Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 September 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< September 1 September 3 >

September 2[edit]

Category:Reggio Audace F.C. players[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 (talk) 18:42, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A contested speedy renaming C2D. There is a "consensus" in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 133#Category:Reggio Audace F.C. players already.

The team is commonly known as Reggiana and for most of the recent history, the full name is "A.C. Reggiana 1919". "Reggio Audace F.C." is just the official name for the club due to re-incorporation in 2018 and it was ceased to use in 2020.

We also don't subcat footballer for the same team and "anachronistic" does not apply. Matthew hk (talk) 22:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Not sure why you put the word 'anachronistic' in quotation marks. Do you not understand what it means? While your WP:LOCALCONSENSUS might seem to you as compelling, the wider en.wiki community seems to think otherwise. Here are a few examples from different categories, including other sports:
As you can see, the wider consensus is to match what the subject was known by at the time, with its content. Which is good, as it doesn't create anachronistic categories. As noted previously, a better solution, which these other categories use, is to create the new category for the current name and place the older categories as sub-categories. --Gonnym (talk) 20:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 11:43, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the objections raised by Gonnym do not apply here; it has been a long established standard for association football/soccer-related categories that we only have one set of categories even when the club changes name. As such, these categories should all be merged at the current article title. GiantSnowman 11:45, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- The practice on sports teams should follow that on college alumni (a longstanding one), where those who attended a merged or renamed institution are deemed to have attended the present successor. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:53, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per GiantSnowman. Long-established for association football teams is to use the current name of the club in categories. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:43, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: To any closer, please note that none of the above has (a) addressed any argument raised in my opposing comment; (b) provided any backing to the claim that this badly named practice has any larger community consensus - no guideline or RfC supporting the exclusion of football categories from the wider en.wiki practice (as shown above); (c) presented any arguments why placing players in correct categories is a negative thing (A category for Dial Square F.C. or Royal Arsenal would be much more beneficial to readers than a catch-all category). --Gonnym (talk) 14:56, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Gonnym, Based on your logic, please find a player in that cat that actually play for Reggio Audace F.C. (2018-2020). Even with your reasoning, all player in the nominated cat are actually belongs to Category:A.C. Reggiana 1919 players (and probably some of them for Category:A.C. Reggiana players if we subcat. But consensus in WP:Footy is we don't) Matthew hk (talk) 04:01, 18 September 2020 (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:Roman Catholics[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: keep. Strong consensus against this rename. bibliomaniac15 18:23, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The parent category is Category:Latin Church and the term Latin is more broad in case a Catholic of the Latin rite church followed another rite besides Roman. I didn’t propose Western Catholics as that would affect other denominational churches.Manabimasu (talk) 21:30, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. "Roman Catholic" is the common term. "Latin Catholic" would be poorly understood. Elizium23 (talk) 21:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Elizium23: What category is Category:Catholics then? This category is redundant and could be renamed or merged.Manabimasu (talk) 21:54, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Roman Catholic is the common term. The "Catholics" category includes both "Roman Catholics" and "Eastern Catholics" categories. This arrangement does not need correction. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:59, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no need for this tree at all. We can simply have Category:Catholics for everyone, with Category:Eastern Catholics as a subcategory for a minority of articles. It can be done similarly to people by occupation and gender, e.g. we have Category:Educators for everyone and Category:Women educators for a minority of articles, but we do not have Category:Men educators. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Marcocapelle, be careful. Yours is an extremely wide-reaching and sweeping proposal that will affect hundreds of categories and thousands of articles. Are you really sure you want to go down that road? Elizium23 (talk) 07:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Marcocapelle - this tree structure is redundant. Eastern Catholics and Independent Catholics are just sub-categories of Catholic. Though I would hate to have to nominate the thousands of sub-categories. A monster task. Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:46, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • We may need an RFC, before immediately nominating thousands of categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:59, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: I agree on an RFC. However, Independent Catholics are not the same as Latin Catholics. That would mean a new category “Latin Catholics" could be created to be on the same level as Eastern Catholics and distinguish from Independent Catholics. Would an RFC be created in village pump?Manabimasu (talk) 14:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The RFC would be meant to discuss merging Roman Catholics into Catholics. Discussing renaming into Latin Catholics is pointless. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: Would the rfc be started in village pump?Manabimasu (talk) 15:54, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The most natural location for the discussion is the talk page of Category:Roman Catholics. The more important thing is that the discussion is broadly advertised, e.g. at the talk page of Wikiprojects Catholicism, Christianity, Religion and Categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see no structural difficulty in the Independent Catholics category being a child of Catholics. After all, they claim to be the same ("it's not us who has departed from catholicity but you" blah blah). Also, hatnotes / scope can clarify how the Roman Pontiff disavows their activities etc. So all good. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:23, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, although there is the Latin Church nobody describes themselves as Latin Catholic, its either Roman Catholic or Catholic in my experience. ----Jules (Mrjulesd) 19:26, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - very uncommon designation. StAnselm (talk) 22:14, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -- The term "Roman" is used to distinguish from "Old", "Anglo-", etc. Greek Catholics are so-called because they worship(ped) in Greek, not Latin. If course most now worship in their vernacular. I regard "Latin Catholics" as an obscure term. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:57, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as "Roman Catholic" is the WP:COMMONNAME. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:47, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -Agree with Peterkingiron and Walter Gorlitz. AFAIK nobody readily self-identifies as a "Latin Catholic". Manannan67 (talk) 04:01, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, because "Roman Catholics" is the WP:COMMONNAME, and therefore we should keep the present name of that category, but someone should also take a look at redirect: Roman Catholics, since it is currently pointing to the main article on the Catholic Church, and therefore we have one of those dubious situations (inconsistent use of terms in titles of categories and articles, or redirects). So, the underliying question here is: what is the primary meaning of the term "Roman Catholics" on English Wikipedia? Is it defined by the present scope of this category, or by current pointing of the redirect Roman Catholics to the main article on the Catholic Church? Sorabino (talk) 19:21, 12 September 2020 (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 cyberbullying victims[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: manual deletion. MER-C 18:47, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining, POV ★Trekker (talk) 19:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Manually merge, then delete, hardly anyone in this category is specifically a victim of cyberbullying, but some articles may be moved to the broader bullying parent category. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:35, 2 September 2020 (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:Video games based on Biker Mice from Mars[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 October 24#Category:Video games based on Biker Mice from Mars

