Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion‎ | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 61.244.93.97 (talk) at 07:41, 10 April 2024 (→‎Category:19th-century Roman Catholic church buildings in New Caledonia). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< April 4
April 6 >

April 5

Category:Year of work unknown

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Drum Corps Associates corps

Nominator's rationale: The organization was dissolved and the members moved to the All-Age classification of Drum Corps International. I wish to rename it to Former Drum Corps Associates corps for maintaining the grouping for its historicity. Why? I Ask (talk) 06:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 13:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Paleontology portal

Nominator's rationale: These seem to effectively be a duplicate category. I'm bringing the category here in case I'm missing something obvious Mason (talk) 01:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge target for the plural category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 13:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16th century in the Mughal Empire

Nominator's rationale: merge, isolated year and decade categories, this is not helpful for navigation between articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:2004 video games with demos

Nominator's rationale: Absolutely not a defining trait. Thousands upon thousands of video games have demos, and none of them are defined by that. I nominated 2004, then noticed the parent and several others. All should go. -- ferret (talk) 13:04, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would be very sad you you delete :(
Not all games have demos. Thousands? Ok, they are divided by years.
Demo is important - because it freely distributable, and we can download it from some websites. This is imprtant for abandonware, for example Armies of Exigo - you cannot buy this game - we have only torrents or great demo.
And often demos is like a beta version of the game, that looks differently from the release version - this is important for the history and research. I am surprised that you want to delete such category :( Vitaly Zdanevich (talk) 16:35, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because it is not a defining trait of the games. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. -- ferret (talk) 17:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -I assume all of the additional subcats of Category:Video games with demos should be deleted as well? (Oinkers42) (talk) 02:13, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes -- ferret (talk) 04:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag all of the subcategories; if there is no further participation in a week we should be all set for deleting them.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Studies of right-wing politics

Nominator's rationale: The contents are mainly biographies, with one podcast. I have added this new category into Category:Political science but don't think this is a helpful addition to the hierarchy. – Fayenatic London 11:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the articles are mostly in the tree of Political scientists anyway and I don't think you can split political scientists neatly on the basis of whether they study right or left wing politics. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So my rationale with this is that the study of right-wing politics actually is an explicit focus for some scholars, historians, and journalists. I can clarify the description of the category to ensure it is only meant to include those researchers who state that they study right-wing politics.
    Here are some examples:
    Bluetik (talk) 06:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, I'm not sure if this matters, but it seems to be primarily sociologists, historians, and journalists, rather than career political scientists. Bluetik (talk) 06:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Disasters in Philippines by province or territory

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: delete. No reason to keep this open. Liz Read! Talk! 05:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The Philippines has no "territories" to speak of, as every square inch of the country is incorporated (i.e., there is no "unincorporated area" or unorganized areas). Howard the Duck (talk) 01:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:29, 5 April 2024 (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:Arab-American gangs

Nominator's rationale: delete, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation between articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:27, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Arab gangs instead. AHI-3000 (talk) 21:33, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Companies that operate fighter jets

Nominator's rationale: Not sure whether this is an appropriate category, but if so it should align with Category:Fighter aircraft. – Fayenatic London 11:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think it's okay to standardize this on "aircraft" instead of "jets". I'm unaware of any companies that currently operate fighters with propellers at a similar scale. Edward Sandstig (talk) 12:14, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Arab gangs

Nominator's rationale: rename, these are Lebanese mafia gangs. Arab is inaccurate, since many Lebanese people do not identify as Arab. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:14, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, because I think this category should be kept so that Category:Arab gangs can be merged into it. AHI-3000 (talk) 21:35, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians in Ngong Hills

Nominator's rationale: No other user pages in the parent category mention this location. – Fayenatic London 10:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scholars of Greek language

Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C. Uncles/aunts in Category:Linguists by language of study are all named Linguists of Fooian.
Copy of speedy discussion
NLeeuw (talk) 10:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Purge and rename, there are some non-linguists e.g. Byzantinists and New Testament scholars in these categories, but that does not match with the clearly linguistic purpose of these categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. These categories have a different scope than those for linguists, and that scope is indicated by the title. If you change both the title and scope of the categories, you are essentially creating different categories, and doing so would eliminate valid categories that exist for a logical purpose. It would be better to create new categories under the proposed names, limiting inclusion to those entries that are actually linguists, than to convert existing categories into something that they were never intended to be, changing both the names and criteria for inclusion. The proposed change strikes me as saying, "this fire engine is red. It should be green. Also, it should be a pickup truck." I'm not great with analogies. P Aculeius (talk) 13:18, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What is, in your view, the difference between a scholar of language A and a linguist of language A? NLeeuw (talk) 09:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    “Linguist” is typically used to mean one of two things in English: 1. An interpreter or translator; 2. Someone studying the technical aspects of language using the ‘science’ of linguistics—a fairly specific and limited field compared with all scholarship involving a language. At one time, the term was used more broadly, perhaps the source of confusion here. But presumably many scholars of Greek are neither linguists in the technical sense nor interpreters in the common sense. The proposal would narrow the scope of the category by excluding all scholars of a language who are not linguists. There seems to be value in being able to categorize scholars of a language irrespective of whether they are linguists, and likewise a category limited to linguists would be useful. The two categories would overlap, but the scholars category would be much broader. They should probably both exist, rather than one replacing the other. P Aculeius (talk) 22:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eastern Europe in fiction

