Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 June 30

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 29 July 1 >

June 30[edit]

Category:Superhero film directors[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. MER-C 14:56, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A non-defining, trivial, and potentially subjective category. While some directors are more firmly associated with superhero films in the public eye than others, categorizing filmmakers by genre is very similar to categorizing performers by roles, which is something we generally avoid. --Animalparty! (talk) 21:52, 30 June 2019 (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:Vampire: The Eternal Struggle[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. MER-C 09:32, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT containing only two articles. Should be merged with the parent category. Alexandra IDVtalk 21:13, 30 June 2019 (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:Userbox galleries[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: closed awaiting a fresh and better structured discussion (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:39, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant duplicate of Category:Lists of userboxes.
Creator of the Category's rationale: Intended to separate pages in user space from pages in mainspace. ElectroChip123 (talk) 15:54, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@ElectroChip123: firstly, this does not match current description of the category: This page is for listing top-level userbox galleries. For example, "WP:Userboxes/Galleries" should be included in this category, but "WP:Userboxes/Galleries/Food" should not be included in this category.. And secondly if category would be used to separate pages in user space from pages in mainspace then a) Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries should not be added to that category and b) a better name for the category is needed. —⁠andrybak (talk) 16:02, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrybak: The problem is that that doesn't address the reason I created the new category. The root problem is that "mainspace" galleries such as "Wikipedia/Userboxes/Galleries/Food" are being lumped in with "User:XYZ/UBX/asdfa/a/g" galleries. This results in an un-navigable mess. As an alternative, (in addition to renaming the page) it could be set up so that all of the "Wikipedia/..." galleries aren't included in the "galleries" category, except for the top-level page which would be sorted to the top of the lists. I suppose the alternative solution is thus to rename the "lists" category to "galleries" and remove all main-space links (except for the two top-level ones). ElectroChip123 (talk) 16:05, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@ElectroChip123: how about third option: rename Category:Userbox galleries to Category:User namespace userbox galleries, and then rename Category:Lists of userboxes to Category:Userbox galleries or Category: Wikipedia namespace userbox galleries? —⁠andrybak (talk) 16:47, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Just remembered: there are some galleries—subpages of User :UBX. —⁠andrybak (talk) 18:02, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrybak: While I think "User namespace userbox galleries" and "Wikipedia namespace userbox galleries" are the the best options of the ones listed, as they fully describe the pages, they are also rather long names. How about renaming Category:Userbox galleries to Category:Userspace userbox galleries and Category:Lists of userboxes to Category: Wikispace userbox galleries or renaming Category:Userbox galleries to Category:Userbox galleries/user namespace and Category:Lists of userboxes to Category:Userbox galleries/wikipedia namespace? "user namespace" could be abreviated as "userspace", and I think "Wikipedia namespace" is techically referred to as the "mainspace", which would give us the third option of renaming Category:Userbox galleries to Category:Userbox galleries/userspace and Category:Lists of userboxes to Category:Userbox galleries/mainspace. Personally, of the ones I have listed here, option three is my favorite. As to "special:UBX" I'm not sure if they should be included in either list (depends if they are actually "galleries"), though, perhaps, we could use a bot/script to add them to the user one. ElectroChip123 (talk) 14:11, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The verbose names were chosen for consistency with naming of other categories, like Category:User namespace templates. The length of category names should not be an issue—four words is well inside reasonable boundaries. The galleries under UBX don't belong to any particular user (see WP:UM). Since galleries under UBX are also thematically grouped, it makes more sense to categorize them together with Wikipedia namespace galleries. After these considerations, I'm leaning towards following two level (rather than flat) structure (fourth idea):

  • Userbox galleries — for galleries in Wikipedia namespace and under User:UBX/
    • User namespace userbox galleries — a subcategory of the first one, with personal users' galleries.

What do you think? —⁠andrybak (talk) 15:48, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looked into it a bit more. The top page for galleries under User:UBX is User:UBX/Userboxes. It is categorized into Category:Themed Wikipedian userboxes. The category itself contains thematically grouped galleries both under User:UBX and personal subpages of actual users. With these findings, it would seem that we need to include Category:Themed Wikipedian userboxes in this discussion. In addition to category, there are also two navboxes User:UBX/Userboxes/Nav and User:UBX/Userboxes/General Nav. Pinging contributors to the three categories in question and navboxes: RichardF, Syrthiss, koavf, Jc37, Mira, DBD, Kephir. —⁠andrybak (talk) 20:29, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ElectroChip123: Gathering two previous messages into one fifth option — new structure to better organize galleries of userboxes:

—⁠andrybak (talk) 12:26, 3 July 2019 (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:Operating system user templates/Macintosh[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. MER-C 09:33, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Macintosh is only one of several operating systems created by Apple Inc. It would be better to make category explicitly more broad, to be able to include templates related to macOS, iOS, iPadOS, and watchOS. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:33, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Another point: for proprietary operating systems, there is already Category:Operating system user templates/Microsoft, named after the company. —⁠andrybak (talk) 02:17, 1 July 2019 (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:Backing vocalists[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. MER-C 15:19, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-WP:DEFINING category. Being a backup singer is not a unique specialty that some singers are limited to -- literally any singer who exists at all can be "lead singer" on some songs and "backup singer" on others, making this an indiscriminate category for any singer who exists. And, indeed, this isn't limiting itself to people whose notability derives primarily from backup singing: it's including many people who have some backing vocal credits but are notable primarily as lead singers, such as David Gilmour and Dave Grohl and Tamar Braxton and Paul Carrack and Shannon Hoon and, I'm not even kidding about this, Paul McCartney. And conversely, even people who are genuinely more famous for their backing appearances than their own recordings, like Merry Clayton, have still released their own recordings as lead singers (they just weren't big hits the way "Gimme Shelter" was.) And beyond that, there are also a lot of people here who, even if they did do some backing vocals on their band's material, are notable principally as instrumentalists rather than as singers per se. For all of those reasons, it's just not a useful or appropriately defining category. Bearcat (talk) 14:00, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or if appropriate, merge back to singers. Any singer who takes the lead may on another occasion back others up. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:29, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. I am assuming that all articles already are in a singers by nationality category so that a merge back is not necessary (but I have not checked that). Marcocapelle (talk) 20:12, 9 July 2019 (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.

