Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 September 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< September 1 September 3 >

September 2[edit]

Category:Log flumes[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. Noncontroversial merging of duplicate/miscategorisation. No prejudice against recreation of Category:Log flumes for any notable log flumes. The Bushranger One ping only 04:50, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge While there may one day be a need for a category for forestry Log flumes, the current category is expressly a duplicate, populated exclusively with Log flume (ride) articles. I believe the target category will be clearer and more precise than the source, but I'd be open to a reverse merge, as well. Also, I assume Category:Log flume rides is an option for the merged category, which would have the benefit of reflecting the main article's title but without parentheses, which I believe are discouraged in category names unless necessary? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:58, 2 September 2012 (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:People from Rockford, Iowa[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT Categories have 3 or less entries. ...William 20:20, 2 September 2012 (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:South Korean idol groups[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, but cleanup. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OC#OVERLAPPING and redundant. Most of the content are also in boy band and girl groups category. Parent category Category:Idol groups is already deleted. Krystaleen 16:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The argument that the parent category Category:Idol groups was deleted is not valid, cause it was nominated by the same person and there was no deletion discussion at all (so the category should be undeleted). As I understand it, Koreans used the Japanese model for manufacturing their own idol groups. They aren't the same as the Japanese idol groups (they don't have an innocent and cute image) but they are called idol groups in Korea, so we should not invent any other names for them. There are also idol groups in other countries now (in Indonesia, in Taiwan, in China). The creator of both categories has over 90000 edits in the Korean Wikipedia but is currently blocked in the English Wikipedia and can't defend it. I will post a notice about this deletion discussion somewhere on Portal:Korea. --Moscowconnection (talk) 01:55, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually no, I'm in Indonesia right now and I've never heard of the term idol group being used here. They call them boybands and girl bands (instead of girl groups). Last year I was in China, and idk I didnt hear that term either although I wasn't paying that much attention to it at the time,--Krystaleen 02:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The term is used but it depends on the person. Even the site Daum has it as a music genre and couple of Indonesian friends say it. Jae ₩on (Deposit) 02:30, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The alternative to deleting these, is deleting the both South Korean boy bands and girl groups categories and Japanese boy bands and girl groups categories. All four of them, mind tough, it will break consistency. Which one you prefer, we can't use both because they clearly overlap.--Krystaleen 02:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Japanese categories don't overlap. Partially, but not completely. We should keep them all, there's no harm in keeping the boyband and girlgroup categories as a Western categorization. The Korean category overlaps 2 categories which don't overlap each other, it's not the case discussed in WP:OC#OVERLAPPING. There is another alternative - to make both Category:South Korean boy bands and Category:South Korean girl groups subcategories of Category:South Korean idol groups. (This won't work for Japanese ones.) This way we will keep both categories, and, until there's a mixed-gender idol group, no article will be included directly in the category Category:South Korean idol groups, but it will still be kept as a valid category. (Edit: But I think it's very possible that there are several girl groups and boy bands that consist of adults and aren't oriented towards a young audience so they aren't idol groups.) But, as I already stated, I'm not very familiar with the Korean definition of an idol group myself. I asked for help at WikiProject Korea. Let's see what they have to say. --Moscowconnection (talk) 03:14, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The question is how they are called in Korea, not in Indonesia. I've seen Korean English-language media call them idol groups. --Moscowconnection (talk) 03:14, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
They are already subcategories, the problem is most of the articles are under the South Korean boyband/girlgroup category AND under South Korean idol groups category at the same time, thus they overlap. The same also happens on Japanese one. I only brought up Indonesian because you claimed that they use that term in Indonesia, which isn't true.--Krystaleen 03:43, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Japanese categories aren't subcategories of Category:Japanese idol groups. --Moscowconnection (talk) 03:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, my mistake. But they still overlap.--Krystaleen 03:59, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep this category and the Japanese one below. There is a huge distinction between idols and non-idols in South Korea and Japan (my argument will address South Korea, as I know that music industry far more than Japan's). If anything, Category:South Korean boy bands and Category:South Korean girl groups should be removed this category, as that miscategorizes several groups found in these subcategories that aren't idol groups to begin with, like 1TYM, SG Wannabe, and especially Seo Taiji and Boys; the latter was the catalyst that led to the utilization of Westernized music and paved the way for the first generation idol groups like g.o.d., S.E.S., Baby V.O.X., Shinhwa, etc. South Korean media does in fact refer to these groups as idols, as they do here (아이돌 그룹 빅뱅...; Idol group Big Bang...), here (아이돌 그룹 샤이니의 최민호...; Idol group Shinee's Choi Minho...), here {...