Nominator's rationale: Extremely WP:ARBITRARYCAT (really; read the category description). Indirect follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 27#Category:Video games set in Northern Europe (upmerged). Note: the "by country" child categories do not have to be upmerged; they are already in Category:Europe in fiction by country. Child category about video games has also been nominated for upmerging. NLeeuw (talk) 09:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Swingin' Utters

Nominator's rationale: Insufficient content for WP:EPONYMOUS category. – Fayenatic London 09:37, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video games set in Eastern Europe

Nominator's rationale: WP:ARBITRARYCAT. Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 27#Category:Video games set in Northern Europe (upmerged). Note: the "by country" child categories do not have to be upmerged; they are already in Category:Video games set in Europe by country. NLeeuw (talk) 09:33, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eastern European restaurants

Nominator's rationale: WP:ARBITRARYCAT, unnecessary grouping of 3 restaurants which are already in the Russian, Ukrainian and Polish restaurants trees. I recommend Just Delete, there's no point in merging. NLeeuw (talk) 09:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Central European art groups

Nominator's rationale: WP:ARBITRARYCAT. There doesn't seem to be anything particularly "Central European" to the articles in this group. Some things are Czech, some Swiss, one German, one Austrian, one Swiss-Austrian and one Luxemburgish, but that's it. The contents do not suggest a larger "Central European" scope, let alone that the category has properly defined its scope. According to several definitions, Luxembourg and Switzerland belong to "Western Europe", while Czechia belongs to "Eastern Europe". The present grouping seems WP:OR. Upmerging to "Europe" resolves the arbitrariness. NLeeuw (talk) 05:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Central European cuisine

Nominator's rationale: Just delete per WP:OVERLAPCAT. Main article Central European cuisine is already in parent Category:European cuisine and all subcategories just duplicate Category:European cuisine by country. NLeeuw (talk) 05:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:National Heroes of North Korea

Nominator's rationale: Main article: Hero of the Republic. Not sure what the best name for this category is; should it specify North Korea in parentheses? I don't think "National" should be a part of the title; there doesn't seem to be any indication that it is in either Korean or English. toobigtokale (talk) 21:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same question: rename or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1990s Japanese superhero films

Nominator's rationale: Why do we need this which has only a few entries? All content has been transferred to Category:Japanese superhero films and Category:1990s Japanese films. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:37, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See other similar cats. Again, 2 subcats and 3 articles does not strike me as an indecently low number: 'Categories which intersect two (or more) topics or characteristics can result in very narrow categories with few members. Such categories should only be created when both parent categories are large enough for diffusion to be an option, and when similar intersections can be made for related categories.' That seems to be the case here and up-merge seems unnecessary.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:27, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:59, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lapinjärvi (municipality)

Nominator's rationale: Renamed the main article Lapinjärvi, Finland. Peltimikko (talk) 17:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Let's see if the RM concludes as moved, or if there is consensus to rename here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Justarandomamerican (talk) Have a good day! 01:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:19th-century Roman Catholic church buildings in New Caledonia

Nominator's rationale: Broaden this category to include 19th-century churches of all denominations. There are only two pages in here, and 4 total in the entire Roman Catholic churches in New Caledonia Mason (talk) 23:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for categorising under the dependent territory and the continent category trees. (Otherwise combine with the counterparts for other territoires d'outre-mer, collectivités d'outre-mer, pays d'outre-mer and collectivités sui generis.) 61.244.93.97 (talk) 09:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • In that case either keep as it is, or, less preferably, keep a big tent category for Roman Catholic churches of all collectivités d'outre-mer along with the sole pays d'outre-mer and the collectivité sui generis. 61.244.93.97 (talk) 09:27, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Justarandomamerican (talk) Have a good day! 01:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Marcocapelle you didn't have a single word on the big-tent proposal on a category for all collectivités d'outre-mer, the pays d'outre-mer and the collectivité sui generis. What's your take? (...are keeping the content in the tree of the the dependent territory... And no I don't mean generally the tree under Category:Dependent territories but Category:19th-century Roman Catholic church buildings by dependent territory specifically.) 61.244.93.97 (talk) 08:11, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians with autism

Nominator's rationale: This is about Person-first/identity-first language.

