Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 8
June 10 >

June 9[edit]

Category:Films about buses[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. ✗plicit 05:09, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There’s not very many films *about* buses, there’s quite a few where a bus or buses play a significant part. JonathanDP81 (talk) 23:26, 9 June 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:PSOTY[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. ✗plicit 05:19, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEPON. With only what amounts to articles on two albums and a discography page, this lacks the content necessary for an eponymous category. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 20:10, 9 June 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.

Expatriates 2[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The result of the discussion was: withdrawn by nominator. – Fayenatic London 21:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Full list of around 123 categories
This is the full list of categories nominated at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 9#Expatriates 2
Those by-continent groupings would be more useful than the proposed global categories, which lump in migrants from Asia with from Africa, Europe, Oceania, South America and North America. I would still oppose the merges, but using by-continent targets would be significantly less destructive than this proposal to simply demolish a large chunk of our human migration categories.
The by-continent data is already there in the current category titles, and re-creating it later would be a lot of avoidable work.--BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:59, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • If Dante were alive he would no doubt create a 10th concentric circle of hell where one is condemned to argue interminably with BHG. Oculi (talk) 14:34, 20 June 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:Santa Clara University School of Business alumni[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. ✗plicit 05:19, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT User:Namiba 17:44, 9 June 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:Fictional heart attacks[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 25#Category:Fictional heart attacks

Category:Railway stations in Great Britain without public access[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. ✗plicit 05:20, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicates Category:Railway stations in Great Britain without road access (won't link for some reason...). Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 17:02, 9 June 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:1662 establishments in Croatia[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. ✗plicit 05:26, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for just one thing. As always, "YYYY establishments in Country" categories do not automatically need to exist the moment there's one thing established in that country in that year with a Wikipedia article -- it aids navigation not a whit to obsessively filter everything down to microcategories of one, so below about five articles per year things should just be catted by century. Bearcat (talk) 12:28, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I changed the first merge target, deferring to local knowledge below. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:13, 10 June 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:Television shows set in Kingston upon Hull[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 the first, merge the second. ✗plicit 04:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Two single-entry WP:SMALLCATs, both created solely to overcategorize the same television show. As always, every place does not automatically get one of these the moment there's one show to file in it -- there would need to be at least five shows set in Kingston upon Hull before a dedicated category was warranted, and below that they should just stay in the Yorkshire parent. Navigation of the pedia is not aided in any way by obsessively sorting everything down into highly localized microcategories of one. Bearcat (talk) 12:03, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bearcat Where does it say this guideline about a minimum of five shows?
When I first created some categories 16 months ago, a lot of them were deleted because they had nothing in them...
Mainly because I had only just created them.
No-one said anything about them having to have a minimum of five entries, which I could easily get.
So I created some of them one at a time, and made sure each one contained at least entry.
Also, let me guess...
You're either, not British, or you're over the age of 47yo?
Which a quick look at your profile suggests, you're clearly not British, you're a Canadian, as Yorkshire does not exist officially as anything, and has never really existed as anything.
It was originally split into North Riding of Yorkshire, West Riding of Yorkshire, and East Riding of Yorkshire...
Which then became North Yorkshire, West Yorkshire, East Riding of Yorkshire, and South Yorkshire.
Those four are Ceremonial counties of England, which are the equivalent of the States of the USA.
Therefore Yorkshire should not be the parent of anything other than North Yorkshire, West Yorkshire, East Riding of Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, and anything unspecific to one of those four counties, like Yorkshire County Cricket Club. Danstarr69 (talk) 13:10, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SMALLCAT, which I already linked to in my nomination statement, is where it says that categories need to have more than one article before they become justified. And it doesn't matter who does or doesn't live where, either, because there's absolutely no rule that the United Kingdom gets any special exemptions from having to follow SMALLCAT the same way as any other country does. Bearcat (talk) 13:11, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bearcat there should be a rule, as people who don't understand UK geography like you, start nominating things to be deleted, partly because you think the East Riding of Yorkshire shouldn't exist.
It's like saying delete British Columbia because Eastern Canada exists.
Recently on a different site, I was updating some Americans places in the middle of a desert, which were also part of a national park, and wasn't sure whether I should add the counties to their addresses or not. I decided against adding the counties to their addresses, as I'm not really sure what an American county is, plus most locations in the USA only ever seem to use just states, not counties then states.
Also Kingston upon Hull should definitely exist, along with many more missing categories about things in the UK's cities, mainly because Hull is 1 of the 76 cities of the UK. It's not like it's a small town, with nothing going on, it's a medium sized city, and former UK Capital of Culture, with lots going on.
I mainly try to focus on Yorkshire cities and towns, mainly on a different site, however I slowly build them up on here every now and again, as shown by some of my recent fiction, books, and writer additions this week. Danstarr69 (talk) 13:46, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia content is not served by being microfiltered all the way down to microcategories of just one article each. Whether a category "should" exist or not, there have to be five articles in it, not just one, before it's actually allowed to exist, because a bunch of one-article categories does not facilitate navigating the encyclopedia. So there's a minimum number of articles that "X in Kingston upon Hull" has to contain before it's allowed to exist separately from "X in Yorkshire" — not because anybody fails to understand geography, but because navigation of Wikipedia's category system is not facilitated by one-article categories. Bearcat (talk) 13:50, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bearcat come on now, admit it.
You thought because it contained a compass point, it must be a made-up place like, West London which I see people use a lot when talking about tourist attractions, when what they're actually talking about are places in the 8.29 square mile City of Westminster 1 of the 76 cities in the UK, because they don't realise that Greater London is not a city, never has been a city, and never will be a city. Danstarr69 (talk) 14:10, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I thought absolutely nothing of the sort, and know far more about UK geography than you imagine I do. But places do not automatically get their own dedicate "X in [Place]" categories just because they exist, they get such categories only when there are at least five things to be filed in them. "This place exists" is not an exemption from WP:SMALLCAT; there have to be five things in the category before a category for them is justified, and one thing is not enough. Bearcat (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This whole discussion is a waste of time and energy. It would be so much more productive if User:Danstarr69 would move all articles in Category:Television shows set in Yorkshire to an appropriate subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:21, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Marcocapelle what do you think I'm doing? Look at my edit history.
    And as I said, "anything unspecific to one of those four counties, like Yorkshire County Cricket Club."
    Some of them I know exactly where they're set.
    Some of them I know roughly where they're set.
    Some of them are set in unspecified areas of Yorkshire.
    Some of them are set in fictional areas of Yorkshire.
    Therefore I can only move the ones I know about, or which specify the exact location settings in the article.
    The unspecified ones, and the fictional ones will have to remain in the overall "Set in Yorkshire" category. Danstarr69 (talk) 15:39, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bearcat you keep going on about this minimum of five entries, yet Wikipedia:SMALLCAT says nothing of the sort. It says:
"Avoid categories that, by their very definition, will never have more than a few members."
It's extremely unlikely that the category will never grow. There's at least 5 productions I know of which have been filming in Hull over the last 12 months, some of which will possibly be set in Hull too.
People from Hull, will know of more productions set in Hull, than I do.
Plus I only created it 4 days ago. Danstarr69 (talk) 15:34, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Anybody can simply claim that any category has the potential to eventually grow large enough, so nothing would ever be subject to the SMALLCAT yardstick at all if all you had to do to exempt it from SMALLCAT was claim that it was theoretically possible that the category could become larger someday. A prospect of expansion has to be imminent, as in "there's an active project underway right now to get this undercovered topic filled in, so the category will be over the size minimum within a few hours at most", and just "anything's possible eventually" doesn't cut it at all. Bearcat (talk) 15:42, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearcat The minimum of five entries which doesn't exist, except in your head.
As I said, Kingston upon Hull is a city with lots going on. It will definitely increase...
It's the only city in the East Riding of Yorkshire, which is why the East Riding of Yorkshire is largely ignored compared to North, West and South Yorkshire.
However like Scarborough, North Yorkshire and Bridlington, East Riding of Yorkshire, it has an advantage over the towns and cities of West and South Yorkshire, as it's a coastal city, so can be used as a coastal setting, or just for filming coastal scenes. Danstarr69 (talk) 15:56, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing exists "only in my head". The minimum of five articles is a standard rule of Wikipedia categories, not a thing i made up myself to be difficult. And again, the standard is not "it's a city with lots going on, so this category could potentially pass the size bar someday" — it requires an immediate prospect of expansion now, not "anything could be possible someday". Bearcat (talk) 15:58, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, the 5 article rule of thumb (or 10) is a custom in CFD, not a formal guideline in WP:SMALLCAT. - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:25, 17 June 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:Ecophenomenologists[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. ✗plicit 05:20, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, not a defining characteristic of the one article in the category (also WP:SMALLCAT). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:47, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom - car chasm (talk) 23:16, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete If a separate main article emerges, I'm willing to revisit, but this seems like it has no growth potential. - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:21, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - per nom. Oculi (talk) 18:40, 17 June 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:Ecophilosophers[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. ✗plicit 05:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, not a defining characteristic of these articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:45, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom - car chasm (talk) 23:16, 9 June 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.

