Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 30
July 2 >

July 1[edit]

Category:Political prisoners by country[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 9#Category:Political prisoners by country

Category:Monuments and memorials to Gabriel Johnston[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:26, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT ★Trekker (talk) 19:27, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, so there's not a practical difference between delete and merge anyway. - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:41, 2 July 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:Crimes in Salvador[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:History of Salvador, Bahia. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:26, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. You are welcomed to nominate some small categories in Category:Crime in Brazil as well Estopedist1 (talk) 19:09, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Small cat requires that there not be a reasonable potential for growth. I would imagine a large number of articles could be created on crimes in Salvador that pass GNG and WP:NCRIME, and I am not seeing a strong case being made that this cat has no potential for growth.4meter4 (talk) 19:27, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I feel like it should be moved to Category:Crime in Salvador, Bahia, per its parent categories.★Trekker (talk) 19:29, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:History of Salvador, Bahia. Of course every category has some potential for growth, but I can't see how this category would grow to a respectible size. Brazil as a whole has hardly 100 crimes articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:48, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, I think you are unintentionally upholding a systematic bias towards Anglophone and European countries with that assertion. See WP:GLOBAL. If we were to actually look for sources on crime in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil in the Portuguese language and in sources available through academic presses in Brazil, I think you would find plenty of potential topics in this category for article creation. The potential for growth is there. The likelihood of growth being small on the English language wiki is a reflection of a preference for Anglophone and European content and not an actual reflection on the potential of content that would pass NCRIME. We shouldn't be making category deletions which feed into systemized biases.4meter4 (talk) 23:55, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is not I who has this bias, it is all editors on en.wp together. Far more articles are written with Anglophone content. Consequently American and British categories need more granularity in categories than other countries of similar size. This isn't any different on en.wp than in other Wikipedias, by the way. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:19, 2 July 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:Kennedy Center honorees[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. – Fayenatic London 13:35, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCAWARD; was used in an WP:OSE argument at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 May 28#Category:Governor General's Performing Arts Award winners. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:20, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:15, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The Kennedy Center galas are lifetime achievement awards who recognized people who are already prominent and typically already have some of the few awards that are defining like Oscars, Emmys, and Grammys. This runs afoul of WP:OCAWARD and WP:NONDEFINING. We already have a list right here for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:48, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - I completely disagree with the above. First of all, that other CfD had only 2 contributors saying "delete" - the two above saying "delete". Second, it is competitive. Read the article - Kennedy Center Honors. People are nominated by the public and then there is a selection committee which decides. As for WP:OSE, that AfD argument doesn't work well at CfD. Please also see a quote at the top of my talk page. - jc37 14:55, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    See also: Wikipedia:OTHERCATSEXIST... - jc37 15:00, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay that's kinda funny that this abbreviation can mean two things: "other cats exist", and "other cat sexist". Which cat is engaging in sexism? Can someone tell them to stop doing that, please?[Joke] Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:36, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I originally closed this as delete. After some discussion on my talk page, I believe it is more appropriate to relist this discussion. If there is not consensus to delete the category, it should be restored when this discussion is closed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:54, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This is probably the most prestigious honor awarded to artists in the United States. It's more impressive than winning an Oscar, Grammy, Emmy, Tony, or even the Pulitzer Prize, and the award is widely covered in a variety of sources from traditional media to academic publications. It is a career defining achievement, and arguments saying otherwise are entirely spurious. With a large number of categories devoted to much lesser known or significant awards, I can't see a well reasoned rationale under policy for deleting categories for this specific award. The main argument made here seems to be that the category is redundant because it overlaps with a list, but almost all categories inevitably will be duplicated somewhere in list form due to the defining and overlapping features of WP:NLIST and the policy language at Wikipedia:Categorization. Under this type of thinking we would delete almost all categories in favor of list pages or lists within articles. It's a bad argument and fails to recognize how categories interlink the encyclopedia for aid in research and navigation; something a list buried in an article would not achieve. Category structure is there for a reason. 4meter4 (talk) 18:53, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When an award category is deleted, there is often consensus to create a list if there is not already one. I was just clarifying that a list already existed so that work didn't need to be done. The existence of a list is not a reason for deletion though. The second part of WP:OCAWARD does a good job on this topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 04:05, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Side Conversation
Oops, totally missed that and no objection to relisting. Collapsing this section to avoid distractions. - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:26, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, a hugely major award. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aza24 (talk • contribs) 09:15, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Between editors and the CFD bot, this category was recently emptied. If it is kept, all of the article removals will need to be reverted. Liz Read! Talk! 03:13, 10 July 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:Superhero crossover television shows[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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:31, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Inclusion criteria not clear, but doesn't look to be defining for anything. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:27, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Category was also created by sock of a banned user. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:29, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. We have an article on Crossover fiction and an attached Category:Crossover fiction. There is a large number of crossover stories involving superheroes in comics, film, television, etc. If you google it there are many reliable sources from a variety of publications where the main topic is crossover fiction involving superheroes from a number of media franchises like the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Marvel Comics, the Star Wars franchise, DC Extended Universe, DC Comics, etc. Superhero crossover fiction is not only a real and defined thing, but pretty much every superhero film in theaters over the last 10 years would technically fall under a type of superhero crossover fiction, because that type of fiction has become mainstream. Many of the superhero television programs (or at least individual episodes) would also fit under that description. 4meter4 (talk) 20:29, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments - The problem with Category:Crossover fiction and its subcats, is that you cannot tell what is crossing over with what in the categories. This is something better suited for a list, per WP:CLN. In addition, in this particular case, with the possible exception of Secret Invasion (TV series), all the rest of the category members are merely superhero teams. The members of which are "crossovers" by merely being on the team. - jc37 23:15, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. (I didn't vote in my earlier comment.) "Crossover fiction" is a recognized genre/trope of fiction; and fiction involving superheroes often employs that genre/trope which is discussed in RS. There is clearly an evidence based rationale for category growth and inclusion as superhero crossover fiction is a recognized (i.e. "defined") sub-genre of fiction in RS. Editors looking for superhero content employing crossover in the medium of television would be using this cat. Further, I don't think the cat needs to define what is crossing over to what. That would make the cat too specific to be viable for category growth. We categorize content all the time into more generalized categories without providing greater detail. Further, in order to be included in the category the article text should make it clear that the subject is crossover fiction and explain the details of the crossover with inline citations supporting the text. If the article doesn't do that then category should be removed from the article in question.4meter4 (talk) 14:43, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I agree with 4meter4. Crossover fiction is a distinct genre in its own right, and this can be confirmed by available sources. Dimadick (talk) 06:53, 3 July 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.

