Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 7 January 9 >

January 8[edit]

Deaf people categories[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) 10:47, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
List of around 70 categories for Deaf and Deafblind
  • Rationale: opposed speedy on the grounds that 'Deaf' (uppercase) might be preferable (see eg Deaf culture). I have no views on deaf/Deaf but am opposed to the present name. Oculi (talk) 19:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of speedy discussion
  • Oppose So I personally don't have a problem with these renamings or the use of identity first language, but I suspect that others from the disability community might have some concerns with some of these renamings. Mason (talk) 22:36, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion[edit]
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:Protests against the islamic religious police[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 22:16, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Possibly WP:SMALLCAT, just one article currently. Brandmeistertalk 12:08, 8 January 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:Rage against the veil protests deaths of women[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:Iranian protests against compulsory hijab. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 22:19, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Weird name apparently reflecting deaths related to wearing compusory hijab. Other suggested name is possible. Brandmeistertalk 12:04, 8 January 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:Rage against the veil protests[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:Iranian protests against compulsory hijab. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 22:18, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Weird name apparently reflecting protests against compulsory hijab or possibly other Islamic dress. The subcategory is also up to renaming. Brandmeistertalk 11:56, 8 January 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:American gay actors[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: procedural keep (abandoned by nominator). Nominator never tagged category. Nominator has withdrawn (below). (non-admin closure) William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These categories such as Category:American gay actors, Category:American lesbian actresses, Category:American bisexual actors are completely unnecessary and redundant. LGBT people by occupation from any country in the world should not be segregated by individual sexuality. For example, many pages in the Category:American bisexual actors still also have the Category:American LGBT actors included in the category section and there cannot be both. The obvious solution is to remove one of them. Another example is, some categories like Category:French gay actors and Category:French lesbian actresses only had at least one or two pages in them and also included Category:French LGBT actors in the page. Again, we can’t have both. I created Category:Gay film actors, Category:Gay television actors, Category:Gay stage actors, etc as a subcategory to the Category:Gay actors page. I apologise if my edits came across as disruptive but Category:Gay actors by nationality and Category:Lesbian actresses by nationality should not be there for all the reasons I’ve listed above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giovanni 0331 (talk • contribs)
  • This requires a batch nomination. Just merging Category:American gay actors and leaving the rest untouched is not helpful. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:11, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also the category page has not been tagged for CfD. See WP:CFD for instructions. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:34, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. With 1,184 articles across the target and its subcategories, a single merged category here would be too large, so Category:American LGBT actors requires subcategorization for size purposes — and, in fact, CFD already weighed in on this very category just over a year ago (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 November 21#Category:American gay actors) and landed at a keep. Nominator has also not made any serious case for why gay actors, lesbian actresses, etc., should not be subcategorized by nationality, yet somehow should be subcategorized by a television vs. film vs. stage distinction that has no relationship to sexual orientation or gender identity at all — the reasoning above boils down to "because I said so", not any actual reasons why a film/TV/stage distinction would be more meaningful and relevant than distinguishing by nationality in this context. And finally, duplicate "parent + subcategory" issues are resolved by removing the parent from the affected articles, not by completely erasing the entire existence of the subcategory — I just did an AWB run to fix the dupes, and found that to be a minor issue affecting just 32 articles total. But that's a small and insignificant percentage of 1,184, making that not a major problem — and spoiler alert, on at least two of those articles the nominator was the person who put the unnecessary duplicate category on the page, even though it was already appropriately subcategorized, in the first place. Bearcat (talk) 13:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Category:Gay actors can be subcatted by nationality and by some other property. It should be a double upmerge to a gay category as well: it is surprising that there is no 'by nationality' subcat scheme for Category:Gay men. Oculi (talk) 21:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I agree that this should be a bundled nomination for all nationalities, not just American, but given that I belive this is the nominator's first proposal at CFD (and given how confusing the procedure of nominating multiple categories can seem), it is understandable why he would start with just one category. I think the big mistake is seeing Category:American gay actors as redundant to Category:American LGBT actors The LGBT categories are "parent" categories to the gay, lesbian, bisexual "child" categories and are on a different level of categorization so they are both necessary. Not only can we have both, we should have both. Lumping all sexualities into one big LGBT category for some occupational fields would lead to a very large category that would be too big to be very useful. The nominator doesn't explain their reasoning for wanting to do away with gay, lesbian, bisexual categories but it seems like an attempt to avoid labeling individuals according to their sexuality and an effort to just use the umbrella term of LGBT which is not specific. That seems a bit pointy to me and requires a fuller discussion here at CFD as this change would affect many other categories for other occupational fields, not just those for actors. Liz Read! Talk! 19:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • User:Giovanni 0331's 2nd ever contribution to cfd was in fact the very competent bulk nom 2023 January 1#Category:LGBT people by nationality and occupation. Oculi (talk) 22:43, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      After reading this more clearly, I had decided to rescind my nomination to merge the categories. I’ve always been a firm believer in the saying "If you can’t beat em, join em." Also, the reasoning for opposing the nomination appeared to make more sense after reading it thoroughly. This is why I’ve created several more categories for musicians and writers. Giovanni 0331 (talk) 13:00, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — nationality is a defining characteristic, "some other property" is WP:NONDEFINING.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:45, 14 January 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:Hardcore music genres[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 22:21, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The current name is ambiguous and could be perceived as a category combining hardcore techno and hardcore punk + other possible variants Solidest (talk) 22:51, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 10:46, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • If there is no support for Category:Hardcore (electronic dance music genre) styles then WA Simpson's alternative of upmerging would be a second best option. In any case leaving as is is the least attractive option, something needs to be done here. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I oppose "styles", as the term "style" is clearly defined only within classical music, while in terms of popular (= electronic) music it is used as an interchangeable term with genre everywhere, as well as on Wikipedia. But we use "genres" in categorization due to consistency. I also oppose merging it into Category:Hardcore techno (Category:Hardcore (electronic dance music genre)) as I see no point in removing a detailed category in which many articles are already in a better place than is proposed to be done. But I would support any of "Hardcore [ techno / (electronic dance music) / (EDM) ] genres" options. Solidest (talk) 15:46, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment — having been overtaken by events, I've modified from Rename to Merge above.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:48, 14 January 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:1866 in sports in Wisconsin[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 22:22, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article in 1866 in American sports doesn't need to be under two layers of subcategories. Merge to 1866 in Wisconsin and 1866 in American sports. –Aidan721 (talk) 17:58, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose: While only a couple of categories in the 1860s (but not Category:1869 in sports in New Jersey are proposed; by the 1890s there are dozens of articles to be recategorised, I do not see the need for having a different structure for the 19th century, and losing the connection between Category:1866 in sports in Wisconsin and Category:1866 in Wisconsin. Keep as part of a series. Hugo999 (talk) 01:36, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — unnecessary triple intersection with no room for growth. Heck, could be the beginning of removal of the whole useless series divided by state, when there simply aren't that many states. There are even sparsely populated subcategories years in the future.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 08:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:32, 8 January 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:Sports venues in Bridgeport, Connecticut[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 16#Category:Sports venues in Bridgeport, Connecticut

