Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 December 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sakiv (talk | contribs) at 14:09, 2 January 2020 (→Category:Kurdish terrorism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
< December 26 December 28 >

December 27

Category:Lists of fictional cities

Nominator's rationale: Per all categories of Category:Populated places, including Category:Fictional populated places. Note that the "Thomas & Friends" and "The Railway Series" are a complete overlap and could be merged if a single title could be found (and both should be purged of their two real locations). I have not touched the "lost cities and towns" categories because the root category is Category:Lost cities and towns.-- Mike Selinker (talk) 22:33, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Middle-earth astronomy

Nominator's rationale: No longer necessary, as 7 of the 8 articles included in this category are now redirects. Hog Farm (talk) 22:25, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Danish philosophy

Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only contains the main article and a subcategory. The main article can be referred to in the header of the subcategory page. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:18, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That article is already in the Kierkegaard subcategory. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:02, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for the subcategory and the two pages the category already holds and because Denmark of course has a philosophical tradition and history, even if Wikipedia so far failed to further elaborate it. Eissink (talk) 01:19, 1 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]
  • It would be great if you could expand the main article regarding this tradition. How is Danish philosophy different from English or German philosophy? Currently the article does not address that question at all. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:18, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Trees in religion

Nominator's rationale: Most of these are recently created and not needed for navigation. Trees in religion is an unnecessary layer as it contains only Sacred trees. However, it has a better name than the latter, as not all trees in religions are sacred, e.g. Zaqqum the "cursed tree" in Islam. Most of the "Plants in X" contain only "Trees in X" and therefore add nothing useful for navigation. There is no need for a dual merge to their other parent Plants in religion because that will still contain all the Trees categories via Trees in religion.

Category:Kurdish terrorism

Nominator's rationale: Category was created by an editor who was blocked for vandalism. Also, a bit rich to equate the actions of Kurdish groups with the ethnicity (which is also OR). Moreover, since we don't have Category:Turkish terrorism or Category:Arab terrorism for the actions of Kemalists and Ba'athists, we shouldn't have this category either. Semsurî (talk) 21:35, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Again, it goes against Wikipedia's rules of original research since 'Kurdish terrorism' is not mentioned in the references of the articles where this category is used. Two of the editors who voted keep, also have troubling edit pasts in Kurdish-related articles and tend to oppose me on everything - perhaps an admin should look into that, since it affects the vote. --Semsurî (talk) 12:09, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I just see one ip blocked usser. But why we should delete whole catagroy you should delte some pages like this one wich is February 2016 Diyarbakır bombing against military personnel and not civilians. But this one is a clear terrorist attack according sources Blue Market massacre Shadow4dark (talk) 22:11, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are not citing any sources here, but even if you would have done so it would not impress. In a conflict between two parties not many sources are neutral. The best we can do is categorize articles by conflict rather than by anyone's terrorism. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:33, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Early Germanic philosophy

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: speedy delete per G7. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 23:24, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is a variation on an outdated Hegelian category. Eissink (talk) 20:17, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Every culture has, almost by definition even, a distinct way of thought, but that doesn't mean that every culture has developed it's own philosophy, be it by a native philosopher or by a conscious recognition of culture typical mental conduct in any other outspoken form. In fact, the expression "Early Germanic philosophy" has no references via Google, except for some Wikipedia pages, so the subject is not even slightly established. Wikipedia is not meant to introduce own research or neologisms. 'Patterns of thought' do not equal Philosophy. Eissink (talk) 17:46, 28 December 2019 (UTC).[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Hávamál is a poem and as such already in Category:Eddic poetry. While poems may reflect some "way of thought", it goes too far to regard them as works of philosophy. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:52, 28 December 2019 (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:Germanic philosophy

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: speedy delete per G7 Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 23:48, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 'Germanic philosophy' is an outdated distinction by Hegel, meant to distinguish Ancient Philosophy from later Western Philosophy – it is obsolete. Eissink (talk) 20:15, 27 December 2019 (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:Middle-earth rivers

Nominator's rationale: Every entry is a redirect. (Is there an echo in here?) Clarityfiend (talk) 20:08, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Middle-earth inns

Nominator's rationale: Every entry is a redirect. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:07, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Middle-earth towers

Nominator's rationale: Every entry is a redirect. Part of the general purging of Tolkiencruft. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:07, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:U.S. Highways by State

Nominator's rationale: Same reasoning as the nomination for deletion of Category:Interstate Highways by State . The category U.S. Highways by state (lowercase "state" versus uppercase "State") already exists and serves as a container category for the various Category:U.S. Highways in <state> pages. There is no need for this new category which would eventually contain every one of the entries in the Category:U.S. Highways in <state> pages in one huge multi-paged category. Indyguy (talk) 19:30, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Interstate Highways by State

Nominator's rationale: The category Interstate Highways by state (lowercase "state" versus uppercase "State") already exists and serves as a container category for the various Category:Interstate Highways in <state> pages. There is no need for this new category which would eventually contain every one of the entries in the Category:Interstate Highways in <state> pages in one huge multi-paged category. Indyguy (talk) 18:40, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Stargate races

Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. The redirects being in article space isn't particularly helpful for navigation. They should be in a "redirects to list" category. TTN (talk) 17:48, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Bălți County (Romania)

