Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< August 24 August 26 >

August 25[edit]

Establishments in the Gaza Strip[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 September 18#Establishments in the Gaza Strip

Category:Health sciences schools in Malaysia[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) Marcocapelle (talk) 13:00, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unneccesary intermediate category. No actual articles. Rathfelder (talk) 18:32, 25 August 2018 (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:Members of the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics[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 to Category:Cambridge mathematicians, though admittedly consensus was not strong in this case, though it was strong that some change had to be made. There seems to be support for renaming this to Category:Cambridge University mathematicians. This could be pursued in a follow-up nomination. Good Ol’factory (talk) 12:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is ambiguous because it does not name the school to which it refers. Klbrain (talk) 17:50, 25 August 2018 (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:Members of the Department of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics[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 as proposed. This result was chosen to match the result of the nomination immediately above. Good Ol’factory (talk) 12:26, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Ambiguous title (missing the University name) that duplicates a page with simpler but clearer title. Klbrain (talk) 17:42, 25 August 2018 (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:Southern jaguars[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 by merger to Category:Jaguars for the single remaining page. @SilverTiger12: please do not empty categories out-of-process again, nor blank the category pages, but use CFD and wait for the discussion to close. Disclosure: I am closing this discussion to put it out of its misery; although I commented, I consider myself not WP:INVOLVED in this one. – Fayenatic London 20:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These 3 categories have been emptied by edits such as this. If these categories are not re-populated then they should be deleted. DexDor (talk) 15:39, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
They have been repopulated. Leo1pard (talk) 15:45, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What's the intended difference between, for example, Category:Southern jaguars and its parent Category:Jaguars of South America ? DexDor (talk) 16:06, 25 August 2018 (UTC) I've put the explanation of the category back in. DexDor (talk) 20:18, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Leo1pard, Category:Jaguars (currently) contains only 21 pages (and most of those are redirects). Thus, there's no need for it to have subcategories. If by-region subcats were needed then it would be best to use regions that are already in use for other categories. DexDor (talk) 14:14, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Leo1pard (talk) 14:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree I was the one who depopulated them, because all they contained was a huge number of redirects, most of which seemed rather superfluous. And I agree, there was an unnecessary amount of categories for all those redirects. So I agree that those need to go.--SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:15, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is incorrect - you have been removing articles from these categories. DexDor (talk) 20:30, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is what I said- that I was emptying those categories. There are exactly 3 pages about extant jaguar populations- Jaguar, North American jaguar, and South American jaguar. The rest of the items in those categories were all redirects to one of the latter two pages. And most of those redirects aren't even in use.--SilverTiger12 (talk) 20:52, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your statement "all they contained was ... redirects" is incorrect - please strike it. DexDor (talk) 06:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - it's difficult to see whether these are valid as the original idea has been 'cleaned' by SilverTiger12. Moreover SilverTiger12 not content with emptying the categories once has now today emptied them again. Oculi (talk) 19:01, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all to Category:Jaguars. We do not like one-article categories. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:23, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Here [4] is a link to the diffs showing the former members of these categories. – Fayenatic London 21:21, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Fayenatic london: Thanks for providing this list. @SilverTiger12: please do not empty a category while the discussion is still ongoing, that is very unhelpful. Based on the list of diffs I note that most of the former category content are redirects to the same articles that are already in the category, therefore redundant. Hence I agree with the merge to Category:Jaguars. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:09, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update: I am moving all items in the discussed categories to cat:Jaguars, since there seems to be a consensus to merge.