Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 October 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 14 October 16 >

October 15[edit]

Conflicts by millennium, century and decade up to 1000 AD[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 13:53, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Extended content
Nominator's rationale: rename/merge as follow-up on this previous discussion. In Antiquity and Middle Ages "conflicts" and "military history" nearly coincide in terms of Wikipedia content. In the previous discussion there was a preference to use the somewhat broader term "military history". This nomination only considers the period up to 1000 AD, because from there on the conflicts tree starts diffusing by year, so for the period of 1000-1499 there will be another follow-up nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:43, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Tim!, Oculi, Icewhiz, and Peterkingiron: pinging discussants in the previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC) [reply]
  • Support -- This implements my vote for reverse merge on the previous discussion. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all and create all the targets as parent categories. There will be articles on military history in the XXXs which are not conflicts. Oculi (talk) 18:48, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all and create all the targets as parent categories. I agree with Oculi's reasoning. Dimadick (talk) 05:16, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The question is not whether there will be articles on military history in the XXXs which are not conflicts, the question is whether in these distant periods we may expect a reasonable number of articles per category (i.e. per century or per decade) that are not conflicts. Currently that is not the case at all, for example we only have 11 articles about military alliances in the entire antiquity. WP:OVERLAPCAT does not require that categories are 100% overlapping, it just requires a large overlap. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:36, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are treaties as well. Look at Category:1957 in military history: there are many items which are neither conflicts nor alliances nor treaties. It is not 'overlapcat' at all - any subcat always overlaps completely with a parent cat. A conflict is best categorised as a conflict. Oculi (talk) 12:46, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The amount of content in 1957 is entirely incomparable with ancient and medieval times. We have about 60 articles about treaties from the 5th century BC up to the 10th century AD, that is on average 0.3 articles on treaties per decade category. Of course any subcat always overlaps completely with a parent cat but here we have a case that the amount of content of the parent cat almost completely overlaps with one subcat, and this is what WP:OVERLAPCAT is about. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:57, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Good Ol’factory (talk) 11:31, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:54, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - WP:OVERLAPCAT is nothing at all to do with cases where a parent category has no articles and 1 subcat. There are many cases (with which there is no problem at all) where this arises. WP:OVERLAPCAT is a section of Wikipedia:Overcategorization, also known as "category clutter". These categories produce no clutter. Oculi (talk) 09:19, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • After all merging is completed the 10th century will contain 10 subcats by decade, 5 subcats by war‎, a fortifications subcat and a military units subcat. That is perfectly fine, isn't it? Marcocapelle (talk) 19:26, 17 October 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:People associated with EOS[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:50, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated subcategory, merge with parent category. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:07, 15 October 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:People associated with Zcash[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:49, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated subcategory, merge with parent category. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:06, 15 October 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:People associated with Bitcoin Cash[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:48, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated subcategory, merge with parent category. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:06, 15 October 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:Bitcoin Cash[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:47, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 13:52, 15 October 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:Rajput chiefs[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:46, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is categorisation by caste, which we do not do. Some past history regarding the consensus is noted at User:Sitush/Common#Castecats. Sitush (talk) 08:30, 15 October 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:People from Shadwell, West Yorkshire[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:People from the City of Leeds. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:44, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is a people category for a village; currently contains only one article, Robin Blaze. Note: if this is not merged, then the London category People from Shadwell should be disambiguated. – Fayenatic London 07:29, 15 October 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:Films shot in the Czech Republic[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: do not rename, without prejudice to a creation of Category:Films shot in Czechoslovakia. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:41, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Some of these films, especially in the subcat, were actually shot before the establishment of Czech Republic, and a geographic category makes more sense anyway. Catrìona (talk) 07:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. For films shot in Czechoslovakia, we can have a separate category "Films shot in Czechoslovakia", no need to be overly creative here with terms like "Čechija" or "Czech lands".--Darwinek (talk) 19:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A Czechoslovakia category makes more sense. It was a relatively long-lived state (1918–1939, 1945–1992), while both theCzech Republic and Slovakia have had a very short lifespan. Dimadick (talk) 07:15, 21 October 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:Sri Lankan military uniforms[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:40, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The parent category, Category:Sri Lankan uniforms, is completely empty except for containing this subcategory. Since this category also only has one article in it, should we simply merge this category to its main parent category? – numbermaniac 06:13, 15 October 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:Classical Israel[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:38, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: split, the word 'classical' is normally used only for the Greek and Roman civilizations as such (besides Classical Greece preceded Hellenism), I have never seen it been used for countries in the Middle East in the Hellenistic or Roman era. Since we already have a Greek and Roman category in this case, the content can simply be dispersed. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:44, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - technically speaking this category was created by me from the understanding that Classical Syria refers to classical era period in the area of modern Syria and Israel/Jordan/Palestine/Lebanon can have similar categories. When rejecting this notion, then perhaps the best fit for Classical Israel is category:Hasmonean Kingdom which was generally named "Israel" during the period.GreyShark (dibra) 06:46, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair enough, I have added this as a third target in the nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is not a problem, since this is a split nomination, not a merge nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:03, 21 October 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:Destroyed landmarks in Spain demolished by period[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:36, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content: all these landmarks are buildings and structures. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Clearer scope. Dimadick (talk) 13:04, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Conforms to established "Buildings and Structures" tree. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:35, 21 October 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:C. Wright Mills[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 2018 OCT 23 CFD. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:54, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: too thin for an eponymous category. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:23, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Mills was an important figure in 20th century sociology. There are books that he has written and concepts that he has introduced that should make it into Wikipedia as articles (The Causes of World War Three and Listen, Yankee, for a start). By coincidence, I have recently started a draft at Draft:Abstracted empiricism, which has a heading in the Oxford Dictionary of Sociology. bd2412 T 12:46, 22 October 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:Foxhound packs of the United Kingdom[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:35, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:Overcategorization, they cover identical subject matter. Cavalryman V31 (talk) 04:51, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and also merge in England and Scotland subcats. There are not enough hunts to merit splitting between the British home nations. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:36, 21 October 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:Legislators who represented multiple jurisdictions[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:34, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Pure trivia. These can be lists but even that is pretty ropey. This is not defining. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:43, 15 October 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_October_15&oldid=871689056"