Nominator's rationale: As far as I know, the practice is to categorize people by origin from a currently existing county/district, not by the entity that existed at the time of the subject’s birth. The user has created origin categories for the counties of Bessarabia that existed during the period of Greater Romania. As these have been defunct for 75 years, the action seems futile. Biruitorul Talk 15:29, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- This is an area where anachronism is difficult to avoid. We generally categorise by current boundaries. Bălți is now part of Moldova. A Bălți County (Moldova) existed for a few years, but the county now has 32 districts instead of 10 counties. The outcome of this ought to be that the people articles are distributed to the relevant district subcat of Category:Moldovan people, but that may be asling a lot of closing admin. Can the nom add the appropriate subcat to each bio article and then tell us that he had done that. Otherwise, we may lose valuable data on the people. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:02, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom, and - in response of Peterkingiron's comment - all five articles already are in Category:People from Bălți or in a district category. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:14, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- per nom. If consistently applied, this innovation would put the same article in tens of new redundant categories. Past administrative divisions are irrelevant as places of birth, whichever the country. Dahn (talk) 13:01, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose, because the nominator's rationale for deleting the category is based on an erroneous supposition, namely that it would somehow not be the practice to categorize subjects by the entity that existed at the time of the subject’s birth (in addition to the currently existing county/district, of course; these two do not cancel each other out). In actual fact, there exists a well-established and very large scheme for characterizing subjects according to former countries/provinces/etc. Moreover, this scheme is certainly not an innovation, but has already been in existence for many years. Example: Category:People from the Province of Brandenburg, which includes 679 subjects and is a subcategory of Category:People from Prussia, which is a subcategory of Category:People from former German states, which is a subcategory of Category:People by former country, which has existed since 2007 and has 209 direct subcategories and a huge number of indirect subcategories. Quod erat demonstrandum. Pamrel (talk) 01:46, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This tree primarily exists for the sake of categorizing rulers, government officials and military personnel of former countries. It would be very odd to e.g. classify a 9th-century Iranian writer as "of the Abbasid Caliphate" in case he has never worked at the court in Bagdad, while for generals it makes perfect sense to be "of the Abbasid Caliphate". Marcocapelle (talk) 07:35, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy technology

Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. The redirects go to the list, so they're unneeded even should it survive AfD. TTN (talk) 15:12, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Men in Black (franchise) weapons

Nominator's rationale: Only two files. TTN (talk) 15:01, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are only two images! Clarityfiend (talk) 20:12, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Stargate technology

Nominator's rationale: Only one article TTN (talk) 15:00, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Regal Entertainment Group

Nominator's rationale: Corporate renaming. See article Regal Cinemas for history and references. Senator2029 “Talk” 07:47, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So, as best I can tell, that part of the article hasn’t been updated yet. But in looking at their website, they refer to themselves and their corporate structure with both “new” and “old” names. If the company can’t clearly state their identity, then that’s their fault. Therefore—unless another editor has more information—I withdraw my request. Senator2029 “Talk” 09:13, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Catholic nuns

Nominator's rationale In Catholicism, there is a distinction between a Religious sister (Catholic) and a nun, hence the wider category name. This is present in the category tree structures of both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Catholic traditions. Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:16, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 07:36, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 05:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:School shields

Nominator's rationale: Category is a misnomer and its description says "This category is for logos relating to academic institutions" which is redundant to its parent category, Category:Academic institution logos. I have emptied the category and there was 40 files and a subcategory — for some it was just simply removing the category whereas for others it was changing {{Non-free logo}} to the dedicated {{Non-free school logo}} which automatically populates the Academic institution logos category. I've also uploaded new logo replacements for most of them, and two have been tagged for deletion straight away as the articles have been redirected to their locality. Also following this discussion. Steven (Editor) (talk) 00:07, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 05:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Songs written by Carey Elmore Morgan, Jr.

Nominator's rationale: The composer and lyricist Carey Morgan is mostly widely known as such (see e.g. VIAF and WorldCat), not by his full name. The category should thus be renamed, per WP:COMMONNAME and to harmonize category with the parent article. I'm not terribly familiar with category naming conventions for songwriters: Morgan appears to be known as a songwriter, composer and lyricst, so I'm not opposed to this category being named "Category:Songs by Carey Morgan" or "Category:Carey Morgan songs" if either more conventional, but I feel it's better to start with a single, all-inclusive category until the sheer number of elements warrants talk of any additional categories. --Animalparty! (talk) 04:03, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 05:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Yellowface in Film

Nominator's rationale: Obviously the rename could be handled by a speedy, I just thought that it was worth bringing this newly-created category to wider attention, not least because I have a feeling that it or something similar has already been created in the past. It's not a subject I know much about other than recognising the sensitivity involved, I will note that we already have Category:Blackface minstrel shows and films with 60+ members but Yellowface is a redirect to Portrayal of East Asians in American film and theater.

How do other people feel about it, is it WP:DEFINING and is this the right name? Le Deluge (talk) 16:09, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 05:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Historical simulation games

Nominator's rationale: Not my area so I'm open to persuasion, but this looks like a near-enough duplicate of Category:Video games with historical settings? Le Deluge (talk) 19:13, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Historical simulation games is properly a subcat. A game can have an historical setting without being a simulation (viz. Assassin's Creed)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 05:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Classification

Nominator's rationale: Apart from the eponymous article all the articles are about classification systems Rathfelder (talk) 20:52, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 05:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_December_27&oldid=933689744"