아이돌그룹 소녀시대의...; ...Idol group Girls' Generation...), and thousands of examples beyond that. — ξxplicit 04:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can you help revamp the categories then so they don't overlap, seeing you know a lot about the industry? That would be fine and then we won't have to delete these.--Krystaleen 04:31, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have no problem in doing so. — ξxplicit 23:56, 6 September 2012 (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 idol groups[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, but cleanup. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:55, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OC#OVERLAPPING and redundant. Most of the content are also in boy band and girl groups category. Parent category Category:Idol groups is already deleted. Krystaleen 16:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep Instead, you should probably delete Category:Boy bands and Category:Girl groups cause those are artificial categories, their inclusion criteria are vague and even the definitions of "girl group" and "boy band" have been disputed. In short, "idol groups" is how these groups are called in Japan. They are officially called idol groups. They are marketed as idol groups. So whatever you may think they are, "girl groups", "boybands", "female vocal ensembles", they are still idol groups. The article Japanese idol isn't good but it can give you some idea. Idol groups have a distinct image. For example, Perfume ceased being an idol group. Tokyo Girls' Style is not an idol group, it's officially a "dance and vocal group" (see the Japanese Wikipedia article). So the category doesn't overlap other categories. --Moscowconnection (talk) 01:26, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
it's just an umbrella term for boybands and girl groups, most if not all groups there are already under boy band/girl groups category, and you can't delete those two because it's pretty much established as there are tons of similar categories for other countries (i.e. American boy bands, British, etc). The definition of boyband and girl groups is very clear, especially in Asian music, it's basically "male dance and vocal groups" and "female dance vocal groups".--Krystaleen 01:42, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Idol group" is the actual name for these groups. "Boyband" and "girl group" are umbrella names. Please find a reliable source for your statement that the definition of the terms boyband and girlgroup "in Asian music" is "very clear". Can you go to the Japanese Wikipedia and show an example of any of these groups being defined as "girlgroup" or "boyband"? The Japanese Wikipedia doesn't even have articles "Boy band" and "Girl group", by the way. But it has lists of female and male idol groups as standalone articles. --Moscowconnection (talk) 02:06, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's my opinion, I don't need a source for an opinion. Idol groups is an umbrella term for collectively boy and girl groups, I don't go to Japanese Wikipedia, we're in English Wikipedia not Japanese, we don't exactly model different languages of Wikipedia after one another. The term idol groups isn't really used in English, and it doesn't even have an article about it in English Wikipedia.--Krystaleen 02:26, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The term is "idol group" (アイドルグループ) in Japanese, it's already in English, it doesn't have to be translated. You do need a source for an argument you use in a deletion discussion. You said it was "very clear" but you don't have a source for it so the argument is invalid. --Moscowconnection (talk) 02:34, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I meant the term isn't used in English speaking countries which is who this Wikipedia is designed for. And I stand by my opinion that the definition is very clear.--Krystaleen 02:38, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is used already: [1] And definitely the term "idol group" is widely used by Japanese English-language periodicals like The Japan Times, The Daily Yomiuri, The Asahi Shimbun: [2], [3], [4]. The articles are written by English-speaking journalists. --Moscowconnection (talk) 03:23, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There must exist many examples of Japanese groups that can be called girl groups by the Western definition but which aren't idol groups cause their members aren't idols. They simply are not idols, you see? There's no way you can include them in the idol groups category. So your proposition (above, at another deletion discussion) to delete the categories Category:Japanese boy bands and Category:Japanese girl groups won't work either. --Moscowconnection (talk) 03:39, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Define "idol". I think it's pretty subjective and arguable whether one is an idol or not. One is basically an idol if they are popular enough to be "worshipped" by teenagers.--Krystaleen 03:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One is an idol when they are defined as an idol by their talent agency. Their profiles say "idol" which implies some Japanese entertainment industry standard for their behavior. The basic rules are to be innocent and cute and no dates. Basically, idols are very young people who were manufactured to be worshipped as young cute things, and they must behave well. Idols are recruited through auditions, they don't write their own songs, and their contracts have very strict restrictions, like no dating. Idols are kept in a strict school-like environment. If they misbehave, the talent agency must punish them or the fans won't trust the agency anymore. These are the basic rules of the idol industry, but each talent agency have their own criteria that they don't disclose. (I know that Johnny's Jimusho continues to call their guys idols when they become adults and marry, but it is the agency's own decision. Some Johnny's idol groups simply continue forever cause they are too good and popular to be dissolved. Their songs are still pure and innocent.) They are officially called idols, it is more than you can say about many groups in the boybands and girlgroups categories, cause there are many bands that hate being called that. --Moscowconnection (talk) 04:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so what do you suggest for the categorization because it overlaps way too much? How many idol groups are there who are neither a boy band or a girl group and vice versa?