Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 22

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< September 21
September 23 >

September 22[edit]

Category:German-American Soccer League players[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:57, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The German-American Soccer is the same as the Cosmopolitan Soccer League is was just renamed. I think it makes sense to redirect the category to the present name. Shotgun pete (talk) 16:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 07:53, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - we do not create new categories every time a sports league changes its name. GiantSnowman 07:54, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support one category no matter how many names the league has had. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:55, 23 September 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:Azerbaijani administrative divisions of Artsakh[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:56, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: What do these districts have to do with Artsakh? These districts are Azerbaijani administrative divisions, whereas the Republic of Artsakh had different administrative divisions in the same territory, which were known as the provinces of the Republic of Artsakh. Kpratter (talk) 14:31, 22 September 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:Future IPA 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: merge. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:55, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Since the separate language-specific IPA templates were deprecated, this category is probably useless. Janhrach (talk) 14:06, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge with IPA language templates. These templates should eventually be TfD'd, but in the meantime this category is indeed redundant and inaccurate, as whether to link the input transcription to the generic guide or to a language-specific key is no longer determined by each template. Nardog (talk) 16:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree Janhrach (talk) 17:03, 22 September 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:July 1860 events in North America[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:57, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: One article. Merge per WP:SMALLCAT. –Aidan721 (talk) 13:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for now, with no objection to recreate when at least five articles fit. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:01, 23 September 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:Quotients[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 12#Category:Quotients

Category:Television series written by Umera Ahmad[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1#Category:Television series written by Umera Ahmad

Category:Indian dramatists and playwrights by language[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1#Category:Indian dramatists and playwrights by language

Category:Indian journalists by language[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 12#Category:Indian journalists by language

Category:District attorneys in Cumberland County, Maine[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 12#Category:District attorneys in Cumberland County, Maine

Category:German queens consort[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 17:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename in order to reduce ambiguity. The category is for spouses of Kings of the Romans, not for e.g. queens of Bavaria or Hanover etc. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion
@Nederlandse Leeuw: pinging initiator of speedy discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:45, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom and my own response to nom's comment in the speedy discussion. We should also rename the main article to Queen of the Romans; I'll initiate a technical move request for that. NLeeuw (talk) 07:09, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    PS: WP:RM/TR filed. NLeeuw (talk) 07:12, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Not every woman in this category was queen of the Romans. Many early German queens were not known as queen of the Romans, such as Cunigunde of Swabia and Eadgyth. Others were queens of the East Franks, such as Hemma.--estar8806 (talk) ★ 13:40, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • They should be purged, as they don't comply with the criterion stated in the header. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:08, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Even those who were Holy Roman Empress are not all listed as Queen of the Romans, Isabella II of Jerusalem are listed as Holy Roman Empress and Queen of Germany. estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:19, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That doesn't matter. Albert I of Germany is called King of Germany in his infobox but categorised as Category:14th-century Kings of the Romans. This is acceptable variation, because these things mean the same. Compare how Henry V, Holy Roman Emperor is called King of Germany (Formally King of the Romans). Similarly, some bios say "Holy Roman Empress" while others say "Empress of the Holy Roman Empire". Both are fine, they mean the same. NLeeuw (talk) 00:05, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    PS: I support purging those who don't qualify, but first let's check whether we are simply dealing with different ways of saying the same thing before we start purging. NLeeuw (talk) 00:12, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the scope of the proposed name is vastly different. Marcelus (talk) 08:15, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, or purge and rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:02, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Marcelus: the scope is not vastly different, the explanation text on the category page says: "women who were queens consort of Germany by marriage to the Holy Roman Emperor (also King of Germany)." Marcocapelle (talk) 05:57, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 13:37, 22 September 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:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Guinea-Bissau[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1#Category:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Guinea-Bissau

Category:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Cape Verde[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 12#Category:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Cape Verde

Category:Kochi[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 12#Category:Kochi

