Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 7

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PanchoS (talk | contribs) at 06:49, 11 August 2018 (→Category:Housing struggles in Brazil: +). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< August 6 August 8 >

August 7

Category:WikiProject Philippines members

Nominator's rationale: The name of the WikiProject for the Philippines is Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines. The name of this user category should reflect the name of the WikiProject.  Buaidh  talk contribs 23:28, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:BFA Senior League navigational boxes

Nominator's rationale: With only one eligible template at this time, there is not enough content to warrant a separate category. (@Quidster4040: notifying the category's creator) -- Black Falcon (talk) 21:37, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nepalese people

Nominator's rationale: The national adjective and demonym for Nepal is "Nepali". Please see the Nepali Ministry for Foreign Affairs or the CIA Nationality Index. Same arguments as #Category:Nepalese Wikipedians below.  Buaidh  talk contribs 22:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support, the article Nepalis exists since 2016 and the name of the article has not yet been subject of discussion. But this is an internal Wiki argument and may well be overturned by a discussion about usage in reliable sources. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:09, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nepalese Wikipedians

Nominator's rationale: The national adjective and demonym for Nepal is "Nepali".  Buaidh  talk contribs 20:59, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Singaporean Wikipedians

Nominator's rationale: The national adjective for Singapore is "Singapore". "Singaporean" is the national demonym.  Buaidh  talk contribs 20:56, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Antiguan and Barbudan Wikipedians

Nominator's rationale: When a country's name consists of two distinct regions, the preferred national adjective is the country name. Thus, "Antigua and Barbuda".  Buaidh  talk contribs 20:49, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan user categories

Nominator's rationale: While both "Taiwan" and "Taiwanese" are used as national adjectives for Taiwan, the term "Taiwanese" is often used to denote the inhabitants of the island prior to the arrival of the government of the Republic of China in 1945. Therefore, "Taiwan" is the preferred national adjective.  Buaidh  talk contribs 20:43, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - While "Taiwan" is used as an adjective, it is not reasonable to think that a reader will be able to differentiate pre-/post-1945 based on such a small change. Nor is it appropriate to assume, as the proposed change does, that all Wikipedians who self-identified as being of Taiwanese descent were necessarily referring to post-1945 descent. The fact is that "Taiwanese" is the most common adjective used to denote people or things from Taiwan (pre-1945 and post-1945), and we should adhere to that practice. -- Black Falcon (talk) 22:00, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    While both terms are used, the CIA Nationality Index gives preference to "Taiwan".  Buaidh  talk contribs 22:28, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    True, but the CIA is not necessarily the definitive source for national adjectives and demonyms. In this instance, I think the weight of issues favors "Taiwanese"—e.g. the fact that the article category is Category:Taiwanese people, that Taiwan Wikipedians could easily be confused with Category:Wikipedians in Taiwan, that "Taiwanese" is a more natural English adjective, etc. -- Black Falcon (talk) 18:30, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Communication degree holders

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:COPDEF - categorizes biographies by a non-defining characteristic. Very similar to the example of a film actor with a law degree. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 20:28, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete an entire category for a degree holder seems like minutia. MartinezMD (talk) 21:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- I do not recall us having other categories for graduates by subject. In this case, the subject is not even a clearly defined one. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:18, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as non-defining. People are defined by what they do or become, not the degrees they earn or hold. -- Black Falcon (talk) 18:31, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The analogy to law degree/lawyer is poor, because Communication degrees aren't prep for a single profession, which is why Chassagne, Winfrey, Neller and Schwartz are all on record saying they made primary use of their degree in their widely disparate work settings. The notion that the subject isn't well-defined is simply wrong -- the National Communication Association and International Communication Association would be happy to supply the details; this is an academic area of study, and universities worldwide offer the degree from quite large and well resourced programs. And the notion that it's not defining is also shaky -- Oprah Winfrey, Mike Rowe, Al Roker, and the others on that list are in a fundamental sense communicators. That's not an objective trait that's measurable, but the fact that they share t hat degree is objective and can be confirmed from published sources. It's a substantive root of their notoriety, and tracing it to their college degree makes it measurable. As for the fact that it's not done for other degrees, that's not an argument; perhaps it should be. Final comment: overpolicing minor features like this weakens Wikipedia and makes it less useful and less accessible. This is a close enough call that the utility of the category should tip the balance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doylesrader (talk • contribs) 16:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    What, in your view, is "the utility of the category"? I don't think there is any question about the characteristic not being well-defined; instead, it is a question of one's degree not being a defining characteristic of individuals. Winfrey, Rowe and Roker may be known for being "communicators" (may or may not be defining, but definitely not well-defined) but they are certainly not known for holding communication degrees (well-defined, but not defining). (Also, please sign your posts with four tildes as follows: ~~~~.) -- Black Falcon (talk) 21:21, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Steel Mills in Karachi

Nominator's rationale: upmerge to both parents per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only two articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:08, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia (country) user categories

Nominator's rationale: Change user category names from Wikipedia convention to natural English. "Georgia (country)" is rather annoying to native Georgians and they should be allowed to use their own country's name in their own user categories. I am opposed to changing "Georgia (country)" anywhere else.  Buaidh  talk contribs 20:03, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Austrian military personnel killed in World War II

