Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 November 24

< November 23	November 25 >

November 24

Category:Drugs for impotency

Propose merging Category:Drugs for impotency to Category:Erectile dysfunction drugs

Nominator's rationale: The former category is a duplicate of the latter, with impotency redirecting to erectile dysfunction. Brandmeister^talk 23:19, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Ambiguous meaning here. Depending on context, impotency can refer to either chronic erectile dysfunction, or to male infertility. Which condition are these drugs treating? Dimadick (talk) 12:46, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Everything currently in the category is about erectile dysfunction. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:30, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
support--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:39, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
support Bondegezou (talk) 12:14, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Castlebar Song Contest

Propose deleting Category:Castlebar Song Contest - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: WP:OCASSOC ("This Category is created for to link people places and songs associated with ...") and is clearly non-defining e.g. for Terry Wogan or RTE. Note: The eponymous article may need to be upmerged. DexDor^(talk) 20:16, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Skeptical Wikipedians

Propose deleting Category:Skeptical Wikipedians - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: First off, this category was deleted before and I do not believe the reasons for deletion have changed. Therefore, I think this could rightly be deleted as re-creation of previously deleted content, but I decided to err on the side of caution and nominate this regularly because this was re-created back in 2012 and has apparently been overlooked since then. I don't think the original reasons for deletion has changed since its first nomination - this category violates WP:USERCAT in that it can not reasonably be expected to foster collaboration. There is already Category:WikiProject Skepticism members for users who wish to actually collaborate. Grouping users in a category who self-describe as skeptics serves no encyclopedic purpose as it is unrealistic to suggest that such users could be expected to share the same interests on a subject to collaborate on solely by being skeptics. VegaDark (talk) 19:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to being in this category I'm also a member of a fairly lively Facebook group with 50+ members that has exactly this unrealistic. It's been going for over 5 years now. 1Veertje (talk) 19:59, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support, the nominated category does not add anything to collaboration on the topic as there already is a Category:WikiProject Skepticism members. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:28, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bunch AfC submissions by user

Propose deleting Category:Bunch AfC submissions by user - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: There is absolutely no point in this page as it always contained User:Sander.v.Ginkel/drafts waiting for approval which dates all the way back to late-2016 and there is no such thing as "Bunch AfC submissions" so this is a useless maintenance category. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:13, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete useless. Every page is ether gone or back in mainspace. Legacypac (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, useless cat. Flooded with them hundreds 07:05, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Regulations by political parties

Propose deleting Category:Regulations by political parties - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Only one article, which is quite satisfactorily in Category:Organization of the Communist Party of China. It doesnt seem likely that we we will get a lot more articles in the category. Rathfelder (talk) 14:56, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not needed Legacypac (talk) 16:32, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American wives

Propose deleting Category:American wives - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: delete, wife is not a defining characteristic, articles should not be directly in this category. The subCategory:First Ladies of the United States should be moved to Category:Wives which may be kept as a container category. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Category is too broad; ostensibly, it could hold all the American women articles on Wikipedia. Yoninah (talk) 22:00, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Update, meanwhile the parent Category:Wives has been deleted per WP:G5. I have moved its subcategories to Category:Spouses. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:32, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Once Category:First Ladies of the United States is moved there's nothing here. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:18, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, created by a confirmed sock Ash Carol (talk · contribs); requesting speedy. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:20, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Since the vast majority of women married at some point in their lives, but except for First Ladies people aren't notable for being wives otherwise, this would be a non-defining and unmaintainable category for upwards of 90 per cent of all articles we have about female people at all. Bearcat (talk) 17:38, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Update the nominated category has been deleted per WP:G5 as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:33, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Husbands

Propose merging Category:Husbands to Category:Spouses
Propose deleting Category:American husbands

Nominator's rationale: merge/delete, husband is not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:28, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Category:American husbands. Category is far too broad; it could include most of the American males on Wikipedia. Yoninah (talk) 22:01, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support all per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:42, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. So stupid; I expect all of the entries were added to prove a point.. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:18, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, created by a confirmed sock Ash Carol (talk · contribs); requesting speedy. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:20, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Since the vast majority of men married at some point in their lives, but people aren't notable for being husbands per se, this would be a non-defining and unmaintainable category for upwards of 90 per cent of all articles we have about male people at all. Bearcat (talk) 17:37, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Update both categories have been deleted per WP:G5. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Far-right politics in Brazil

Propose deleting Category:Far-right politics in Brazil - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: This category will most likely only ever contain one person. As per WP:SMALLCAT and WP:OVERCAT), there is no need to keep it. Besides, its a contentious category being described as controversial and disputed in the talk page of Jair Bolsonaro (WP:OPINIONCAT). WooliesOS (talk) 06:35, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per policy. –User 45 65 41 12:02, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, this category is part of a series Category:Far-right politics by country. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:34, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The Vargas Era and its totalitarian constitution (execution of political prisoners, censorship, purges, militarism, state propaganda, cult of personality) are not included in the far-right, but the conservative Social Liberal Party is? How does that work? Dimadick (talk) 13:55, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
keep per Marcocapelle and it is now more populated than it was Hmains (talk) 18:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment you guys should check the talk pages of the only two articles that are included in this category. Many editors are complaining about this category but a few ~~owners~~ others are refusing to remove them from the category due to possibly political bias. EmaUser111 (talk) 02:51, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Hmains: I do not know what you added, but it has been removed already. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:09, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per policy. newslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:50, 26 November 2018 (UTC) 08:01[reply]