Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 August 3

August 3

Category:London words

• Propose renaming Category:London words to Category:Linguistics of London

Nominator's rationale: Current title "London words" is vague (what is a "London word"?), resulting in contents being added piecemeal. I previously removed at least one page that didn't fit, and those that remain are still sort of a grab-bag, but nonetheless I think the category makes sense/is salvageable with a more specific title that better fits the current contents. BlackholeWA (talk) 04:55, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

• Rename per nom, or to Category:Language in London. I wonder if Polari and Rhyming slang belong here. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:41, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

• Language in London might actually be a better fit, as it feels slightly broader. I would support that naming if others did. BlackholeWA (talk) 06:01, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

• Rename to something Both names so far proposed suggest a category covering the enormous linguistic diversity found in London, so I think it needs to be clarified that only English is covered. Category:English language in London perhaps? Johnbod (talk) 21:15, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Could always add more pages to the category after renaming, if needed. BlackholeWA (talk) 10:01, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 22:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Category:English language in London sounds good to me, it is clearly not about foreign languages. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
• Rename to Category:English language in London. Tessaracter (talk) 10:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
• Rename to Category:English language in London sounds good. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:41, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:Historians of Socialism

• Propose renaming Category:Historians of Socialism to Category:Historians of socialism

Nominator's rationale: To match Category:History of socialism and proper capitalization rules. User:Namiba 15:58, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Good idea. User:Mercer17 16:07, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Speedy rename per WP:C2B and WP:C2D, should have been listed at WP:CFDS. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:Unassessed-Class chess articles of Mid-importance

• Propose renaming Category:Unassessed-Class chess articles of Mid-importance to Category:Unassessed chess articles of Mid-importance

Nominator's rationale: Correct name (see, for example, Category:Unassessed chess articles). 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:International light-heavyweight boxing champions −

• Propose deleting Category:International light-heavyweight boxing champions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Firstly, I can't see many people searching for international boxing champions of any weight class; they're generally not very notable nor held in high regard (even those from the major sanctioning bodies). Secondly, the description is far too vague; it says it is to list boxers who have held international titles from the WBA, WBC, "and others", which opens the category up to the countless irrelevant, minor sanctioning bodies like the WBU, WBF, IBA, IBU (of which International titles are even more irrelevant). Lastly, I presume that the category is intended for boxing titles that have the word "International" included in the name (e.g. WBA International light-heavyweight title), but unless specified as such, it can be left open to interpretation and include any title eligible to be contested between two or more nations (anything above national level, probably 80% of boxing titles). Even when specified and limited to the four major organisations, I still can't see many people searching for this category. If we have this, then we might as well have the same for European, Continental, Inter-Continental and all the other (irrelevant) regional titles awarded by the four major sanctioning bodies. ².O.^Boxing 13:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Keep, the category is fine and necessary for correct categorisation. I searched for a similar only yesterday. --HuntGroup (talk) 16:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Correct categorisation of, what? "International champions" is far too vague. As I said, it would include champions from literally every single major and minor sanctioning body; WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO, IBO, WBU, WBF, IBA, IBU, and I'm pretty sure there's even German and Polish international titles, just to name a few off the top of my head. The first four mentioned are the only significant titles (IBO is just on the fringes), and even their International titles aren't considered significant; they're not titles people set as a goal to obtain or fight for and they're not viewed as necessary titles to obtain en route to world honours. Why anybody, let alone a boxing fan, would search for international champions still remains lost on me. Major national, regional, and world titles are the significant ones, by anybody's standards. – ².O.^Boxing 18:02, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

It's the International champion for each of the four main recognised sanctioning bodies. Make it clear in the description of the category. It is not hard to be a little more constructive as opposed to destructive.--HuntGroup (talk) 21:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

As I've twice said, even the International titles from the big four sanctioning bodies are insignificant and irrelevant. The reason there's categories for other champions – EBU, CBC, BBBofC and world WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO, The Ring champions – is because they are the most prestigious titles and are held in high regard across the board. Nobody holds the International titles from the WBA, WBC, IBF, and WBO (or any other combination of letters) in high regard. Insignificant. Pointless category. Nobody will search for them. I'll refrain from replying further to prevent bludgeoning, unless there's any constructive comments to engage. – ².O.^Boxing 22:46, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

