Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 28: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit Reply
Line 166: Line 166:
* '''Merge''', this is a too subjective distinction. [[User:Marcocapelle|Marcocapelle]] ([[User talk:Marcocapelle|talk]]) 05:21, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
* '''Merge''', this is a too subjective distinction. [[User:Marcocapelle|Marcocapelle]] ([[User talk:Marcocapelle|talk]]) 05:21, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
* '''Merge''', this is a too subjective distinction. Anyone can claim anything is "non-traditional". We could all be claiming that editing Wikipedia articles online is just a "non-traditional way of writing books", but that doesn't help explain anything, and it stakes a claim on how broad the terms "writing" and "books" can be interpreted beyond 'inscribing ink on paper pages bounded together' in ways not everyone might agree. [[User:Nederlandse Leeuw|NLeeuw]] ([[User talk:Nederlandse Leeuw|talk]]) 20:43, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
* '''Merge''', this is a too subjective distinction. Anyone can claim anything is "non-traditional". We could all be claiming that editing Wikipedia articles online is just a "non-traditional way of writing books", but that doesn't help explain anything, and it stakes a claim on how broad the terms "writing" and "books" can be interpreted beyond 'inscribing ink on paper pages bounded together' in ways not everyone might agree. [[User:Nederlandse Leeuw|NLeeuw]] ([[User talk:Nederlandse Leeuw|talk]]) 20:43, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
* '''Fix''' I adjusted these articles, you can now delete this category. Some of these don't belong in rodeo performers. Some that did I moved there. Others I removed the category because they don't belong and I added different categories to them. I have worked with rodeo article since 2016. [[User:dawnleelynn|<i style="color:#800000;">dawnleelynn</i>]]<sup>[[User talk:dawnleelynn|(talk)]]</sup> 06:12, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


==== Category:FIFA World Cup ceremonies performers ====
==== Category:FIFA World Cup ceremonies performers ====

Revision as of 06:12, 29 August 2023

< August 27
August 29 >

August 28

Category:1980s Russian sailplanes

Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT. NLeeuw (talk) 22:36, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, there is only one article ANB (glider) which was introduced in the 1980s (Soviet era) and it is not clear if this ANB still existed after the Soviet Union came to an end. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:15, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This is also new to me, but aircraft are categorised according to country of origin + "decade of first flight". So it doesn't matter which aircraft still fly 1 or 12 decades later, nor if it flies in the country of origin or in Karakalpakstan, because those data are considered WP:NONDEFINING. NLeeuw (talk) 05:59, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soviet and Russian ultralight aircraft

Nominator's rationale: WP:CATSPECIFIC: They are all Russian. NLeeuw (talk) 22:32, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soviet and Russian civil trainer aircraft

Nominator's rationale: WP:CATSPECIFIC: They were all Soviet. NLeeuw (talk) 22:30, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soviet and Russian agricultural aircraft

Nominator's rationale: WP:CATSPECIFIC: They were all Soviet (except the Sukhoi Su-38, which has had only 1 prototype built in 2001, and has apparently been abandoned since 2002. I wonder whether it even meets WP:GNG). NLeeuw (talk) 22:28, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soviet and Russian military utility aircraft

Nominator's rationale: WP:CATSPECIFIC: They were all Soviet (except the Kazan Ansat). NLeeuw (talk) 22:24, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soviet and Russian military tanker aircraft

Nominator's rationale: WP:CATSPECIFIC: They were all Soviet. NLeeuw (talk) 22:21, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soviet and Russian command and control aircraft

Nominator's rationale: WP:CATSPECIFIC: They were all Soviet. NLeeuw (talk) 22:19, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soviet and Russian attack aircraft

Nominator's rationale: WP:CATSPECIFIC: They were all Soviet. NLeeuw (talk) 22:17, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. The 1990s subcat contains aitcraft that have been in use long after the Soviet Union ceases to exist so I added that subcategory to Category:Aircraft manufactured in Russia. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:33, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This is also new to me, but aircraft are categorised according to country of origin + "decade of first flight". So it doesn't matter which aircraft still fly 1 or 12 decades later, nor if it flies in the country of origin or in Karakalpakstan, because those data are considered WP:NONDEFINING. So
    Mil Mi-28 (first flight: 10 November 1982, so the "1990s" are not even the correct decade) and Sukhoi Su-34 (first flight: 13 April 1990, so over 1.5 years before the Soviet Union ended and the Russian Federation began) are both "Soviet", not "Russian". And both articles say so in the opening sentence. NLeeuw (talk) 06:12, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soviet and Russian patrol aircraft