Mayors of cities in China[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:32, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Large cluster of one, two or three item WP:SMALLCATs for mayors of towns and cities in China. As always, a town or city does not get its own dedicated "mayors of place" category the moment there's one mayor of that place with a Wikipedia article: mayors are not "inherently" notable per WP:NPOL, and instead get articles only if they clear conditional notability standards such as high levels of sourceability and/or having also held another more notable political office at some other time in their careers, so mayor categories are not eligible for the "realistic potential for growth" exemption in SMALLCAT. So a "mayors of city" category may exist only if four or five articles about mayors of that city already exist, and at one, two or three articles they are to be filed only at the country or first-order divisional levels. Bearcat (talk) 14:56, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for Now While there are obviously other mayors, the notability issue makes growth challenging. No objection to recreating any that exceed expectations and reach 5+ articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 17:40, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I agree that this is probably too specific, but I also think "Mayors of places in China" is so general as to be useless. Category:Mayors of places in the United States breaks it down into states, and I would suggest that the China category tree for mayors follow a similar format by organizing cats for mayors into the the 33 administrative provinces.4meter4 (talk) 19:44, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That would probably be a valid approach, but it's best handled by people who are knowledgeable about China, and would probably be a trainwreck if we tried to start it here. Bearcat (talk) 00:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm open to that approach. - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:15, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for now per RD. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:51, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Query Are they not part of an established tree structure? Do they not have potential for growth? Should there not be consistency in the application of the SmallCat exception? Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:20, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not every place in China has its own mayors category, there are dozens of articles in the parent category. Nor should there be a mayors category for every place in China because it merely leads to a very thinly populated tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:48, 7 July 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:Face recognition[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 15:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match Facial recognition system and subcategory Category:Facial recognition software. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:41, 1 July 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:Fair trade schools[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:32, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:TRIVIALCAT and WP:NONDEFINING
Fair trade means paying more to suppliers based on ethical considerations and the intersection with that topic and these schools varies quote a bit. Wellsway School makes sure "fair Trade coffee, tea and sugar are used in the staff room and other products sold in the school canteen", Skipton High has "Fair Trade FairAchiever status" which might be some sort of certification, St. Catherine's set the world record for how many fair trade bananas could be eaten in a single day, while St. Cyres has an entire section on the topic that is well sourced. I'm unsure if this intersection is notable enough for an article, but it doesn't seem defining enough for a category. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:03, 1 July 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:Bullfighting schools[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:32, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT
There's 1 one article in this category, California Academy of Tauromaquia, and I could only find 1 other with any secondary coverage: this one in Madrid. There are definitely some others programs out there but I don't think they're notable or even really "schools": someone gives a class in Houston and I can't figure out where this coaching program is based. No objection to recreation if I'm mistaken and 5+ articles ever materialize. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:03, 1 July 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:Conductive education schools[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:33, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING or WP:SMALLCAT
Conductive education is a special education approach for people with motor disorders, while this category only has 3 articles, there's no shortage of schools that use it: here's a directory for the US. The issue with this category is that most schools use this approach for small number of students that need it, but that's one of many educational aspects of the school and Cashmere High School is pretty representative. The other 2 articles are Addington School, which is probably defined by the association, and the Conductive Education School, Kuwait, which is definitely defined by this category but that article would have a rough time in AFD. I don't anticipate a category that is both defining and well populated. I added the last two articles to the see also section of the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:03, 1 July 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_July_1&oldid=1165969714"