Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 June 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 9 June 11 >

June 10[edit]

Category:Wikipedians in the Editor Assistance Project[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) 01:26, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia:Editor assistance is marked as {{historical}}. There is no collaborative value in categories grouping editors by projects they used to participate in. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:46, 10 June 2021 (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:Rusyn Wikipedians[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) 01:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overlooked Wikipedians by ancestry category. (Per the description, this category comprises user pages of Wikipedia users who are of Rusyn ancestry. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:29, 10 June 2021 (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:Indigenous American Wikipedians[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:33, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overlooked Wikipedians by ancestry category (Per the description, This category comprises user pages and subcategories of Wikipedia users who descend from any of the indigenous peoples of the Americas.) I would also be okay with a merger to Category:Native American Wikipedians, which is phrased in terms of active identification rather than passive ancestry. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:29, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The description is wrong. The userbox says "descends from the first Americans" which is only technically a descent description. Another userbox could say "descends from the first French people" to describe French people. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:04, 18 June 2021 (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:Disney Renaissance singles[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) 00:13, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These are already in Category:Disney Renaissance songs. No need for further diffusion. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:30, 10 June 2021 (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:Songs about chess[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) 00:12, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single-entry WP:SMALLCAT for a non-defining characteristic. The song here ("I've Seen All Good People") is not about chess in any meaningful or significant sense; it merely contains some chess-based metaphors in the process of being about navigating human social relationships, and is "about" chess in pretty much the same way "One Night in Bangkok" could be labelled as "about" chess (i.e. not at all, past the surface use of some chess imagery as a metaphor). Bearcat (talk) 14:13, 10 June 2021 (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.

1910s in the Republic of Macedonia[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/delete per amended nomination. New categories e.g. Category:1910s in North Macedonia will be deleted as WP:G7. – Fayenatic London 16:46, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Amended nomination (14:23, 23 June 2021 (UTC))