Category:Jewish American presidential candidates[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. MER-C 18:05, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match Category:Candidates for President of the United States. User:Namiba 12:47, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I think this could even have been done as a speedy rename. Debresser (talk) 08:34, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom BlackholeWA (talk) 08:38, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Clearer scope. Dimadick (talk) 19:17, 3 September 2020 (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:African-American United States presidential candidates[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. MER-C 18:06, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match Category:Candidates for President of the United States. User:Namiba 12:44, 2 September 2020 (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:Snow White (Snow White)[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: manual merger. MER-C 13:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I'm not exactly sure what the purpose of this category is. I think it's meant to be a category for the character of Snow White within the story of Snow White. In any case, it is a small category (only two articles) and can be upmerged. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:00, 2 September 2020 (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:TVA (Canadian TV network) television stations[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 September 18#Category:TVA (Canadian TV network) television stations

Category:Comics festivals[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 (talk) 18:43, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: While the category description states "This category is for comics festivals, a type of art festival focused on the comic arts. Not to be confused with comics convention", we do not have a dedicated article on Comics festival - it just redirects to Comic book convention, which uses both terms as synonyms. Comic book convention article is set as the main article for both categories. Having attended several events of this type, I think this is an OR-ish attempt to distinguish between events that have panels and such, and events which are just "sales only", but this is blurry and ORish line not justified by sources,a and just leading to confusion in the category structure as many events present in the Festival category are more than just sales, some are in both categories, and I bet some people just categorize things as 'festival' because the event uses this word in a name. Bottom line, those terms are likely synonyms and are one and the same. Interwiki note: Convention is much more popular with 10+ interwikis, festival has only 3. Out of those, French category exists only for the "Festival" and should likely be just retargeted, but Korean and Chinese wikipedias have both. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:30, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom Unclear distinction. Dimadick (talk) 19:19, 3 September 2020 (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:Viasat Sport[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. MER-C 18:06, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The main article was recently moved without discussion from Viasat Sport to V Sport; I suggest the category should follow. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:28, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support C2D per nom. Raymie (t • c) 22:03, 2 September 2020 (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:BBC Newcastle[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. MER-C 18:07, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The article was recently moved without discussion from BBC Newcastle to BBC Radio Newcastle; I suggest the category should follow. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:18, 2 September 2020 (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/2020_September_2&oldid=985156989"