--SilverTiger12 (talk) 12:40, 5 September 2018 (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:Donald J. Trump Foundation[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:Business career of Donald Trump. Good Ol’factory (talk) 12:16, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, only two articles, unlikely to grow. Both articles refer to each other, that's enough. — JFG talk 12:17, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, no objection to placing those articles in a parent category. I just noticed this smallcat was unnecessary. — JFG talk 08:06, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@JFG: In that case, please nominate such cases for merger in future, rather than deletion. Deleting a category removes its contents from the parent hierarchies (unless the contents are already in other sibling categories). – Fayenatic London 09:28, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK, wasn't aware of that process. It can be disputed whether articles about the foundation belong in the parent category anyway (the Trump Foundation was not a business activity). — JFG talk 09:42, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Foundation article is currently listed in categories Category:Foundations based in the United States and Category:Donald Trump controversies and Category:1988 establishments in New York (state), that looks good enough to me. — JFG talk 09:45, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@JFG:​ Simple deletion would still remove List of grants made by the Donald J. Trump Foundation from the Category:Donald Trump hierarchy. I suggest that the list should at least be placed in that top category if the nominated category is deleted. – Fayenatic London 20:08, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, of course. — JFG talk 05:17, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support deletion, per WP:SMALLCAT and per further explanation by nominator (the Trump Foundation was not a business activity). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:54, 29 August 2018 (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:Roman Catholic cardinals by X[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: consensus to rename, but no consensus on which form, so defaulting to not including disambiguated form since other similar categories do not include the disambiguator. A fresh nomination dedicated to this issue could be had. Good Ol’factory (talk) 12:13, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C: Category:Cardinals by century‎, Category:Cardinals by country‎, Category:Cardinals by nationality‎, Category:Lists of cardinals. Chicbyaccident (talk) 10:55, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename but to Category:Cardinals (Catholic Church) by papal appointment etc per Category:Cardinals (Catholic Church) (renamed at cfd a few weeks ago) and the usual rule of following the name of the parent category. Oculi (talk) 11:52, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename or alt rename, either way is fine, in these particular cases adding the disambiguator is not crucial because it is very clear from the context (e.g. by papal appointment) what kind of cardinals are meant here. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:20, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename as nom. Context (e.g. "papal appointment" or "suburbican diocese") make the (Catholic Church) precision redundant and useless. The short name is not ambiguous here, and a lot better. Place Clichy (talk) 14:05, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural comment This is the follow-up of an opposed speedy nomination (actually, two of them). It is good and civil practice to provide a copy of the discussion at CFD/S when moving to full discussion. I noticed that @Chicbyaccident: quite often opens such full discussions without respecting this goodwill gesture. I think it would improve the quality of collaboration if they did. Place Clichy (talk) 14:05, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry for any mistake! Chicbyaccident (talk) 14:41, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I have now pasted these below. – Fayenatic London 11:57, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom the contextual words eliminate the need for a disambiguator. Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:09, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of Speedy nominations
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 associated with 3D printing[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 12:07, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, align with name of parent Category:Computer specialists by field. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:30, 25 August 2018 (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:Women by association[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: split to Category:Women and Category:Women by organization. Good Ol’factory (talk) 12:05, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge per WP:OCASSOC and because the distinction between this category and the parent category is unclear. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:23, 25 August 2018 (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 whose birthplace is disputed[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. – Fayenatic London 20:44, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Cf. Category:Age controversies. Renaming will avoid disagreements over whether a person's birthplace is or was disputed. It will also avoid arguments over WP:FRINGE, which is already happening after this Category was added to Barack Obama. Muzilon (talk) 03:01, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, this concerns a non-defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:55, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: I disagree; it is analogous to Category:Age controversies. Examples include Peter Wyngarde and Carlos Gardel.--Muzilon (talk) 10:17, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is not defining for any of the three people in the nominated category. Let's discuss the other category at some other occasion. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:24, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, it was not created because of Barack Obama. User:Muzilon asked at the help desk if it would be an appropriate category. The OP did not mention Obama at all among the several examples provided. I created the category, and then added Obama as the fourth entry and second POTUS, with a third, Chester A. Arthur, lurking in the background. You will not find anything in my extensive editing record that is in the least derogatory to Obama; you will, however, find many snide remarks - not in mainspace, of course - regarding Trump. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:42, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @MelanieN and JzG: I suggest you WP:AGF and not raise baseless accusations again. