Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 March 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 9 March 11 >

March 10[edit]

Category:Burial sites of African royal families[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:Burial sites of royal families. bibliomaniac15 05:57, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:05, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- There is not enough content and probably never will be. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:38, 12 March 2022 (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:Xyleninae[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: no consensus. bibliomaniac15 05:58, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: "Choose type of action wanted" marked as "deletion", but my intention is more "discuss". I can see that Xyleninae has never been created on en.wp. It would appear that this is Noctuoidea (and that superfamily Noctuidae is tagged as disputed) subfamily - see https://www.gbif.org/dataset/111ec1e3-9549-4bc1-84bf-479ba57cfd5b. Your thought about this? Pete AU aka Shirt58 (talk) 09:44, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • If the category is not kept, it should be upmerged instead of deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:55, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Xylenina is classified as a subtribe in the Noctuidae family, but we do not have dedicated articles on many of the family's tribes and subtribes. Noctuidea itself has been undergoing revisions in taxonomy in recent decades, because there is no available molecular analysis on a number of the included species. It is not entirely clear if this is a monophyletic group, or whether all included species have been correctly classified. Dimadick (talk) 07:50, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:42, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:15, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep -- This is a well populated category. The alternative would be merge; certainly not delete. The objection is the lack of a main article, but a look at the parent suggests that it is not unique in this. I note that we have a related Xylenini, where the issue is mentioned. Is not the solution to keep and provide a main article? I am no expert on this. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:52, 11 March 2022 (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:Vegan cafés[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 per WP:SMALLCAT. bibliomaniac15 05:58, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: With a single entry and no foreseeable expansion, this category should be upmerged to its parents per WP:SMALLCAT. ✗plicit 14:00, 10 March 2022 (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:Films about mental disability[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. bibliomaniac15 06:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: split, this category combines two rather unrelated topics. The split was proposed earlier by User:Fayenatic london in this discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:12, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split as nominated. This might have been carried before if I had not changed my mind during the course of the previous discussion. I suggest that this be implemented by moving some contents up to the parent, then renaming the category in order to retain the page history. – Fayenatic London 08:54, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split as proposed. Though this would require some manual work. Dimadick (talk) 03:53, 17 March 2022 (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.

Screening and assessment tools[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 all. bibliomaniac15 06:02, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per precedent, see this previous discussion. See also the two nominations below which I kept separate because they are somewhat less straightforward.
@Xurizuri, Markworthen, and Ozzie10aaaa: pinging contributors to previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:57, 10 March 2022 (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:Psychiatric instruments: child and adolescent psychiatry[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:Screening and assessment tools in child and adolescent psychiatry. bibliomaniac15 06:03, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per precedent, see this previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:56, 10 March 2022 (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:Psychiatric instruments: global scales[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:Global screening and assessment tools in psychiatry. bibliomaniac15 06:03, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per precedent, see this previous discussion. An alternative is to merge this to the parent category per WP:OCMISC. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:56, 10 March 2022 (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.

Alaska borough / census area / Unorganized Borough category tree cleanup[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: no consensus. Kbdank71 03:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have no opinion on this enormous proposal or NRHP-related categories. I don't know anything about a "slow-motion edit war", I tag empty categories daily, as I've been doing for years now, regardless of what subject they cover. The suggestion that I have a bias against any particular subject of categories can look at my CSD log or the many pages of CSD log archives and see that they reflect what categories are emptied, either through article deletion or category restructuring. I know that some editors get upset when a particular category is tagged for CSD C1 deletion but, for good or bad, they usually respond by making sure the category doesn't remain empty and, in that case, the CSD tag is removed and the category isn't deleted. That's all I have to add to this statement. Liz Read! Talk! 02:12, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- I know little of this subject, but the nom seems to be falling into the trap of which he complains. Can we find a single term that will cover both boroughs and unincorporated areas, for example "area", which could then be defined in headnotes, so that we would have Category:Glaciers of Alaska by area, with a headnote saying that it was by Borough or (where there is none) by census area. We have a tendency to make category names long, so that they are comprehensive in saying what their scope is, something better left to a headnote: category clutter is avoided by the use of short names. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:05, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose the current structure reflects the reality of the government structure in Alaska and should only be changed if that government structure changes. WP should not be in the business of making things look nice when it does not agree with the subjective opinion of an editor--WP is about describing reality. Hmains (talk) 16:33, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merging the latter batch, as List of boroughs and census areas in Alaska notes, Alaska is divided into 19 organized boroughs and one Unorganized Borough. If the census areas were well populated one could argue to keep the census area categories, but that is not the case at all. But oppose renaming the former batch per Hmains, census areas are a different level in real life and the category tree adequately reflects that. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:26, 17 March 2022 (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/2022_March_10&oldid=1084544402"