For many conditions/disabilities/traits, the use of person-first language is preferred or there is no consensus. This was also true in the past for autistic people. However, within the last few years, particularly since the rise of the Autism_rights_movement and its focus on self-advocacy, use of identity-first language has become much more preferred and prominent among people who are actually autistic.

While neurotypical people have no consensus on person-first or identity-first language, this category is used specifically by people who are actually autistic. So, in order to better represent people who self-identify with the category, it would be better for it to be named "Autistic Wikipedians".

A notable American organisation supporting person-first language is Autism Speaks. However, Autism Speaks has been criticised and boycott by the autism rights movement because it does not reflect the needs or desires of self-advocating autistic people.

References within Wikipedia articles

Although some prefer to use the person-first terminology person with autism, most members of the autistic community prefer autistic person or autistic in formal English, to stress that autism is a part of their identity rather than a disease they have. In addition, phrases like suffers from autism are objectionable to many people, and are discouraged by prominent style guides.

— Autism_rights_movement#Terminology

Identity-first language is preferred by many autistic people and organizations run by them.

— People-first_language#Criticism

References from reliable sources

Autistic adults and parents were more likely to select an [identity-first language] term. The identity-first terms “I am autistic” (64.1%) and “I have autism” (13.1%) were the most common terms selected.

— Preferences for identity-first versus person-first language in a US sample of autism stakeholders by Amanda Taboas, Karla Doepke, Corinne Zimmerman in the United States.

This article shows autistic people generally prefer identity-first language, while other people who aren't autistic may prefer person-first language or may have no preference. Since this category is about Wikipedians who are autistic self-identifying, it makes sense to use identity-first language. This is more likely to respect the identity of the people in the category.

There has been a recent shift from person-first to identity-first language to describe autism. In this study, Australian adults who reported having a diagnosis of autism (N 198) rated and ranked autism-terms for preference and offensiveness, and explained their choice in free-text. ‘Autistic’, ‘Person on the Autism Spectrum’, and ‘Autistic Person’ were rated most preferred and least offensive overall. [...] Statements in this theme reflected that being autistic is core to these participants’ sense of self, and not something that can be removed or separated from them (i.e., their autism is not an ‘accessory’)

— “It Defines Who I Am” or “It’s Something I Have” by Simon M. Bury, Rachel Jellett, Jennifer R. Spoor, Darren Hedley in Australia.

Alternatives considered

  • No change: "Category:Autistic Wikipedians" is a redirect to "Category:Wikipedians with autism". It is not possible for Wikipedians to add the "Autistic Wikipedians" category to their user page. This is because bots will edit their user page to "Category:Wikipedians with autism" in an attempt to "fix" the redirect.
  • Another name: As per the Australian paper, the term "Person on the Autism Spectrum" was most consistently ranked and offended the fewest people, though it wasn't the most preferred term as frequently as "Autistic Person".

While "Autistic Person" may not appeal to every single person who self-identifies as autistic, it overall has greater appeal in English-speaking communities than "Person with autism". CauliflowerMoon (talk) 09:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support making a change. My impression has been that the general preference in the community is to use Identity first language rather than person first language. Annoyingly, I could have sworn that the APA style guide used autism as an example for identity first preference... but it seems I was either misremembering or it was changed [4]. One core tenent that I think is extremely applicable from the APA guide: "Use person-first or identity-first language as is appropriate for the community or person being discussed. The language used should be selected with the understanding that disabled people's expressed preferences regarding identification supersede matters of style. " I think creating three categories with a user box template could be a workable solution. We could have the main category be: Category:Wikipedians on the Autism Spectrum, and have two child categories with Category:Autistic Wikipedians and Category:Wikipedians with autism. Mason (talk) 00:32, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Justarandomamerican (talk) Have a good day! 01:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mixed Do whatever you want. But this seems a little bit pointless to me, maybe that's just me. As an autistic person myself i don't care what happens, both seem fine to me AuroraANovaUma (talk) 23:41, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Emigrants from British North America

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There's only one category in here, whish isn't helpful for navigation. Also a followup to Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_March_24 Mason (talk) 01:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. As in the previous discussion, I would be ok with a follow-up proposal to rename pre-confederation Canada to British North America. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Australian association football cup seasons

Nominator's rationale: Suggesting rename for consistency with Category:Soccer cup competitions in Australia. – Fayenatic London 16:46, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Justarandomamerican (talk) Have a good day! 01:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_5&oldid=1218187622"