Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 December 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 4 December 6 >

December 5[edit]

Category:10 Books that Screwed up the World[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 19:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is simply a list of books mentioned in a non-notable book by a minor academic, published by a right-wing publisher. Appearance in the book is not a defining characteristic of the titles mentioned, and placing this category in the respective articles appears to be a POV attempt to tag and shame them. RolandR (talk) 23:00, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, we never have categories simply reiterating random published lists like this. Crossroads -talk- 00:28, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral, assume good faith in speculating about the motives of other editors. In this case baseless. Amicably, Pete unseth (talk) 02:47, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not a defining characteristic of the books. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:46, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Clearly not a defining character, and as Crossroads says, not the type of thing we use categories for. Doug Weller talk 10:18, 6 December 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:Al-Andalus exiles[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 December 13#Category:Al-Andalus exiles

Single-article books 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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 19:59, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, just one article in these categories. This is not a case of the smallcat exception rule because the large amount of books has not been categorized by writer. Just Category:American non-fiction books contains more than 1000 articles directly in it rather than in an writer category. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is not a rule which requires the creation of writer categories indeed, the consequence is that most books are not in a book by writer category, so this is not a large established scheme. If anyone would claim this is a large established scheme then by implication they would prefer this category tree to be fully diffused. But with all due respect, having thousands of additional one-article categories does not aid navigation at all. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:37, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • It does aid navigation within Category:Philosophy books by writer say, navigation that would be greatly hindered by the nom. A J Ayer wrote a lot of books; it is surprising there is only one article. I would certainly prefer the category to be fully diffused as at present it is a meaningless jumble of titles of books. Removing signposts does not improve navigation. Category:Songs is an exemplar. Oculi (talk) 19:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • In order to prevent meaningless jumbles, the books should be and largely already are in categories by topic (non-fiction) or genre (fiction). The meaningless jumbles are in the tree by nationality which is a parallel tree, of which the subcategories by writer are also part. I would suggest containerizing the categories by nationality (not now, but for the sake of argument). There are two big differences with songs: 1) many more writers only wrote one notable book than artists singing one notable song and 2) books can be categorized by topic or genre while songs by topic is in many cases pretty meaningless. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:50, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Category:Novels is diffused by author: Category:American novels states "Articles in this category should be diffused to as many of the following hierarchies as possible ..." by writer being one. I return to the definingness of the author. I am not aware of any other area of cfd discussion where an editor is agreeing that YYY is a defining characteristic of an article XXX but is advocating that no category on XXX should mention YYY. WP:DEFINING: "The defining characteristics of an article's topic are central to categorizing the article". Oculi (talk) 12:35, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, I am not arguing that no category on XXX should mention YYY, this is just for single-article categories. Very comparable to Category:Musicians by band where we also do not have single-article categories if only one of the members has their own article. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • You are exactly arguing that no category on Language, Truth, and Logic should mention the author, Ayer, as you are trying to remove the only one that does. Oculi (talk) 10:36, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:23, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:02, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    • A smallcat discussion is always about a characteristic that is defining, that is not any different in this particular case. WP:SMALLCAT is simply a different rationale than WP:NONDEF. Definingness is a necessary condition, not a sufficient condition. If it were sufficient, all other criteria in WP:OCAT could be striken. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:41, 7 December 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.

River Seine[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 20:01, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Option A
Option B
Nominator's rationale: rename since River + name of river is a very unusual way of disambiguation. Option B was proposed for speedy renaming by User:Russian Rocky but there are two Canadian rivers of the same name, so that was opposed by User:Oculi and User:Laurel Lodged. But the fact that there are two Canadian rivers of the same time confirms that the current disambiguation is very unsatisfactory. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option A - or keep. Oppose option B as Category:Seine is certainly ambiguous as there is Seine (department) as well as 2 other rivers. Oculi (talk) 14:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option A - or keep. Oppose option B as Category:Seine is certainly ambiguous as there is Seine (department) as well as 2 other rivers. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:46, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- There is no reason to change here, because the French river is the original, which the two Canadian rivers are presumably named after. The two Canadian rivers do not have (and do not need) categories. It is possible the categories need an otheruses link. If we need a change at all it should be Category:River Seine (France), etc. Oppose option B, which compounds the ambiguity. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:37, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:21, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:01, 5 December 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:Rabbis that emigrated to the Land of Israel[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 20:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Grammar. One immigrates to a place and emigrates from a place. gobonobo + c 15:21, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse and mark as Speedy Rename, [1]
Sir Joseph (talk) 15:30, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a trivial intersection. We not categorize immigrants by occupation. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete triple intersections are usually a bad idea. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:23, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 05:01, 11 December 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:Rabbis that emigrated to Israel[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 20:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Grammar. One immigrates to a place and emigrates from a place. gobonobo + c 15:20, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse and mark as Speedy Rename, [2]
Sir Joseph (talk) 15:30, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a trivial intersection. We not categorize immigrants by occupation. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Delete Delete triple intersections are usually a bad idea. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:23, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 05:02, 11 December 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:Buildings in Savannah, Georgia[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) Qwerfjkltalk 20:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Small categories which are unlikely to grow. User:Namiba 15:03, 5 December 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:Wikipedians interested in netflix[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 20:03, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:USERCAT for lacking any discernible collaborative function. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:14, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete, if it is meant to collaborate on the topic of Netflix then it is a very narrow topic to collaborate on for an interest category. (But I am not sure if that is the intention of the category.) Marcocapelle (talk) 04:55, 6 December 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:Motion capture in video games[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 December 13#Category:Motion capture in video games

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_December_5&oldid=1127267059"