Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 27 January 29 >

January 28[edit]

Category:Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Serbia files[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 09:30, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Empty but more importantly, the parent category Category:Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 files does not have by-country or by-project subcategories. Pichpich (talk) 21:24, 28 January 2023 (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:Festivals in Port Townsend, Washington[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 09:31, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. I've nominated Category:Puget Sound region festivals to be speedy renamed to Category:Festivals in the Puget Sound region. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:30, 28 January 2023 (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:Cultural depictions of Nikola Tesla[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 09:32, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEF. Lots of these items are included because of merely passing mentions of Nikola Tesla, and all of them are better represented in the article Nikola Tesla in popular culture. fuzzy510 (talk) 20:17, 28 January 2023 (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:Festivals in Lubbock, Texas[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 09:32, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:12, 28 January 2023 (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:Undefined articles needing translation from German Wikipedia[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 09:33, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not used. If topic is undefined, then the article could just be placed in the parent category. Numberguy6 (talk) 19:53, 28 January 2023 (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:Festivals in Anacortes, Washington[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 09:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. I've nominated Category:Puget Sound region festivals to be speedy renamed to Category:Festivals in the Puget Sound region. –Aidan721 (talk) 19:11, 28 January 2023 (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:Conventions in Miami Beach, Florida[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 09:35, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. The lone page is already in Category:Political conventions in Florida so additional merging is not necessary. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:59, 28 January 2023 (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:Anti-Muslim sentiment in India[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 09:37, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Established category naming convention. No difference in content between the two categories. Oddly enough, both categories were created the same day by different users. BirdCities (talk) 20:10, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Or reverse merge is also ok, per further discussion below. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Islam is a religion and Muslims are a community. Sentiment against one doesn't equate to sentiment against the other. Please consult WP:RS instead of making up your own opinions. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:54, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • It wasn't always organised that way. Category:Anti-Muslim sentiment was made a redirect some time recently. A misguided decision in my opinion. Rather Category:Anti-Islam sentiment should have been made a redirect, just like Category:Anti-Christianity is a redirect. There are obviously Wikipdia's systemic biases at work and I don't have the energy or inclination to fight them all. But for most of South Asia pages, "Anti-Islam" doesn't make sense. Demolition of Babri Masjid, for instance, had to do with historical disputes regarding which community the localition originally belonged to it. It had nothing to do with the principles or practices of Islam. If you put Demolition of Babri Masjid in a category of "Anti-Islam", I will be forced to delete the category because there are no reliable sources that support such a claim. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:31, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I retained Haridwar hate speeches in the "Anti-Islam" category because the speeches were made by Hindu religious preachers, and it could be argued that they were prejudiced against the religion of Islam itself. But there is no fine distinction here. All these ridiculous niceties can be avoided if Category:Anti-Islam sentiment is made a redirect to Category:Anti-Muslim sentiment, which is logically the correct thing to do. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:43, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I support having a single category, I don't care what title it's at. Conceptually one could argue for a fine distinction, but I see no such distinction in the sources, and in the vast majority of articles in which this is used the sources are going to use language that doesn't match these titles anyway (prejudice, hate, Islamophobia...) Vanamonde (Talk) 15:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - There should be two categories, for the reasons that User:Kautilya3 mentioned above: anti-Islam would denote opposition to the religion itself, while anti-Muslim indicates opposition or discrimination to a group of people. These are conceptually different categories and unless one is being deliberately obtuse, it is not a 'fine' distinction. - 06:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naushervan (talk • contribs) [reply]
  • There is no way to oppress a religion without impacting the followers of that religion, so yes it is a fine distinction. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:26, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I used the term "fine distinction" in the context of the specific page, Haridwar hate speeches. In many other pages, the distinction is quite significant.
Most of the literature on "Anti-Islam" or "Islamophobia" is written by western authors in the western context. They are quite oblivious of the rest of the world, and especially South Asia. India has the second largest number of Muslims in the world and Islam has been in India from the time of Prophet Muhammad himself. So the issues there are quite different from those of the West. However, see this source which attempts to deal with the distinctions to some extent:
* Gottschalk, Peter; Greenberg, Gabriel (2018). Islamophobia and Anti-Muslim Sentiment: Picturing the Enemy. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-1-5381-0738-6.
In any case, making Category:Anti-Muslim sentiment the primary category would solve the problem, as far as I can see. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This is far too fine a distinction. "There is no way to oppress a religion without impacting the [community of] followers of that religion" is correct.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  17:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:58, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per SMcCandlish and V93. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Agreed these are fundamentally the same concept, and I doubt the creator of whichever was created last was aware of the others existence. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — WP:OVERLAPCAT I'm a long-time reader/supporter of Informed Comment, and have a passable understanding of the distinctions. Agree that anti-Islam or Islamophobia is against a misunderstanding of the religion, while anti-Muslim is against the body or personification. However, these are implied motivations of activities described in the articles, not the articles themselves. Categories are not for labelling fine distinctions. Combining to one category will assist navigation and editors.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:22, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge or reverse merge as overlapping categories with no clear difference. Note that there is also Category:Islamophobia in India and Category:Anti-Muslim violence in India. The problem may be at the higher level, maybe as the result of this poorly-attended CfD. In my opinion there should be only a category for negative discourse on religious grounds (which should be Category:Criticism of Islam and another category for hate & prejudice (which should probably be called Anti-Muslim sentiment) in the case of Haridwar hate speeches, that's clearly hate speech towards Muslims as a social group, not theological debate. The clerical role of people involved in hate speech and calls to violence does not change the nature of the speech. Place Clichy (talk) 11:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'd not found the separate Category:Criticism of Islam. OTOH, I'm not convinced that Haridwar hate speeches are Anti-Muslim, but not Anti-Islam. They are not expressing support for the tenets of Islam, merely against their neighbors believing such things. They oppose a/all/any different religion in their community. The name of that religion in this instance is Islam (in English). We'll need to deal with Category:Anti-Muslim violence in India later.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 17:19, 29 January 2023 (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:American sportspeople of Asian 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: delete. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 09:38, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT recent proliferation of tiny categories with unusual and irrelevant hierarchical organization. Southwest Asian is already empty, and has been tagged WP:CSD#C1.
