Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 November 23

November 23

Category:Church

• Propose turning Category:Church into a disambiguation category.

Nominators rationale: WP:SHAREDNAME, very different entries are brought together in a category based on the word "church". This is a follow-up on an earlier proposal to delete, see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_October_4#Category:Church. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:39, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Comment help needed: please advice on how to tag the category Marcocapelle (talk) 20:39, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

International association football competitions by host

• Propose renaming...

Nominator's rationale: Within Category:Association football, there is an established convention to use "association football" for international or general-topic categories and the national variant (either "football" or "soccer", typically) for national-level categories. How should this convention apply to Category:International association football competitions by host, which categorizes international competitions by host country? Should the subcategories use the national variant of the host country, or should they use "association football" because they contain articles about international competitions?

There is a drawback either way... With Option A, a category such as Category:International association football competitions hosted by Costa Rica would be housed within Category:Football competitions in Costa Rica, leading to a naming discrepancy within that category tree. With Option B, international competitions involving multiple nations would be categorized under the variant of one particular nation—for example, a competition hosted by England and involving the United States would be categorized as a "football competition", and a competition hosted by the United States and involving England would be categorized as a "soccer competition". (WikiProject Football has been notified.) -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 20:13, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

• Note: I will nominate categories which already use either Option A (example) or Option B (example) in a follow-up nomination, based on the outcome of this discussion. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 20:13, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:Prince-Bishops of France

• Propose deleting Category:Prince-Bishops of France - Template:Lc1
  

Nominator's rationale: the Prince-Bishoprics of Strasbourg and Metz were part of the Holy Roman Empire at that time, not part of France. The respective bishops of Strasbourg and Metz are already parented to Category:Roman Catholic Prince-Bishops of the Holy Roman Empire. (See also three discussions starting from Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_November_16#Category:Prince-Bishops_of_Latvia.) Marcocapelle (talk) 19:29, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:Bishops of Dié

• Propose renaming Category:Bishops of Dié to Category:Bishops of Saint-Dié

Nominator's rationale: Per Roman Catholic Diocese of Saint-Dié. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:53, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:American female pop singer-songwriters

• Propose deleting Category:American female pop singer-songwriters - Template:Lc1
  

Nominator's rationale: Like the rock one, a decision was already reached on Category:American pop singer-songwriters to triple-upmerge it. This child category was missed in that nomination, and would be made an orphan by that action. Count me as Neutral but the current situation makes no sense, Courcelles 17:11, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:American female rock singer-songwriters

• Propose deleting Category:American female rock singer-songwriters - Template:Lc1
  

Nominator's rationale: This child cat seems to have been missed in the decision to delete its parent, and therefore should be discussed. Count me as Neutral but the current situation makes no sense. Courcelles 17:09, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:Contemporary music

• Propose renaming Category:Contemporary music to Category:Contemporary classical music

Nominator's rationale: Per main article: contemporary music/contemporary classical music. Alternate proposal: Delete as an arbitrary mish-mash of 20th/21st-century musical styles, including contemporary R&B, Pop, psychedelic, etc. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:44, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. Renaming seems not appropriate as the target already exists and is a child category of the nominated category. Deleting seems not appropriate since there are a number of 'contemporary' child categories so (if desired) it would require to first delete the 'contemporary' child categories before deleting the container category. I would not oppose purging the category though, i.e. to remove all child categories that are not a 'contemporary' form of a longer existing music genre. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:02, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:People educated at Marple Hall School

• Propose deleting Category:People educated at Marple Hall School - Template:Lc1
  

Nominator's rationale: Nothing here that isn't on the school's main page. One Of Seven Billion (talk) 10:24, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

• Delete - Not enough entries to constitute a category. George.Edward.C – Talk – Contributions 12:33, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
• Keep – part of the established scheme Category:People educated by school in England, 5 articles to date, and the school is open producing around 200 potentially notable people every year. Oculi (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2014 (UTC) Oculi (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
• Delete - only one entry (I have removed all the others as unsupported by RS) so not needed. 200 potentially notable students a year?! Nonsense. GiantSnowman 15:55, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

• Everyone is potentially notable. It's ridiculous to remove uncontroversial info just to make a point. It is still part of Category:People educated by school in England, 1 member suffices; we have thousands of 1 member categories. Oculi (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:Television series involving disabilities

• Propose deleting Category:Television series involving disabilities - Template:Lc1
  

Nominator's rationale: Too vague to be of any meaning. Virtually every show in the 19080s had a "very special episode" revealing a character's ADHD, blind neighbor, etc. Shows often include characters with various impairments of varying severity. How bad was George Costanza's vision? Velma Dinkley's? Geordi La Forge's? Does Scooby Doo have a speech impediment? There is no clear line. SummerPhD (talk) 07:29, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

• Keep and refocus the scope to "A list of television series that centers around or features a character with a disability." I think this is a topic well worth exploring, but maybe better dealt with something like Category:Television series with disabled lead characters or similar. I don't think any of the four above mentioned people would pass this criteria (having glasses is not typically thought of as a disability – most likely because it would be quite revolutionary to classify a massive swath of the population as disabled). SFB 12:45, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Velma is nearly helpless when she drops her glasses. Geordi is blind without his visor. Both sets of eyewear are more essential than Dr. House's cane, but we don't have sources calling any of them "disabled". It all comes down to original research. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:16, 23 November 2014 (UTC)