Cycle manufacturers[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. ✗plicit 05:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:14, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for Now with no objection to recreation if any ever get up to 5+ articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:22, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Oculi (talk) 19:08, 17 June 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:Political websites by continent[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 20#Category:Political websites by continent

Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina art history[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. ✗plicit 05:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: unique, because no other category with the name "Foo country art history" Estopedist1 (talk) 05:28, 9 June 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:National anthem compositions by key[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. ✗plicit 05:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This and its subcategories ought to be deleted because as a rule it's not a defining characteristic of these songs. For example, looking in Category:National anthem compositions in F-sharp major, I've already removed one entry because of the two performances of 'L'Abidjanaise', neither was in this key, and I could find no substantiation that the music was published in this key; it was also listed in a different key category. One of the other category members was also categorized in multiple keys and the third, while performed in this key by the Navy band, could just as well have been notated in the enharmonic key of G flat major, and again there's no documentation of the key.
There are a few anthems that are almost invariably played (if not sung) in a particular key because the compass of the tune doesn't give a mixed group of singers a lot of options. On the other hand the Episcopal Hymnal 1982 uses the tune for 'God Save the King' on facing pages in two different keys. When doing multiple verses it's common enough to move up a key on the last verse. Again, as above, finding documentation that an anthem was originally composed in a specific key is difficult to impossible, and sheet music from the present showing it in one key does not preclude performance or even other sheet music in another. My guess is that all categorization here is WP:OR, but in any case I don't see that the supposed key of these pieces matters. Mangoe (talk) 04:19, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also nominating the following subcats:
Mangoe (talk) 02:13, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural comment, the subcategories should be tagged and listed too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:26, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom, not withstanding Marcocapelle's comment which should be dealt with. Nobody knows the key a song was composed in save the composer, if a particular recording of a song/anthem is known and referenced, that is different.--Richhoncho (talk) 00:02, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as non-defining and often of dubious certainty. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:33, 14 June 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:Green thinkers[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. ✗plicit 05:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Vague, non-WP:DEFINING category - car chasm (talk) 03:57, 9 June 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_June_9&oldid=1161920539"