See recent:
  1. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 3#Category:American sportspeople of European descent
William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The subcategories deeper down should be nominated too (for merger, probably), otherwise the nomination misses its point. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:25, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Go ahead. We're still waiting on a decision about your mass nominations a month or so ago. I've checked the subcategories, they are already in other parents where they should be deleted or merged. I'm working on strategically pruning this useless part of the tree.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 03:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let us wait until the older discussion is closed. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Category:American sportspeople of Southwest Asian descent was tagged as a regular CSD C1 since it was empty even though it seems to be included in this nomination (no CFD tag on the page). So, unless something changes, it looks like that category will be deleted before this discussion closes. Liz Read! Talk! 21:05, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- These are harmless containers and should have that label. I suspect that the SW Asian category is empty because the content has been moved to Middle Eastern. This should perhaps become a cat-redirect. We may need a Central Asian sibling for the ex-Soviet republics there. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:05, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep pending a larger nomination and discussion of the tree of Category:East Asian people etc. Simply deleting sportspeople doesn't make sense given that it is a logical derivative of much larger and broader categories.--User:Namiba 15:39, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This argument makes little sense, as this is indeed part of a larger group on nominations, linked below. This effort comprehensively covers the notability of continental/regional descent categories of sportspeople and their racial implications. BTW sportspeople is the only occupation for which such categories exist. It is therefore not pending anything, and keeping only these 5 categories would create a wart. Place Clichy (talk) 16:10, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 21:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Larger nomination has concluded delete:
Also, related have all concluded delete:
  1. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 3#Category:American sportspeople of European descent
  2. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 12#Category:Latin American sportspeople by ethnic or national origin
  3. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 13#Category:South American sportspeople by ethnic or national origin
  4. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 14#Category:African sportspeople by ethnic or national origin
  5. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 14#Category:Middle Eastern sportspeople by ethnic or national origin
  6. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 14#Category:Oceanian sportspeople by ethnic or national origin
William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:49, 28 January 2023 (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 Al-Andalus[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 all per discussion. Kbdank71 17:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming
original
Nominator's rationale: rename for consistency. The category tree currently contains four different formats: Al-Andalus fooers and fooers of, from and in Al-Andalus. "From" (with the exception of rulers and military personnel) is the default for the Russian Empire, Ottoman Empire and for caliphates. "Of" is sometimes ambiguous, e.g. are historians of Al-Andalus living in Al-Andalus or is Al-Andalus their topic of interest? "Al-Andalus fooers" failed earlier in this discussion. "In" only occurs very rarely. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:16, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Asqueladd, Laurel Lodged, and Peterkingiron: pinging participants in previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:16, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support "from" works best for multi-ethnic empires. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:30, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The al- should be lower case per WP:MOSAR. I am slightly unsure about "of" vs "from" in all cases. I think "from" can also be ambiguous. For example, is a slave brought to al-Andalus a "slave from al-Andalus"? Srnec (talk) 01:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Caveat: I agree that the bishops categories should remain as is. Srnec (talk) 21:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — to match previous decisions. Don't see any decision about Al-Andalus specific capitalization, this matches the others. If enslaved there, "from" there. (Marcocapelle must have a marvelous script for mass nominations, this would have taken me half a day.)
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 03:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • A trick is to copy an unfolded category tree to Excel. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:01, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for all the bishops categories. The standard format for bishops categories is "Nth- Century bishops in (Location)". No opinion on other categories. Referencer12 (talk) 20:53, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Selectively keep -- Those categories already using "of" should be kept; and it should be dynasties of Al-A. On the other hand "from" is much better for exiles and expatriates. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:51, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for bishops categories per Referencer12. Furius (talk) 02:42, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 21:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:46, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose, Propose selectively keeping some as are and changing others to "Andalusian fooers," based on how other categories in other groups are worded (eg, RC bishops in, Andalusian rabbis, etc.) Rational: Consistency should be kept across those other groups not al-Andalus.Referencer12 (talk) 06:39, 1February 2023 (UTC)
William Allen Simpson (talk) 17:16, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oops! Sincerest apologies! 1st time partaking in one of these discussions. Wasn't meaning to make it look like more users were opposing. Referencer12 (talk) 03:36, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: do you agree to these modifications?
William Allen Simpson (talk) 17:37, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am not opposing any of the modifications. I guess many more categories need renaming when we change the suffix. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:13, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK. I've clarified that current proposal for the closer. Also, "Clergy in", just like bishops and rabbis.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Great, thanks for taking the Clergy/Bishops/Rabbi issues into account & for working on making Wikipedia better! Referencer12 (talk) 03:36, 2 February 2023 (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:Nigerian mythology[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 09:42, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, as becomes clear from the articles, (West) African mythology is not limited to the state borders of Nigeria. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:33, 28 January 2023 (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:Japanese tribes[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 19:53, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete selectively merge, incoherent content, in part overlapping with Category:Tribes of ancient Japan and Category:Japanese clans. A speedy move request was declined. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion
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:Wikipedians interested in legal doctrines and principles[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:Wikipedians interested in law. Kbdank71 05:23, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, this apparently is a too narrow topic of interest. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:00, 28 January 2023 (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/2023_January_28&oldid=1138052953"