Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 July 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< July 17 July 19 >

July 18[edit]

Category:13th legislature of the French Fifth Republic[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 for now without objection to a broader discussion (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 19:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Only one article in the category. None of the other pages about the number of the legislature of the French Parliament have a similar category nor are there other pages that fit this category. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:23, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I'm open to broader noms about groupings by legislative sessions. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:23, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- This is an anomalous category, which might be parenting a category for members of that assembly (2007-12). For some reason we do not appear to have for French legislators the equivalent of the UK MPs category, only list articles, though I note the members invariably have a bio-article. Cleanerman has spotted an anomaly, but is deletion (rather than the creation of missing categories) the right answer? Peterkingiron (talk) 21:03, 23 July 2021 (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:Upcoming debut albums[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) 16:10, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category:Upcoming albums is relatively small and primarily serves as a maintenace category since album articles will not stay in there for very long. There is no need for further diffusion for upcoming albums that are also an artists' debut album. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 22:40, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I created the category because I felt a distinction had to be made; the one album there now, An Evening with Silk Sonic, has no current scheduled release date, and placing it in Category:Debut albums didn't seem appropriate as the year needs to be specified. I do support merging if someone can provide an alternative solution, like "Unscheduled debut albums" or something similar, but at this stage I'm not convinced merging solves the problem. Sean Stephens (talk) 00:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Why does there need to be a year? It will be known soon enough. What's wrong with just having it in Category:Debut albums and Category:Upcoming albums? I don't see how this subcategory makes things better. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 02:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I created the category specifically for use in discouraging editors from adding unsourced release dates (in both categories and prose), which has happened repeatedly at the article I linked. If you want to help stop them doing so, please, be my guest. I was also under the impression that the category had the template {{Category diffuse}} present, but it appears it was removed more than a year ago. If I was aware of that at the time, I wouldn't have created the category, as I wouldn't have seen a need for it. If you feel merging is necessary, I won't stand in the way. Sean Stephens (talk) 08:33, 19 July 2021 (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:Opposition to Fidel Castro[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 July 26#Category:Opposition to Fidel Castro

Category:British premierships[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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 19:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Match format with Presidencies of the United States. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:51, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Neveselbert. Sorry, but I think they should all be in the same category. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- The office of PM goes back to the rise of Walpole in 1721. He was the prime minister of the king. He had oversight of the government of Ireland, even though the government there was run by the Lord Lieutenant and Chief Secretary. There was a separate Parliament in Ireland, but the government of Ireland was very much under the direction of that in London. The present name fits the situation very well indeed. Equally there was no break in the government in 1707 when Scottish MPs were elected to Westminster. The government in London continued much as it always had. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:12, 23 July 2021 (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:Western (genre) drama films by decade[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. bibliomaniac15 06:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per the discussion going on here right now. As User:No Great Shaker says, most Western films are dramas, making the category unnecessary. I also propose merging the subcategories, but I do not know how to use Twinkle to do that. Scorpions13256 (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Twinkle cannot be used for batch nominations. You need to add the subcategories manually (and tag the subcategory pages manually). Marcocapelle (talk) 21:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've added all the sub-cats. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 21:46, 18 July 2021 (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:Trade unionists from South Carolina[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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 19:48, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as part of an established series. WP:SMALLCAT states "Note also that this criterion does not preclude all small categories; a category which does have realistic potential for growth, such as a category for holders of a notable political office, may be kept even if only a small number of its articles actually exist at the present time." Given the relative dearth of coverage on Wikipedia of topics related to organized labor, it is highly likely that this has a "realistic potential for growth."--User:Namiba 13:54, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This category should include Category:Trade_unionists_by_state or something similar, but in any case, keep per Namiba. Shushugah (talk) 14:44, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This defeats the purposes of categorisation and conflates too much. There are fundamental differences between activists and trade unionists: eg, leaders of police officers' associations would rarely be thought of as activists, but are axiomatically trade unionists. Conversely, no libertarian will ever be a trade unionist. Finally, a person may be notable as a trade unionist, but never be considered an activist (eg a union leader who embraces business trade unionism). Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 22:29, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- Part of a series Category:American trade unionists by state. Many of these are well populated, but perhaps half a dozen only have one person. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:15, 23 July 2021 (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:United States Marine Corps ranks[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. bibliomaniac15 06:17, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unify name with similar named subcategories of Category:Military ranks of the United States where they all follow this naming scheme. Terasail[✉️] 16:21, 18 July 2021 (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:Yaksha Kingdom[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 August 12#Category:Yaksha Kingdom

