Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 August 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< August 17 August 19 >

August 18[edit]

Category:Enrico Macias[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) Qwerfjkltalk 14:32, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous categories per WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 21:34, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, songs and albums categories are sufficient unless there are a lot of articles about the musician himself. But that is clearly not the case here. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:31, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, at the moment this is an intermediate hierarchy to the songs categories that are not useful. --Mvqr (talk) 11:27, 23 August 2022 (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:Hand-controlled rhythm games[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) Qwerfjkltalk 14:33, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NARROWCAT, disambiguation by control method is not a typical way of disambiguating games. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:00, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 04:53, 10 August 2022 (UTC) [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:28, 18 August 2022 (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.

Western New Guinea geography 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: merge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 14:35, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(moved from below)

Nominator's rationale: These are very small categories. Merge to new parent that has just been created by splitting per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 July 19#Category:Maluku Islands and New Guinea (Indonesia) geography stubs. The templates might as well be kept. – Fayenatic London 13:43, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sharouser (talk) 16:06, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Central Papua geography stubs‎ (17 P)
Highland Papua geography stubs‎ (17 P)
Papua (province) geography stubs‎ (19 P)
South Papua geography stubs‎ (10 P)
West Papua (province) geography stubs‎ (67 P)
Now these are not very small categories. Sharouser (talk) 16:59, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stub categories are supposed to contain at least some 60 articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:19, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If we merge these three new categories, we should merge Category:Papua (province) geography stubs too. Sharouser (talk) 06:31, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Since you have recategorised some pages from Papua to the others, and they are all still small, I agree with merging this one too. – Fayenatic London 20:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:35, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge all, stub categories have other requirements than normal categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:41, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all -- Conceivably West Papua might be kept, but the rest are far below the minimum for a stub category. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:19, 20 August 2022 (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.

Sri Lankan businesspeople by ethnicity[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 14:41, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge/delete, trivial intersections between ethnicity and occupation, see WP:EGRS. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep some -- Sri Lanka had a long civil war between the Buddhist-led majority and the Tamils. I suspect they speak different languages and remain ethnically distinct. Ethnicity is thus significant. Not sure about Chetty and Moor. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • While ethnicity as such may be significant, ethnic businesspeople is not. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:05, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:39, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Not so exclusive that categories would be necessary. NavjotSR (talk) 08:34, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further comment - I would have thought that Category:Sri Lankan Tamil publishers (people) mainly published books in Tamil, not other languages. Wiping out longstanding ethnic diversity is not a good policy for WP. America has a melting pot. Many other countries do not and ethnic communities have long existed separately. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:54, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Other occupations may have a connection with ethnicity, so a mass nomination will not work. This has to be done for every occupation (or group of related occupations) separately. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:05, 25 August 2022 (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:Bengali-language newspapers by country[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:Bengali-language newspapers. bibliomaniac15 05:30, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge, it is an unnecessary category layer, it is the only subcategory of the target. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:46, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, it is not any unnecessary category. This category differentiate Bengali-language newspaper by country that is needed. Mehedi Abedin 07:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: Then we have to put the category Category:Bengali-language newspapers under Category:Bengali-language mass media by country and that is not okay I think. Mehedi Abedin 16:38, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
amended vote. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:01, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The US subcategory has now been merged, the UK and Pakistan subcategories nominated. The need for the intermediate category layer as nominated here becomes smaller and smaller. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I had not found the US nom, when I wrote the comment. I have now voted similarly on that, supporting merger to Category:Bengali-language newspapers. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:45, 18 August 2022 (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:Basketball players at the 2022 NCAA Division I Men's Final Four[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) Qwerfjkltalk 14:47, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A clear example of WP:PERFCAT. Simply appearing in specific games has previously been judged as non-defining. See this 2019 discussion, which reached no consensus and this discussion for the consensus to delete champions categories a year ago. User:Namiba 15:08, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note I have started tagging other categories in this tree. If anyone could help me finish tagging them, it would be much appreciated.--User:Namiba 15:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:44, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom and precedent. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:15, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - If WP:PERFCAT is meant to apply to athletes then sport examples really need to be added to the guideline. Right now all examples are of the arts. I find it weird that if it applies to athletes there is not a single relevant example, given the sheer number of athlete articles. I’m not voting on the proposal, let consensus fall where it may. Rikster2 (talk) 20:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed! - RevelationDirect (talk) 23:39, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:43, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging contributors to the 2021 discussion: User:Pichpich, User:RevelationDirect, User:UCO2009bluejay, User:SportsGuy789, User:Good Olfactory, User:Johnpacklambert, User:KingSkyLord, User:Words in the Wind, User:WilliamJE, User:Muboshgu.--User:Namiba 20:52, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete on Different Grounds My application of WP:PERFCAT is always "Would a person with this career tend to automatically appear in a bunch of these performance cats?" The answer here is no, as I checked 10 random articles and none of them were in more than one of these cats. But neither did these categories seem to be defining to the players, as most did not mention it in the intro. Categorizing basketball players by being on one of that year's top 4 performing team in a competition just doesn't aid navigation. - RevelationDirect (talk) 23:47, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:PERFCAT (RevelationDirect's argument is also convincing). Pichpich (talk) 05:30, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't care whether these stay or get deleted. But whatever the outcome, it should be applied toward all women's sibling categories at Category:NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Tournament Final Four players by year. SportsGuy789 (talk) 20:40, 21 August 2022 (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:Greater León[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. No consensus on whether to delete. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 14:48, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Consistent with parent article Region of León. Super Ψ Dro 12:15, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, this is about regionalism in a former first-level administrative division and only the two articles truly belong in this category. The medieval kingdom of Leon was at times much bigger than the former administrative division, and other subcategories that have been added here have joint content for the new administrative division of Castilia and Leon. The two articles can directly refer to each other without the need of a category. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:45, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support move - Matches the correct, English-language name and main article title for the Region of León. Scanlan (talk) 00:32, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:40, 18 August 2022 (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.