You consider them 'insignificant and irrelevant' but that sounds like a personal issue. If they were that insignificant and irrelevant they wouldn't be so in demand and fought for so often. They are a significant milestone and the gateway to world titles and the pinnacle of the sport.--HuntGroup (talk) 10:37, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

• Delete – we don't even have categories or a list article for interim champions, which are held in far greater regard than secondary International/Inter-Continental/[insert fancy name here] titles. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

That's an argument to create more categories rather than delete this one. --HuntGroup (talk) 21:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Keep – International Championship fights are constantly happening and are in high regard all over the boxing community across europe especially this category is needed as I learned earlier as I made a edit where I placed a an International Champion under the Category:World light-heavyweight boxing champions and was told as an an International Light Heavyweight Champion he couldn't be added so I felt it best that International Champions should have their own category. Eerie Holiday (talk) 12:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

They're not really held in high regard though, even more so in Europe. I've never seen a European (or any other) boxer include a random international title within their goals. The EBU title is the only regional title held in high regard for Europe, hence why many boxers include the European title within their goals. "I want to win the national, European, then world honours". The boxing community actually sees all these International, Continental, Inter-Continental, and European titles as a bit of a joke and a means for the respective sanctioning bodies to collect more sanctioning fees.

If a boxer wins the EBU title then he's seen as the top fighter in Europe. If somebody has the WBC International title, who considers them the top fighter and of where? International titles, compared with other long established regional titles, are insignificant. The International titles also are not stepping stone titles; the majority of boxers do not capture an International title en route to world honours nor is it a requirement. There is no separate ranking system for International titles to determine who fights for them, the sanctioning bodies just offer vacant titles up as a trinket. (Personal attack removed) – ².O.^Boxing 13:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

(Personal attack removed)--HuntGroup (talk) 09:24, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

How many different organizations sanction International Titles? Answer is clearly every major boxing organization has International titles from the WBC to WBA and down. Also a majority of International title fights take place in Europe is what I was meaning when saying when I said "High regard" as major fights happen over seas and are for International titles in all weight classes. Eerie Holiday (talk) 16:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

As this category is currently under CfD, I would advise you not to populate it with new entries which may need reverting anyway. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 17:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

(e/c) And all of them are insignificant lol as Mac said, if there's going to be a category for the International titles, there might as well be categories for every other irrelevant/minor regional title from the major sanctioning bodies that nobody will probably ever search for; Continental, Inter-Continental, Continental Africa, European, Asia, Asia Oceania, Africa, Baltic, Australasia, Continental Americas, Pan Asia, amongst many many more (some of which are actually notable). What makes the International title more valuable or noteworthy than any of those? We should keep the categories for the standout titles that are universally notable; EBU, Commonwealth, BBBofC, world. NABF, NABA and maybe the NABO would be worthy categories. Even an OPBF category would be more valuable than an International. I kind of get your point, even though I strongly disagree. I think I've stated my point enough so I'll refrain from a back-and-forth. – ².O.^Boxing 17:25, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, there should at least be a list article for interim world champions before a category for sub-world level/regional titles should be allowed to stay. Priorities need evaluating. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 17:30, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree, an interim champion category would be worthwhile (certainly more so than an international, even though I think they're now ridiculous). After all, an interim title does (eventually) guarantee a world title shot. – ².O.^Boxing 17:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Why can't a category for Interim champions be created? Also would it be better if the category was just simply renamed "Category:International boxing champions" as it would open up the category to way more people who have claimed International titles. [1] this article States These are the 4 major boxing sanction bodies called IBF, WBA, WBO and WBC respectively and they all have their own belts. So in all 17 weight divisions we can have 4 different world champions.

Now they sanction all of the titles they promote, what makes the the WBC International Light Heavyweight Title less important as the WBC World Light Heavyweight Title? As you will see in this article [2] it just says that there are different levels to titles from "World Titles" to other titles available on both international and regional levels like British heavyweight champion, European heavyweight champions, WBC latino titles and what not. – (This Quoted from the article) now I don't understand why having a category containing a list of International Champions would be so wrong as regardless of opinion any title promoted by all for major promotions seems to be just as important as an other as long as they are promoted by 1 of the 4 sanctioned major promotions. Like in regards of MMA fighters being able to have a page it states on Wikipedia that they must have 3 or 4 fights under a major promotion. Why can't a category be created for boxing champions just as long as it is based the 4 major promotions?