Nominator's rationale: there was no such thing as a Republic of Macedonia between 1910 and 1944. If the purpose of these categories is for events and organizations established in present-day North Macedonia, then they should use the modern name of the country. Place Clichy (talk) 13:35, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this act is supposed to happen when you are simply tagging categories for discussion in a CFD. They shouldn't be preemptively emptied until after a CFD is closed but it seems to be happening a lot recently. Liz Read! Talk! 01:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose/revert changes -- Calling it "North Macedonia" is anachronistic. Most of these are small categories, which would be better merged to their Yugoslav equivalents. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:37, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Under what rationale would you consider keeping/reverting to the name Republic of Macedonia, which was only ever used between 1991 and 2019, less anachronistic for the period considered? Place Clichy (talk) 08:29, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all Delete the 1910s categories as they are unpopulated. Merge all others to their equivalent year/decade in Yugoslavia. Down with presentism. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:44, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alt merge (as nom) to the equivalent category for year or establishments in Yugoslavia. This solution seems to have the support of User:Marcocapelle, User:Peterkingiron and User:Laurel Lodged from their comments above. As original nominator I now also support it. Place Clichy (talk) 14:03, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I amended the nomination accordingly. Note that some categories would be merely deleted in the process, as they merely serve as an empty intermediate level to their subcategories. Place Clichy (talk) 14:23, 23 June 2021 (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:Loredana Zefi[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) 07:10, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous category per WP:OCEPON; the two subcats provide sufficient navigation to and from each other. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 13:21, 10 June 2021 (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:Theatres des Vampires members[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) 07:15, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single-member category. Per consensus and Category:Musicians by band, "categories should not be created when only one member has an article." StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 13:15, 10 June 2021 (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:English words prefixed with eigen-[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) 00:11, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not a defining characteristic, not a dictionary. There is also a matter of precision in that the currently included Eigenmannia is a scientific name of a genus and not an English word. Eostrix  (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 11:47, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Wikipedia is not a dictionary, so we do not categorize articles as works, just as things. Even in the rare case when we do have articles on words as concepts and not on things, this is not a reasonable way to categorize them.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:11, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. We do not categorize unrelated topics by the fact that they happen to share a prefix or suffix in their names. Although WP:SHAREDNAME doesn't explicitly say that yet, I can't think of a credible argument as to why it wouldn't still be applicable. Bearcat (talk) 13:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per the spirit of WP:SHAREDNAME. If you put "eigen" in the Wikipedia search bar you will already get this list so I can't see any navigational benefit here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 16:59, 10 June 2021 (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:21st-century Korean people[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 for now, considering that the subcategories by occupation have not been nominated (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:23, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Korean is no longer a nationality. Rathfelder (talk) 10:34, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The two Koreas still claim they want to be unified, AFAIK. The Korean peninsula is well defined. Past times in which Korea was split, such as Three Kingdoms of Korea, still have unified categories at the top. This Category:Silla rulers and Category:Baekje rulers are both in Category:Korean rulers and chained into Category:Korean people despite being separate geopolitical entities that predate the existence of any unified Korea.--Eostrix  (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 11:54, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - per Category:Korea, Category:Korean people. This would need a much wider nom. (I'm not sure that Korean implies a nationality: we have Category:Asian people.) Oculi (talk) 17:59, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This was part of Category:People by nationality and century. The contents of Category:21st-century Korean people are all divided between North Korean and South Korean subcategories. If we get rid of this superior category the subcategories could go speedily. But do we want to keep this as an aspirational category? There are other countries which aspire for reunification but I dont think we generally give them a nationality-like category. I'm inclined to think this is misleading. It's the reverse of the situation where people are categorised on the basis of the nationality of the place they come from as it now is rather than as it was when they were there, which I think is agreed as undesireable. Rathfelder (talk) 21:05, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- An undivided Korean category should only be used before 1948. The actors subcat has a detailed and sensible headnote on this. We might conceivably retain this as a container-only category, but better not. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:42, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Korean is also an ethnicity and language. It isn't only a country/countries. This is a larger change than just post-1948, this will affect historic periods of division too.--Eostrix  (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 05:27, 16 June 2021 (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 criminals on soap operas[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 delete, so rename to Category:Fictional criminals in soap operas. – Fayenatic London 07:08, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I have serious doubts this is a defining characteristic that warrants a category. We don't have any other category for characters by occupation / status for soap operas or other genres. Entries can be safely upmerged to existing parent categories (Soap opera characters, fictional criminals). If kept, this needs renaming ("Soap opera criminals" or "Fictional criminals in soap operas"?). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:33, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – DarkGlow • 08:38, 10 June 2021 (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:EarthBound character redirects to lists[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) 01:32, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: EarthBound belongs to the Mother series. (Oinkers42) (talk) 00:29, 10 June 2021 (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:Order of Railway Conductors[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) 07:27, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT approaching WP:C2F, one eponymous article
The Order of Railway Conductors was an American trade union that merged with multiple other rail unions in 1969 to form the United Transportation Union. Conceptually this category is fine but the main article is the only article directly in the category with little growth potential. (There is also a subcat for ORC presidents with 3 articles but with growth potential.) No objection to recreating this later if I'm wrong and it ever gets to 5+ direct articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:13, 10 June 2021 (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:Architects of YMCA buildings[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) 00:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:PERFCAT)
Homer G. Balcom designed many buildings including the YMCA in Jerusalem, Charles I. Barber designed many buildings including the YMCA in Knoxville, Edwin Thayer Barlow designed many buildings including the YCMA in North Adams, and so on. If we start defining architects by every client they design a building for, we would end up with non-defining category clutter. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Architects design all kinds of buildings for all kinds of clients, but it would lead to extreme category bloat to categorize them for every individual type of building they ever worked on. If there were people here who only worked for the YMCA, and didn't have any other notable non-YMCA work in their résumés at all, then there might be a case for this. But there aren't. Bearcat (talk) 13:46, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -PERFCAT. Might be worth listifying. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:44, 13 June 2021 (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/2021_June_10&oldid=1073193010"