People of Breton descent‎[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 (weak keep). (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 14:55, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, with very few exceptions these people are descending of French nationals long after the duchy of Brittany lost its independence. Insofar people were an active member of an expatriate Breton community (separately organized from expatriate French people) they may be added to e.g. Category:Breton diaspora or Category:Breton American on an individual basis. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:41, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Its not useful to subdivide descent categories in this way. Breton much more a geographical than an ethnic description. Many of these articles dont mention Brittany at all. Rathfelder (talk) 07:53, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose merge and deletions - Bretons are a distinct ethnic and linguistic group, similar to the Basques and other ethnicities within France. They formed distinct communities in the countries where they settled. This erases a large amount of content and categories, particularly the "Category:People of Breton descent" proposed deletion. Scanlan (talk) 00:41, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • If they are so distinct why do the articles make no mention of it? Pinochet was a " descendant of an 18th century French Breton immigrant". Where is the evidence of this community? Rathfelder (talk) 07:07, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:46, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • That is the case in France, but there is no evidence that they are a linguistic minority in countries of emigration. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:57, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as per Dimadick. A regional and linguistic identity doesn't stop being so when one leaves the larger entity in which it is based. The above suggestion and following comment from Marcocapelle don't even match up, you want to delete 'French people of Breton descent' but concede that they have a distinct identity in France. So that one should be struck for one. But what I infer from the deletion proposals is the idea that when people from Brittany (or anywhere) move abroad they instantly abandon all their cultural and linguistic identity and identify solely as French, and pass that simplified history on to their children – to me, that is a complete nonsense. In terms of Wikipedia, the use and addition of categories like this shows readers are interested to know what people have Breton family origin but were not born there, as they are with all credibly recognisable subnational groups, of which Breton certainly is one.
Alternatively, for consistency ALL the various subnational ethnic/regional origin categories, particularly the many of Italy and Spain I have come across, should be nominated here too as they have also been appropriated for use by the modern day diaspora rather than those people directly from the medieval kingdoms that predated the current nations (Aragon, Venice etc). Some such categories may have stronger claims to exist than others, but to be honest Brittany would be very near the top of any such list despite the best attempts of France to dilute it into nothing over the centuries (now being reversed somewhat). Certainly I am not suggesting that 'Chilean people of French descent' should not ALSO be included in relevant articles, and as always with categorisation there will be some that have slipped in without referencing - an issue that should be resolved, but is not what is being proposed here.
Overall this is a case of trying to fix (erase?) something that is not broken. If it is really so undesirable that people from a long-established, multi-faceted region of a country should be identified on Wikipedia as such even when they move abroad and produce offspring with at least part of that culture, a practical solution could be to rename these categories as Category:French people of Duchy of Brittany descent etc, which looks clumsy but will discount all the modern people and they could have it deleted from their articles. But better to abandon this wiki-ethnic cleanse altogether IMO. PS I have mentioned this discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject France for wider input - which may well support the proposals rather than my view, we shall see. Crowsus (talk) 13:08, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose in most cases -- The French category may be difficult to define, so that I am neutral on that. The British category has nothing but an English subcat, making it a redundant level. The Irish one only has two articles, which is not enough to keep. All the rest have more than 5 members, which is enough to Keep them. Brittany was a province of France, divided at the French Revolution into three departments, but there is no problem in identifying the scope. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:43, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:39, 18 August 2022 (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:Confucian thought[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:Confucianism. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 14:55, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, align with Category:Eastern philosophy and Category:Chinese philosophy. There is not an article under the name of either Confucian thought or Confucian philosophy, both are redirects to Confucianism. Upmerging of the category to Category:Confucianism might be an alternative. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:12, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:50, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:38, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • (as nom) Just to avoid misunderstandings, I think merging is a good solution too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:44, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:Confucianism, though I do want to note that the term "Confucianism" is falling out of disuse among scholars in favor of "Confucian thought." Personally I'd prefer a reverse merge, but I agree with the spirit of this discussion, that we should condense the categories. bibliomaniac15 03:33, 22 August 2022 (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:Bengali-language newspapers published in Pakistan[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) Qwerfjkltalk 14:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only one article in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:51, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Note that the only article in this category is already in Category:Daily newspapers published in Pakistan, which is a subcategory of Category:Newspapers published in Pakistan. Animal lover |666| 18:26, 23 August 2022 (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:Province of Brandenburg[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 August 26#Category:Province of Brandenburg

Category:Deniers of the Uyghur genocide[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) Qwerfjkltalk 14:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is a highly controversial, derogatory and charged category which has blatant WP:BLP implications, lumping allegations on specific individuals that are not directly verified in third-party, reliable sources. Rather, it seems to indiscriminately list anyone who has voiced a defense of China or challenged the popular narrative regarding this issue, as if there is no legitimate debate to be had on it. In his light, it appears to have no other useful purpose as to be an attack category of sorts. The Uyghur genocide is an extremely controversial and contested topic, and for this reasons there was not even a consensus (after heavy debate) to list it on the article genocide denial itself, so how can there be a category of such?- Sunderland Renaissance (talk) 04:43, 18 August 2022 (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/2022_August_18&oldid=1107284617"