Examples – Category: International boxing champions and Category: Interim boxing champions

What would be wrong about these? As long as a detailed description was added explaining who can and can't be considered under each category. Eerie Holiday (talk) 19:13, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

The reason international titles are less important than world titles is kind of self explanatory; a world champion has reached the pinnacle of the sport, an international champion has won an international title that doesn't give a pre-determined ranking or a guarantee at a world title. Boxers don't chase any of the International titles; they are either offered up by the sanctioning body, or the opponent they're facing just happens to hold it or have a higher ranking than they do (as in, "I'll fight that guy because I'm ranked 25th and he's ranked 16th. Oh look, he has the International title too, that will look good on my mantle"). A fighter doesn't even need to be ranked in the top ten of a sanctioning body to win an international title, and winning one doesn't guarantee a top ten ranked position. For example, Aleksei Papin won the IBF International title in June 2019 and was ranked number 14 by the IBF in July, as opposed to Yury Kashinsky, who won the IBF Inter-Continental title (lower down the food chain than an International title) at the same weight, in the same month but was ranked number 1 in July. The titles don't even hold significance within the respective sanctioning bodies' rankings, let alone the rest of the world. That just reinforces the boxing world's sentiments that the various regional titles from the major sanctioning bodies are insignificant, which then reinforces my sentiment that a category for international champions is pretty much pointless, because people aren't concerned with them or who has held them. That's the core issue, the category will be rarely used because people simply won't care. – ².O.^Boxing 22:06, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

First off Thank you for the explanation of how you view World to International Titles. But User talk:Squared.Circle.Boxing your quote – category for international champions is pretty much pointless, because people aren't concerned with them or who has held them. That's the core issue, the category will be rarely used because people simply won't care. Well this first came up because I was someone who who cared i saw International title fights was looking up information on them which drove me to see the WBC International Light Heavyweight Title History and said to myself hey they're have been a lot of former Champions and a lot of them have Wikipedia pages already so i took the time to create the category. So my point in saying that is we really don't know how many other people might be interested in the category so I feel it wouldn't hurt to have the category available but even an alternative to have a category for all former International Champions. One thing I find interesting in regards to your statement on the International titles.

This source [3] states Championship fights must be earned and not handed out just to fill a vacant spot. This has always been the main concept and true philosophy the International Championships of the World Boxing Council have been carried out since 1986…… and this source [4] Official rankings and List of all champions from WBC, IBF, WBO as well as the WBC Silver and International Light Heavyweight Champions are included above the rankings. The international title as well as others seem to matter in the WBC as the source will show.

So the The titles don't even hold significance within the respective sanctioning bodies' rankings, let alone the rest of the world. That just reinforces the boxing world's sentiments that the various regional titles from the major sanctioning bodies are insignificant, which then reinforces my sentiment that a category for international champions is pretty much pointless, because people aren't concerned with them or who has held them – User talk:Squared.Circle.Boxing your quote makes this claim more as a very aggressive opinion rather then fact and in the end Wikipedia is supposed to be based on factual evidence to support its articles with actual sources which iv managed to provide thru out these discussions to support that International Titles mean something that they aren't just "Pointless" as you've claimed them to be. These aren't amateur organizations sanctioning these title fights its the World Boxing Council who is having WBC International Light Heavyweight Title fights look thru the history of the title you'll see its being defended multiple times by the same individuals not just one and done fights where they are vacated after 1 fight. I just feel this category should be given more of an opportunity based on the fact that it is sanctioned by the largest boxing organization in the world and that they themselves credit the International titles at a level high enough to even list them along with the World Champion shown from their listing of WBC Light Heavyweight Champions source i listed. At least a compromise of renaming it Category: International boxing champions because once more i know I was someone who was curious enough to look into it who's to say they're hasn't been more or could be more who might want to look into it on this bases i hope you can reconsider your stance on it look at the sources presented. Eerie Holiday (talk) 00:23, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Also one last source i would like to share is [5] to show the factual claim from the official website of the World Boxing Council that WBC International Titles are held in high regard. Eerie Holiday (talk) 00:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

They would be considered primary sources, from the horses mouth. And the WBC would hardly admit their own titles are worthless in the grand scheme of things. I think we should leave it at that and allow this to play out or we'll be going back-and-forth for the next week lol – ².O.^Boxing 01:00, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