Category:People's Commissariat of Railways of the Soviet Union[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:Rail transport in the Soviet Union. bibliomaniac15 06:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Correct translation. MarcusTraianus (talk) 11:54, 18 July 2021 (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:Decatur Baptist College alumni[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) Marcocapelle (talk) 19:50, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge, then delete – It's a long-standing practice in education categories to upmerge alumni into the modern name of the university. Just because Dallas Baptist University was founded as Decatur Baptist College doesn't mean there is any tangible difference of being alumni based on school name alone. Look at literally hundreds if not thousands of similar categories; they all use the modern school name as the alumni category. SportsGuy789 (talk) 18:25, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Cat is helpful for researchers who would like to know who attended "Decatur Baptist College". There are numerous examples where previous school names are used as a subcat, all of which makes the cat structure more helpful for researchers, to include this example where the school was moved to a new place. It is more useful to keep the cat by the name of the school that they are alumni of. Merging these would be like merging Category:Brooklyn Dodgers players and Category: Los Angeles Dodgers players - same team, but different places. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 19:56, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it wouldn't be like sports teams. Colleges don't relocate or claim separate histories for record-keeping purposes, they are stationary and all roll up into broader alumni categories for the same school's present-day name. Apples to oranges. Furthermore, Wikipedia should be created with general readers in mind, not toward researchers. If someone so badly wants to know who attended a school by a given name, they can still figure that out easily. There's no reason to start sub-diffusing based on an overall-irrelevant historical name. SportsGuy789 (talk) 21:56, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, this college did relocate from Decatur to Dallas. Not only that, it went from junior college to a four year college. Breaking it out in subcats makes it easier for both the general reader as well as the researcher. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 22:16, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with Redirect I was totally expecting to support a separate subcategory ... until I started clicking through the 3 articles. For these biographies that list the school as part of their youth, the expansion/relocation is not defining in this case but I remain open to historical college subcats, especially with mergers, in other instances. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:14, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this is not clear-cut, but I do not believe it is defining to include an alumni cat on a person's page with the name of a school that they did not attend, so a cat with the correct name provides a unique, defining characteristic. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 12:06, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For now, keeping a redirect will help editors using WP:HOTCAT with categorizing older biography articles that use the old school name. I remain open to considering a split if/when more content is created. - RevelationDirect (talk)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 16:45, 4 July 2021 (UTC) [reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 09:12, 18 July 2021 (UTC) [reply]
  • Keep - I can't see any advantage in hiding the 3 alumni from an earlier era among the 16 alumni from the new institution. The connection between the 2 institutions is neatly reflected in the earlier one being a subcat of the later one. The other problem in my view is that the articles mention the name of the institution at the time and it looks odd to have a different category at the bottom unsupported by the text (unless one adds "(now known as Dallas Baptist University)"). Oculi (talk) 18:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge -- We have a longstanding convention for alumni categories that alumni of merged or renamed colleges are deemed to alumni of the present college. This can have surprising results. I found a case of an Oxford graduate who as an alumnus of a certain college 150 years before it was supposedly founded, but he was correctly categorised as he had attended the preceding hall of the university, subsequently refounded as a separate college. Leave redirect. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To my mind, it would be a lot easier to have a separate category for that "certain college" to see who attended there then have to fish around a much larger category of a school with a different name. Semper fi! FieldMarine (talk) 17:56, 24 July 2021 (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:Notable taxidermy[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:Individual taxidermy exhibits. There's a definite agreement that this needs a rename, and this seems to be the target with the most approval. bibliomaniac15 06:27, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We usually do not include "notable" in the name of categories, because something's existence in WP implies (presumed) notability. But here, if we removed the "notable", it would just be Category:Taxidermy, but that category exists as the general topic category, whereas the nominated category is the set category for individual examples of taxidermy, so it doesn't make much sense to merge the two categories together. I am unsure what to suggest here. Perhaps Category:Individual taxidermy or Category:Taxidermy mounts or leave it alone? Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:33, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Individual taxidermy exhibits or Category:Individual taxidermy mounts ? (Based on Category:Individual animal corpses). No strong preference except I concur the current name is the worst possible. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:16, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
There is consensus to rename, but the target is not entirely clear yet. Most likely candidates are Category:Individual taxidermy and Category:Individual taxidermy exhibits. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:59, 7 July 2021 (UTC) [reply]
  • Support renaming to “individual taxidermy”. (At first sight I thought: Category:SOMETHING - what a bad joke! Why here in a work sphere? At second sight it was just okay. Well, there is so rarely irony/humor around here that you don't expect it.) Either of Piotrus' suggestions could be a good solution. 'Exhibits' is even better understandable than mounts. --Just N. (talk) 20:07, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: if this is kept, regardless of name it should be purged of everything except those that became notable primarily because of their taxidermy. Lolong, Lonesome George, Martha and others were notable animals with different defining traits entirely unrelated to their posthumous preservation. Likewise, we don't categorize dead humans who were notable as scientists, authors, dancers, etc. as Category:Cremations or Category:People buried in tombs (not even Grant!). --Animalparty! (talk) 02:55, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 09:07, 18 July 2021 (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:Gongsun Yuan and associates[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. bibliomaniac15 06:20, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only one article in the category. A merge is not needed, the article is already in subcategories of Cao Wei people. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:28, 18 July 2021 (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:Islamic superheroes[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 August 19#Category:Islamic superheroes

Category:Yellow Turbans[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 since the category has been emptied. bibliomaniac15 06:19, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, only the leader of this rebellion is notable. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:19, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for Now with no objection to recreating if we ever get to 5+ articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:06, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Category has been emptied. Liz Read! Talk! 15:28, 6 August 2021 (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/2021_July_18&oldid=1073192942"