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:50, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Since my name has been mentioned... yes, I did suggest a category called Category:Birthplace controversies at the Helpdesk to align with Category:Age controversies. (Although I see an editor above now seems to be questioning the appropriateness of the latter too.) I did not have Mr. Obama's biography in mind either. If the consensus is that one or both of these categories should be deleted, I'm happy to go with the flow.--Muzilon (talk) 06:25, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • These examples merely illustrate that birthplace controversies may be interesting details of a biography, it does not make it a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:20, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as the proposed name is not better. "Controversy" is vague and subject to fringe interpretations, leaving room to add, for instance, Alexander Hamilton, whose birthplace is not disputed, but whose disqualification for any candidacy as President of the United States while being one of the most important Founding Fathers is of importance in American history. Place Clichy (talk) 09:19, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not particularly defining for the biography - perhaps only for the biographers. Also we have likely scholarly disputes about many ancient folks - even queries as to whether some even existed. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:09, 2 September 2018 (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 associated with the anti-austerity movement[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. Timrollpickering 20:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, these are people associated with an anti-austerity movement in different countries, they do not have a relationship with each other. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:54, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • That would not solve the problem that the articles of this category are very unrelated to each other. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:09, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*rename and prune to Category:Anti-austerity activists. One person certainly fitted this. Another was an economist, who was probably not an "activist". I note this has a lot of redirects in it. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:43, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯxplicit 05:21, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯxplicit 02:18, 25 August 2018 (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 associated with Anonymous[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, removing only Parmy Olson as the other nine appear to fall within the revised scope. I will move Olson up the parent category as her reporting on the group appears to be defining for her at the moment. – Fayenatic London 20:52, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename and purge per WP:OCASSOC, this is currently a hodgepodge category of people associated with Anonymous in very different ways. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:45, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. That's how we have Category:Alt-right not Category:People associated with the alt-right. wumbolo ^^^ 15:51, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:OCASSOC and similar to my comments to the Labor Party above. "Activists" are hardly better. Look at our article "activism" which defines it as: "efforts to promote, impede, or direct social, political, economic, or environmental reform or stasis with the desire to make improvements in society. Forms of activism range from writing letters to newspapers or to politicians, political campaigning, economic activism such as boycotts or preferentially patronizing businesses, rallies, street marches, strikes, sit-ins, and hunger strikes." So anyone who writes to a newspaper or politician or campaigns could be an "activist". Malarkey. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:22, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯxplicit 05:21, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯxplicit 02:18, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (prune if necessary). People actually involved in its activities are however worth categorising. I support adding "group" or another disambiguator, to prevent irrelevant additions. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:32, 26 August 2018 (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:Wikipedian document markup users[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 to Category:Wikipedians by markup language and purge articles held directly in the category. – Fayenatic London 21:07, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I am proposing two changes: (1) to align with the title of the main article, Markup language; and (2) to replace "users" (which we all are) with a more active descriptor such as coders, writers, etc. (Category creator notified using Template:Cfd-notify) -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:36, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Three of the four users noted above by Fayenatic london are no longer active. Should this category be changed to a container?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯxplicit 02:18, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @RubenSchade: as the only currently active editor with a user page in this category, please reply re moving it into one or more sub-categories. – Fayenatic London 15:27, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fayenatic london: He is already in several of the subcategories, so I think it would be fine just to remove him from this category if becomes a container. -- Black Falcon (talk) 19:12, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree Proposal by Fayenatic London to change to a sub-category consistent with Category:Wikipedians by programming language makes sense. I'll revise my page with the agreed-upon sub-category once it's created. Cheers --RubenSchade (talk) 07:17, 30 August 2018 (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/2018_August_25&oldid=871694156"