We should go by WP:NBOX. Granted, it primarily pertains to bio articles about boxers, but I see a case for applying it to categories as well. What we have now are categories for WBA/WBC/IBF/WBO full world champions, as well as European, British and Commonwealth full champions. What we do not have—or need—are categories for those organisations' sub- or regional champons, for the same reason a boxer is not considered notable if they have only fought for/held the BBBofC Southern Area title, or the WBA International title, or the IBF Pan-Pacific title. Therefore, categories for non-full titles shouldn't exist either. It is total overcategorisation. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 00:04, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:Catherine of Alexandria

• Propose deleting Category:Catherine of Alexandria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Too little content for an eponymous category. The main category is also overcategorized, so it seems like very few of the articles in it or the subcat need to be categorized into any of those parent categories. The subcat is already part of an established scheme, so removing this won't impact it re: navigation. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Keep Not only do some of the sub cats hold other articles, but this corresponds with the structure of the images that are on file at the Commons. --evrik ^(talk) 12:18, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
• Delete including subcategory (which I have tagged as well), all of it is a matter of shared name, not shared content. Nothing except the main article and the painting is about the person Catherine of Alexandria. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:11, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:Individual rocket vehicles

• Propose renaming Category:Individual rocket vehicles to Category:Individual rockets

Nominator's rationale: More WP:NATURAL name. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 04:27, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Weak oppose. One of the child categories is rocket-powered cars, which are not rockets. Grutness...wha? 04:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom and purge the cars subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:18, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:African-American university presidents

• Propose renaming Category:African-American university presidents to Category:African-American college and university presidents

Nominator's rationale: Not all colleges are universities. We recently renamed WP:WikiProject Universities to WP:WikiProject Higher Education because of this concern, and the parent category of this category is Category:Heads of universities and colleges in the United States. People like G. Gabrielle Starr (president of Pomona College) belong in this category, since there's no Category:African-American college presidents, but can't be safely put here until it's renamed. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Rename per nom To match the scope of parent category Category:Heads of universities and colleges in the United States. Dimadick (talk) 09:37, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Um, shouldn't we also put them in that order for this category then? 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
• Rename per nom to match scope LumaNatic (talk) 19:00, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
• Delete unnecessary racial/ethnic category. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:48, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
• Administrators and presidents and heads, oh my! Upmerge to Category:African-American university administrators. The two categories overlap significantly and contain ~65 articles altogether; the resulting category would not be so big as to require sub-categorization. Carlossuarez46 may have a valid point, too, unless it can be demonstrated that this intersection is a topic of encyclopedic interest (per WP:CAT/GRS), but I disagree with deleting the category (versus upmerging) when the equivalent parent is not nominated. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 17:24, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:Rating

• Propose deleting Category:Rating (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: WP:SHAREDNAME. Rating is a non-trivial disambiguation page, and the word has several distinct meanings: see e.g. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rating, https://www.dictionary.com/browse/rating.
Alternatively, convert it to a {{Category disambiguation}} page. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

• Merge into Category:Evaluation. fgnievinski (talk) 01:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
  • That's a good idea, @fgnievinski. I support that merge, so long as the merge is selective. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
• Keep, the category is fine and the problem is in article space where Rating should not be a disambiguation page for different applications of the same concept. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I've tagged the DAB page as a WP:BCA. fgnievinski (talk) 05:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 03:15, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Keep per above, the main Rating page should really not be a disambig page.★Trekker (talk) 13:45, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:New England ancestry Wikipedians

• Propose upmerging Category:New England ancestry Wikipedians to Category:United States ancestry Wikipedians

Nominator's rationale: I am not sure what purpose state-level ancestry categories serve in the first place, but placing that aside... This intermediate (regional) level between the country-level and state-level categories is unnecessary and hinders navigation. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 03:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose: Rather than merging, it would be far better to leave this category a subcategory of Category:United States ancestry Wikipedians. Yours aye,  Buaidh  talk contribs 18:05, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

  Why? -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 17:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support per nom. It would have been different when many editors would have identified as New England ancestry Wikipedians instead of state ancestry Wikipedians, but in the current situation we just have a container category by state, so it has the same functionality as Category:United States ancestry Wikipedians. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

  New England is the only invariable region of the United States. Please see Category:Wikipedians in New England and Portal:New England. Yours aye,  Buaidh  talk contribs 00:48, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

  PS – I live in the very variable Mountain States.  Buaidh  talk contribs 00:48, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

  Variable or not has nothing to do with it. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:37, 7 August 2020 (UTC)