Nominator's rationale: WP:CATSPECIFIC: They were all Soviet. NLeeuw (talk) 22:14, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose : There are Russian patrol aircraft - ie. the maritime patrol variants of the Ilyushin Il-114 - although they haven't entered service. In addition the Border Guards version of the Technoavia SM92 Finist probably counts as a Russian patrol aircraft as well.Nigel Ish (talk) 22:30, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soviet and Russian fighter aircraft

Nominator's rationale: WP:CATSPECIFIC and for consistency with related categories, categorisation at the level of individual states. Disambiguation, because the Soviet Union had 15 successor states, and it’s incorrect to imply that the Russian Federation is the only one that counts by maintaining categories that equate the RF and the USSR. Recommend moving Category:1990s Soviet and Russian fighter aircraft to both target categories because there was some overlap, and recommend moving Category:1910s Russian fighter aircraft along with Category:Soviet fighter aircraft, even though most were developed in and used by Tsarist Russia rather than Soviet Russia. NLeeuw (talk) 21:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Russian and Soviet emigrants

Nominator's rationale: “Russian and Soviet” is not a nationality. People of fifteen nationalities may have been formerly Soviet, and there’s no reason to equate the Russian Federation with the Soviet Union. This should lead to the splitting of subcategories.  —Michael Z. 18:09, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Russian and Soviet military radars

Nominator's rationale: For consistency with related categories, categorization at the level of individual state. Disambiguation, because the Soviet Union has 12 successor states, and it’s wrong to imply that the Russian Federation is the only one that counts by maintaining categories that equate the RF and USSR.  —Michael Z. 17:58, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Beauty Pageant

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of Category:Beauty pageants, plus member articles here do not make sense. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 12:45, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Celtic legendary creatures

Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 26#Category:Indo-European legendary creatures. Some of the items in this tree may genuinely be properly associated with Celtic mythology, such as the Aos Sí. But most are not specifically "Celtic", or a blend of various cultural traditions in the British Isles, Scandinavia, mainland Europe or other parts of the the world. For instance, Wild man, White Lady, Black dog (folklore), are all hardly exclusively "Celtic". The Loch Ness Monster has nothing to do with "Celtic" mythology at all; its first purported sightings date from the 1870s and the only thing "Celtic" about it is the fact that the word "loch" is Scottish Gaelic. It's just one of many modern Category:Cryptids that has no demonstrable roots in ancient Celtic mythology (pre-500 CE).
Therefore, we may Upmerge by default all items and subcategories to Category:European legendary creatures, unless they can be shown to be specifically "Celtic" and Manually upmerged to Category:Celtic mythology. It's quite possible that items such as Wild man and White Lady are too universal for global human culture to be limited to just "Europe" either, so those may be Manually upmerged to ancestor Category:Legendary creatures in general. Cheers, NLeeuw (talk) 09:20, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: pinging nominator of previous discussion for follow-up. NLeeuw (talk) 10:59, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Objects in museum collections

Nominator's rationale: The construction "Paintings in the collection of Foo" in category names was dropped in favour of "Paintings in Foo" in this CfD of 4 June – "the collection of" was considered to be unnecessary verbiage. Here I propose to do the same for other types of object in museums, for consistency's sake. Most subcategories of Category:Sculptures by collection and Category:Photographs by collection already follow the proposed style. Ham II (talk) 08:36, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dirty District albums

Nominator's rationale: Empty category, all album articles present were recently deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Great Gangsters from the Dirty District due to lack of notability. Sgubaldo (talk) 06:47, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Celtic nations

Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:POV. The main article is already in Category:Celtic nationalism where it properly belongs. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I'm honestly puzzled even by the nomination. This is about as controversial as Category:Nordic countries. This is essentially a dictionary definition. --Tóraí (talk) 18:06, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Bringing up the Nordic countries is WP:OTHERSTUFF. The dictionary link WP:FAILs because it does not mention the word "nation(s)" anywhere, and does not list any set of countries remotely similar to the 6 members of this category. E.g. there is no Isle of Man. Meanwhile, lots of other sets of countries/regions are mentioned, e.g. a member of an Indo-European people who in pre-Roman times inhabited Britain, Gaul, Spain, and other parts of W and central Europe. This has almost no overlap with the 6 items in this category. NLeeuw (talk) 20:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Seriously (from the link above), "...Scotland, Wales, Ireland, and some other areas such as Brittany." Really, this isn't controversial. --Tóraí (talk) 21:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You're counting the hits and ignoring the misses. NLeeuw (talk) 05:52, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, clearly satisfies its own categorisation as a cultural region. What would you replace it with on these six place articles to group them together, or are you claiming they have nothing in common? Crowsus (talk) 18:23, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    What they have in common is WP:ARBITRARY. Whether it is WP:DEFINING or WP:NONDEFINING is a WP:POV. That these 6 items are inextricably linked to each other and belong to each other to the exclusion of all other countries and regions which could be so defined is a particular POV within modern Celtic nationalism. A POV that may, in fact, enjoy consensus within Celtic nationalism. But it is a POV nonetheless. NLeeuw (talk) 20:36, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, more detail needed from nom; as of now, the category seems logical and as per common usage. SeoR (talk) 18:28, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The concept may be regarded as at best dubious, but the term is widely used, in the UK at least, and this group is what is meant. The subcat doesn't really belong here though. Johnbod (talk) 01:24, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "At best dubious" doesn't strike me as a particularly objective and unambiguous way of grouping items. NLeeuw (talk) 05:54, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Joseline Hernandez songs

Nominator's rationale: I created this category back in 2017 for two songs ("Run Me My Money ‎" and "Hate Me Now"), and I have turned both of these articles into redirects as there was not enough evidence of significant coverage in third-party, reliable sources for either songs to have an independent article. This category no longer seems necessary when the subject does not have a song notable enough for an article. Apologies if this does incorrectly. I have never nominated a category for deletion before. Thank you in advance. Aoba47 (talk) 01:01, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This category has been emptied which renders this discussion irrelevant. If you want editors to debate whether or not we should have a category, it's best not to make it an empty category. Liz Read! Talk! 05:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the response. As I have said above, I am not really familiar with the process of deleting a category so apologies if this is the wrong venue or way to approach deleting an empty category. Aoba47 (talk) 17:22, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Non-traditional rodeo performers

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT and WP:NONDEFINING
This category groups rodeo performers who had a non-traditional career. Stuart Anderson was restaurateur who may have performed in rodeos, Wayde Preston performed in the rodeo before being discovered as an actor, while Tom Threepersons went into the rodeo after retiring from law enforcement. I'm not sure why Kelly Sutherland is here though because there's no bright line between traditional and non-traditional. And I'm not sure doing a different job before or after being in the rodeo is defining anyway. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:19, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I removed Chester A. Reynolds from the category, but there's no issue of SMALLCAT here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:32, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, this is a too subjective distinction. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:21, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, this is a too subjective distinction. Anyone can claim anything is "non-traditional". We could all be claiming that editing Wikipedia articles online is just a "non-traditional way of writing books", but that doesn't help explain anything, and it stakes a claim on how broad the terms "writing" and "books" can be interpreted beyond 'inscribing ink on paper pages bounded together' in ways not everyone might agree. NLeeuw (talk) 20:43, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fix I adjusted these articles, you can now delete this category. Some of these don't belong in rodeo performers. Some that did I moved there. Others I removed the category because they don't belong and I added different categories to them. I have worked with rodeo article since 2016. dawnleelynn(talk) 06:12, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:FIFA World Cup ceremonies performers

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:PERFCAT and WP:NONDEFINING
This is textbook Performers by Performance. Imagine the category clutter if we tracked every individual performance by Shakira, J.Lo, or Ricky Martin. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:19, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_August_28&oldid=1172771356"