--Krystaleen 05:10, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's unacceptable that the categories overlap to some extent. I'm the one who created the Japanese idol groups category so I added most groups there myself. I also remember later going through all articles in the category and deleting some groups from it. There are many groups that I don't know, so there are certainly some in a wrong category but I more or less did like in the Japanese Wiki. --Moscowconnection (talk) 06:07, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I only left Tokyo Girls' Style there cause it's not commonly known they aren't idols, so I thought someone might look for it there. You can remove it from the category if you like. Avex marketed Tokyo Girls' Style as a "dance and vocal group". I don't know why they aren't idols. I can only point out that they don't wear school uniforms, they wear lolita dresses (the link is for admins so they know what we are talking about), that the group wasn't created as a result of auditions, it just appeared from nowhere, that there doesn't seem to be much known about its members. (The Japanese Wikipedia probably doesn't have articles about the members because they aren't doing anything outside the group, but still... Their birthyears are private, for example.) By the way, since then Avex created 2 idol groups, Super Girls and Fairies. Avex even created a special idol record label for Super Girls, so there must be a big difference in how an idol group must be managed. --Moscowconnection (talk) 06:07, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as this is the term used in Japan (sometimes even times written in English). It doesn't matter if there is some overlap with other categories as that will happen sometimes with related categories. It can't always be avoided. It's very possible that someone(s) need to go through the related categories and do some sorting, but that is irrelevant to this. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:57, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand where you're coming from, but the overlap is way too much. Yes if deleting the category is not an option then someone needs to go through the articles and recategorize them.--Krystaleen 17:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I went through all the articles and removed some from the category. --Moscowconnection (talk) 14:54, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The category Category:Idol groups has to be recreated, by the way. It looks like it was deleted automatically by a bot because no one objected to the deletion proposal. (I suspect that most Japanese people won't agree there's any connection between Japanese and Korean idols, but anyway... There are now also idol groups in Taiwan, etc.) --Moscowconnection (talk) 15:07, 9 September 2012 (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:Lake tributaries[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. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:36, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The 'by' naming format seems to suit these categories better than their current names, as it more accurately describes their contents - as parent categories for "Tributaries of Foo River/Lake Bar" subcategories. The Bushranger One ping only 02:56, 2 September 2012 (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:Grammy Award winners[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 and encourage creation of other categories. Courcelles 00:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Because the 2,000+ articles in this category are on the artists who won the award, it may help disambiguate the category somewhat. This should be renamed to Category:Grammy Award-winning artists, but then recreated as a parent to that and Category:Grammy Award-winning albums. Each can also just be a child category of Category:Grammy Awards. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 01:45, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, not all people who win Grammys are "artists". Songwriters, producers, etc. also win the award. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 06:09, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, and also create Category:Grammy Award-winning songwriters, Category:Grammy Award-winning producers, etc. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:29, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Bushranger. The award sub-categories need to be created (compare with the Academy Awards) and articles placed in the appropriate one. Lugnuts And the horse 08:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as long as subcategories are made. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commment Isn't part of the reason there is only the top level category was to avoid overcategorization of winners? So, someone who is simply a Grammy Award winner can now be a Grammy Award-winning artist, a Grammy Award-winning producer and a Grammy Award-winner songwriter (and maybe remixer, arranger, engineer?); not to mention that other awards may follow suit (Brit Awards, Juno Awards). My intent was to distinguish between the individuals/groups who won the award and the works for which he/she/they won. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, they can - and each type of award is individually distinguishing and defining enough to need categorisation. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:12, 4 September 2012 (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/2012_September_2&oldid=1136102869"