Medieval Finland[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/do not merge. MER-C 08:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge/delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only few articles per century. The smallcat exception rule does not apply because Finland was not a separate country in the Middle Ages, it was just part of Sweden, so it is does not to be diffused by century as part of an established scheme by country. All articles are already in an appropriate century tree, so no need for a dual merge. The establishment categories can be deleted because the content is already in Category:Medieval Finnish architecture. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:21, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object -- Finland was a recognisable part of the Swedish realm, being separated from Sweden proper by the Gulf of Bothnia. We commonly do have by century categories, not necessarily only for countries. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:51, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • We do have by century categories not only for countries, but they should have a fair amount of content, unlike is the case here. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:48, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:10, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 07:37, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Peterkingiron's argument. Dimadick (talk) 15:02, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The term Finlont existed already in 12th Century rune writings. I see that these categories can be useful because the distinction can be geographical as well, and Sweden lost Finland in 1809 so the histories of the two present day countries are already so divergent. But there should be discretion what should be added here. Not everything that's mostly medieval Swedish but that also affected Finland should be added in them. However, there are many things that were happening in specifically on the Finnish side of the Swedish realm. --Pudeo (talk) 13:35, 13 July 2019 (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:Papua Region[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:Southern Region, Papua New Guinea. MER-C 14:58, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Papua Region is an obsolete name, while Southern Region is the new name that has been used since the 2011 PNG census. Sagotreespirit (talk) 22:38, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to:

  • "Census Figures by Wards - Southern Region". www.nso.gov.pg. 2011 National Population and Housing Census: Ward Population Profile. Port Moresby: National Statistical Office, Papua New Guinea. 2014.
  • Rename to Category:Southern Region, Papua New Guinea, aligned with the main article of the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 01:56, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that nominator unilaterally implemented their nomination already. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • information Administrator note I've reverted that while this discussion is open. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:31, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:09, 30 June 2019 (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 Sunnmøre[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. MER-C 14:57, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Irrelevant categorization by district. Norwegian people are categorized by municipality, the appropriate parent cat of which lists people by county. Geschichte (talk) 21:21, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because it is virtually empty, but I see that the other ones exist as container categories, which would be fine Geschichte (talk) 20:05, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • While it may currently be virtually empty, it can easily be populated as a container category (like the others). I have made a start populating it. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:09, 30 June 2019 (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:Burgundian saints[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. MER-C 14:56, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT and the category is a hodgepodge of one article regarding medieval Upper Burgundy and two articles regarding Burgundy (French region) which are unrelated. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:06, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Anselm does not belong. This leaves two French people, who should be upmerged to a suitable French or regional category. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:35, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:09, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, it can be deleted. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:31, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and Peter. 16:12, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
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:Mage Knight[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 August 11#Category:Mage Knight

Category:Mandopop artists templates[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. MER-C 09:02, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match parent Category:Pop musicians templates and the scheme under Category:Musician templates. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 01:45, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:07, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It may procedurally be easiest to rename this per nom, and start a fresh discussion about plural/singular for all siblings together. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:04, 2 July 2019 (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:Mabel (singer) songs[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: do not rename. MER-C 08:52, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: And also:

Isn't it a given that only singers can release songs and albums? We don't need disambiguation here. NØ 05:59, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Also NB. There are also categories for albums, songs written by and maybe others, for these artists, singling out one category tree would not work. --Richhoncho (talk) 10:12, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all - convention is to follow the article. These are Mabel (singer), Halsey (singer), Khalid (singer) respectively. This saves the trouble of looking to see if other Mabels might produce songs - indeed one quickly finds Mabel (group) and a redirect Mabel (band). Oculi (talk) 17:31, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:IAR. Dogmatic adherence to silly 'rules' results in grammatically cumbersome, stupid-looking category names festooned with "(disambiguator)". Besides violating our precious sacred rules, what is the HARM in changing the catgories? --Animalparty! (talk) 22:03, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • In answer to your question - because by harmonising articles and categories there is no question of 'is this the same person/thing/item?' and that WP is more than just the music related pages, removing disambiguators across the whole of WP could create more problems than a mere dislike of disambiguators does. Finally, WP:IAR can't be used to support Wikipedia:I just don't like it as you appear to be doing here. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:50, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, there are many more articles with a '(singer)' or '(band)' disambiguator. If we remove the disambiguator from the category name we should do it for all of them. I would support a broader nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:22, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as noted above. Part of the reason to match the article is to maintain consistency when such ambiguity was becoming an issue. Best to stick with status quo. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:14, 3 July 2019 (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.

DB Schenker Rail (UK)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 July 10#DB Schenker Rail (UK)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_June_30&oldid=1073192143"