scheme for Category:Expatriate women's footballers by nationality.) ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:43, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn I'm making that scheme. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:07, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Hmlarson: You don't understand: they aren't in EG but from there originally. By definition, none of them are in EG. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:07, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Koavf can you clarify what specific categories you want to upmerge to? Hmlarson (talk) 15:54, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The proposal is withdrawn. I'm making that scheme. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:56, 10 September 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:Curaçaon expatriates footballers[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 to Category:Curaçao expatriate footballers. -- Black Falcon (talk) 15:40, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Spelling error ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:14, 7 September 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:Gilgit-Baltistan education stubs[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: redirect template and delete category (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:00, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Way too specialized at this time. I moved the one tagged article to the comfortably sized Category:Pakistani school stubs. Recommend renaming category to Category:Pakistan education stubs, and redirecting template to {{Pakistan-edu-stub}}. Dawynn (talk) 20:24, 7 September 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.

GP2 Series rounds[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:  Relisted to CfD 2017-Sep-17 § GP2 Series rounds. Categories were not tagged originally; they are now tagged. -- Black Falcon (talk) 15:49, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: C2D, closer to the names of the articles in this category and other series. Bbb2007 (talk) 19:11, 7 September 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:Full Metal Panic! technology[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 to Category:Full Metal Panic! (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:07, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT, category is small and unlikely to get any bigger. Seems like a holdover from when there existed a lot more fancruft about the series.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 18:35, 7 September 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:Naive painters[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. -- Black Falcon (talk) 15:53, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of the latter which follows the main article spelling, naïve art. Brandmeistertalk 17:21, 7 September 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:Australian stock and station agents[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: relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 October 3. – Fayenatic London
Nominator's rationale: merge, because the content of this category is companies only (in contrast to the New Zealand category below) the category is very poorly populated and it is not part of a broader scheme. The second parent category does not look like a very strong merge target, since these organizations deal with agriculture in general. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:55, 7 September 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:New Zealand stock and station agents[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: relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 October 3. – Fayenatic London
Nominator's rationale: "stock and station agent" is not a defining characteristic of the articles in this category. People involved are characterized more generally as farmers / land owners, or as merchants / business people. There are also a few companies in this category that can be moved to Category:Agriculture companies of New Zealand per WP:SMALLCAT like the Australian nomination above. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:26, 7 September 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:Power Snooker[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 moving the 2011 tournament to Category:Snooker competitions per User:SMcCandlish. -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:18, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. There are only two articles in the category, and this snooker variant wasn't played competitively since 2011, so there is no room for expansion. Armbrust The Homunculus 13:47, 7 September 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:Biomorphic robots[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 to Category:Biorobotics. – Fayenatic London 12:39, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: According to biomorphism, it's more of an artistic/design movement than a description of robots. In other words, a way of incorporating natural patterns onto objects, not making them look like natural objects. Per Category:Biorobots in fiction, it would only make sense to make the category about actual biorobots called the same thing. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 11:05, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The apparent main article is currently Robotic pet, which I suspect is too narrow for the subcategories here. No opinion on what we temporarily call this category as we wait for a main article to appear so we know the correct name going forward. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:34, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose "Biomorphic" has a clear meaning, aligned with what this category is about. "Biorobot" is better known as a suicidal euphemism from Chernobyl. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:35, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - What you say isn't backed up by evidence. A google search for "biorobot" reveals articles like this: [1] [2] [3] There is no evidence that there is any sort of popular linking of the term with Chernobyl beyond your claim, as it is not even mentioned in the article on Chernobyl responders. Also, the article for biomorphic and its Wiktionary definition, state that it is a purely visual aspect and has nothing to do with any sort of mechanical resemblance to biological organisms. The Wiktionary definition of wiktionary:biorobot doesn't mention Chernobyl anywhere.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 09:53, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • Further google search on "chernobyl biorobot" found predominantly just passing mentions of the term. Seems like more of a candidate for a small disambguation like "This category refers to robots with biological traits. Chernobyl liquidators are listed in Category:Chernobyl liquidators."ZXCVBNM (TALK) 10:43, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Please note that Special:Contributions/Marcocapelle seems to be busily engaged in emptying this category during the discussion, against the well-known advisory on the page header. I do wish people wouldn't do this. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:16, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's not really emptying so much as sorting into a subcategory, so it shouldn't really matter. The discussion is not about the category's suitability for existence, but the fact that the name is incorrect. Biomorphism is an abstract design philosophy, a biomorphic object wouldn't directly resemble a living thing, just use organic forms. It's the difference between a robot that literally looks like a plant, and one that has a flower pattern on its body, which is clearly not what this category contains.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, biomorphic is clearly something different than intended. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:16, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename alt. to Category:Biorobotics, per the actual title of the main article, to better fit within Category:Biocybernetics, and to better reflect the category's scope—not just individual robots but the larger topic of biorobotics. -- Black Falcon (talk) 16:06, 17 September 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:Fictional asterozoa[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: upmerge (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:18, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Subcategory only contains one article and I doubt there are enough notable animated starfishes to warrant categorisation. Upmerge Category:Fictional asteroidea to Category:Fictional invertebrates. Sionk (talk) 05:14, 7 September 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:Fictional myriapods[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). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The category has only one member, which isn't really pertinent either (the vast, vast, vast majority of Battle Beasts are not myriapods). I'd be surprised if there are enough notable animated centipedes to justify keeping this category. Sionk (talk) 05:01, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per the spirit of WP:C1, an unpopulated category. The Battle Beasts article should also be cleaned up to remove most of the other categories but I don't want to take action mid-nomination. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:37, 7 September 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:1461 Trabzon[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 and move the subcategory to Category:Sportspeople from Trabzon (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:26, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No need for an eponymous cat--just upmerge the footballers category as needed. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:11, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - The main article will make a main article for the footballers, which leaves nothing else for this category. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:34, 10 September 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:Homeless World Cup[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. -- Black Falcon (talk) 19:29, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Too little content. Upmerge as appropriate. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:14, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, considering the category has good potential for growth. The Homeless World Cup appears to be an annual event and gets lots of international news coverage for each event. Sionk (talk) 05:37, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Hmlarson (talk) 04:30, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:Homeless sport. The one year article in the category (2012) doesn't look like it is notable on its own and the appearance of other year articles is therefore unlikely. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:10, 17 September 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_September_7&oldid=1090392368"