Category:People from Bruceville-Eddy, Texas[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) 10:45, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: One page. Merge to county-level. Source indicates he was from McLennan County part of town here. –Aidan721 (talk) 06:55, 8 January 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:People from Ingleside, Texas[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 (talk) 10:44, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Lone article states that he coached in Ingleside, but has no claim that he is "from Ingleside, Texas" (in fact he was born elsewhere), therefore this category should be deleted. –Aidan721 (talk) 06:50, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, there is no confirmation that he really lived in Ingleside, and he worked there for a very short period anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:28, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete after listing (done) — WP:SMALLCAT. A cited reference says there's a street named after him in Ingleside, Texas, so I've added him as a Notable resident. He wasn't born here, and we don't categorize people by insignificant birthplace.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 10:03, 14 January 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:Cultural depictions of criminals[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) 10:43, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Time to continue cleanup we did at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_August_11#Category:Cultural_depictions_of_people. Cultural depictions=depictions=works based on/about. If we go down the subcategory, we end up at Category:Cultural depictions of Adolf Hitler which has Category:Novels about Adolf Hitler‎, a part of Category:Works about Adolf Hitler. So this needs renaming/merging and we should also rename/merge all child categories, as this "cultural depictions of" tree just duplicates "works about" one. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:45, 8 January 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:Templates that must be substituted[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 (talk) 10:43, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of Category:Wikipedia substituted templates. I'd weakly support a redirect, but it doesn't seem particularly plausible. Clyde!Franklin! 00:26, 8 January 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_January_8&oldid=1134076045"