Category:American literature in immigrant languages[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 17:28, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not defining, among other things. Mason (talk) 04:43, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Adding to my rational as I believe that the literature categories are very much not defining (and concede that I was overzealous in also nominating their parent category). This category (and the poetry) category sit at a really odd intersection that I don't think is useful for navigation, when compared to "American literature by ethnic background‎ ". Like why does American literature in the Irish language‎ belong in "immigrant" languages as opposed to the parent. I could see a case for American literature by language, but the current category effectively isolates all the American literature not written in English (or native american languages...). Why immigrant languages specifically? Mason (talk) 23:44, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This category has very different type of content than the category above, so "per above discussion" isn't very helpful. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:46, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 13:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge as non-defining. You are always someone else's immigrant. Place Clichy (talk) 21:24, 7 October 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:19th-century German entomologists[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:58, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Narrow overcategorization. We don't have any Category:Entomologists by century tree for these to be a part of, and the creator filed just one person in each of these without making any effort to follow through on recatting any of the other Category:German entomologists. If there's any desire to start subcategorizing entomologists by century the way some (but not all) occupations are, that would have to be undertaken as a comprehensive project across the corpus of all entomologists, with basic Category:18th-century entomologists, Category:18th-century entomologists and Category:20th-century entomologists parents in place first and subcategories by country following second -- but if there's no community will to get that done, then these aren't needed as isolated special cases. Bearcat (talk) 13:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per exactly your reasons. Mason (talk) 20:01, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for now without prejudice to recreation when at least five articles fit the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 23 September 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 Armant[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:People from Luxor Governorate. No prejudice against recreation when the category can be populated sufficiently. (non-admin closure) HouseBlastertalk 21:45, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Small category for just one person. As always, every town or city on earth does not automatically get its own "people from X" category as soon as there's one person with an article to file in it -- there have to be five people from Armant before a category is warranted, and below five they should just be categorized at a higher divisional level like the governorate.
A quick scan of Armant's "what links here" failed to find four other people, however -- admittedly I didn't comprehensively check every article, but after finding one person who linked to Armant in a different context other than being "from" it and four articles that looked like they might be personal names but instead turned out to be other towns or villages when I looked at them, I gave up.
So I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with a lot more knowledge of Egypt than I've got can find four more people to properly populate this with, but it's not needed for just one person. Bearcat (talk) 12:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for now without prejudice to recreation when at least five articles fit the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 23 September 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:17th-century Shawnee people[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:17th-century Native Americans. (non-admin closure) HouseBlastertalk 21:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge as this is a very small category, i'd be thrilled if we got to critical mass of folks to populate the category Mason (talk) 05:00, 22 September 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:Innovators[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:59, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: vague and undefined Mason (talk) 01:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There was a discussion of this family of category. The sense was that this category could work as a container category. However, it doesn't seem to be used in that manner. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 June 6#Category:Innovators. I'll tag the main category, and then see how folks are feeling, before tagging more of them Mason (talk) 01:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Category:Women innovators is also relevant to this discussion. Janhrach (talk) 07:25, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The top Category:Innovators still seems to work well as a container category. However the nationality subcategories are mostly sparsely populated, occasionally contain articles and can be deleted easily. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all - Looking at the contents of Category:Innovators, this looks rather subjective in inclusion criteria. Just to start with, any craftsman, inventor, designer, or artist, could be considered an innovator. What arbitrary benchmark do we use to decide if a particular artist is an innovator? It looks like this cat is trying to gather together people who find things with people who make things. That is a rather broad inclusion criteria. And if we include everything listed in Innovation (where Innovator redirects to), it gets much much broader than that. - jc37 23:45, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning delete all as vague. Compared to Category:Inventors which feels better defined. -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:38, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: This was discussed under Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 June 6#Category:Innovators. The decision was to keep it as a container category and it and various subcategories are still being used as such. What has changed since this decision? I think it still applies. —Jonathan Bowen (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    10 years ago? It was only kept as a container to hold the subcats - which are now also being nominated for deletion. The previous discussion noted that this was "vague and poorly defined", and was not WP:DEFINING. - jc37 18:31, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Keeping for being suitable as a container category was, and still is, a very weak argument. I think that this category arbitrarily groups together categories of people that have something to do with "newness". This is however too vague. Delete. Janhrach (talk) 07:01, 30 September 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_September_22&oldid=1179821524"