Nominator's rationale: Merge Austria did not exist during World War II, it was fully integrated with Nazi Germany as the province of Ostmark, former Austrians who served in WW2 did so with German uniforms, in German formations, and fully integrated with personnel from other provinces of Germany. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:17, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I does not say that they served in the armed forces of Austria. It's possible that they died while wearing the uniform of France, Germany Italy or the UK. I interpret it to mean that they were 1) Austrian, 2) served in the (a?) military, 3) were killed in WW2. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:27, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Just because a people doesn't have a sovereign nation state doesn't mean it's not a people and has never meant it doesn't get a category. Just have a look, for instance, here and here. We have categories e.g. for Polish, Czechoslovak, Croatian, Ukrainian, and Irish people of World War I. We have categories e.g. for Czech, Azerbaijani, and Ukranian people of World War II. We have never tried to force a clean, intersection-free partitioning; we have always gone by what is natural and useful to readers: there are separate categories for Czechs and Czechoslovakians, for Russians and Soviets, and so on. There is also the issue of Austrian emigrants and refugees who enlisted in Allied armies. They identified as Austrians and fought for Austrian independence. Calling these soldiers "Germans" would be absurd; Germans were the guys they shot at. Damvile (talk) 09:22, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose, people in this category were German soldiers when they died but they had been Austrian people for the larger part of their lives. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:58, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Defer to Conversation Below I think my preference would be Category:German military personnel from Austria killed in World War II but that only makes sense if my rename below prevails. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Austrian military personnel of World War II

Nominator's rationale: Merge Austria did not exist during World War II, it was fully integrated with Nazi Germany as the province of Ostmark, former Austrians who served in WW2 did so with German uniforms, in German formations, and fully integrated with personnel from other provinces of Germany. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:16, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Tentatively no, because to the best of my knowledge there were no soldiers in World War II who identified as "Israeli" in the modern sense, who were considered "Israeli" by their fellow grunts, or who have the label "Israeli" retroactively applied to them by modern historians. Israeli statehood was a distant goal during the war, not something that anybody had ever actually experienced.
(There were, of course, soldiers who identified as Jews, and guess what − the Category:People of World War II by nationality does contain a Category:Jewish people of World War II. Do you object to this category on the grounds that Judaism is a religion and not a country? I didn't think so. I am reliably informed that the Jewish experience of Nazi aggression was a tiny bit different than the non-Jewish experience, so it's a meaningful distinction, so the category is helpful − country or not.)
An "Israelis of World War II" category would indeed be anachronistic. An "Austrians of World War II" category is the opposite of anachronistic: it faithfully reflects how people − idiots and intellectuals alike, Austrians as well as non-Austrians − thought, felt, and wrote at the time. The only faction in World War II that denied the existence of an Austrian nation were the Nazis, and even among card-carrying NSDAP members there was occasional dissent about the matter. Given the choice between siding with Hitler's most loyal acolytes or siding with current scholarly consensus, I think Wikipedia should pick the latter. Damvile (talk) 20:34, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • If this is renamed by consensus along the lines of RD, we can nominate the others. A cursory glance shows: Albanian (which fielded irregular armed forces - partisans), American (ok), Australian (ok), Belgian (ok), Brazilian (ok), British (ok), Bulgarian (ok), Canadian (ok), Ceylonese (the category contains both those who were members of the Ceylon Defense Force and members of the British forces), Chechen (should be renamed Category:Soviet military personnel of World War II from Chechnya), Chinese (ok), Croatian (ok), Czechoslovak (some served in various irregular forces or in other nations' forces), Dutch (ok), Filipino (some served in irregular forces, some in the Armed Forces of the Philippines, others in the American forces), Finnish (ok), French (ok), Greek (ok), German (ok), Hungarian (ok), Indian (similar to Ceylonese), Iraqi (ok), Italian (ok), Japanese (ok), Latvian (the only person there fought in the SS on behalf of Germany, not Latvia), Malta (it's not clear whether the only person there fought in a Malta unit in the British forces or in some independent Maltese unit), Mexico (ok), New Zealand (ok), Norwegian (ok), Polish (ok), Romanian (ok), South African (ok), Southern Rhodesian (some served in British forces), Soviet (ok), Spanish (officially neutral, some Spaniards joined the Blue Division and fought for Germany, others joined French forces), Tongan (the only person there fought in the New Zealand forces), Yugoslav (ok). Notably, the use of Soviet, Southern Rhodesian, Ceylonese, Czechoslovak, and Yugoslav are in line with what countries existed at that time (even those not fully independent), and Austria, Chechen seem the only ones not. Also, Irish volunteers seem to be categorized with the armed forces in which they served (chiefly the British), further illuminating that these are categorized by which military the person served, not which passport the person (later) held. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:38, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply "It's simply a Nazi propaganda term and we're on treacherous ground." New Swabia certainly matches your description since it wasn't real in any sense but, unfortunately, the German annexation of Austria was real so our recognition of that isn't buying into Nazi propaganda, it's acknowledging a historic fact. Yes, I would favor renaming other similar categories. RevelationDirect (talk) 23:55, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Books about economic inequality

Nominator's rationale: To broaden the category. Not all the articles are actual physical books and there are other works - films, paintings, websites etc which could sit happily in a broader category. Rathfelder (talk) 18:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Flora of West Africa

Nominator's rationale: These categories appear to be for the same region. DexDor (talk) 18:14, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Housing struggles in Brazil

Nominator's rationale: Only one actual article. No article defining the category. Shanty towns and squats, the sub categories, are not generally regarded as protests or struggles. Rathfelder (talk) 18:13, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nepalese VFX artist

Nominator's rationale: Category is not correctly named according to Wikipedia's naming conventions: it needs to be "artists" rather than "artist" as we declare categories in the plural, not the singular, and it needs to be "visual effects" rather than "VFX" as we don't use abbreviations in category names. It may also be preferable to simply upmerge this to the parent categories Category:Visual effects artists and Category:Nepalese film people, as it's a WP:SMALLCAT for two people and neither of the parents is large enough to really require subcategorization (and no, there isn't yet any established scheme of subcategorizing visual effects artists by nationality, either) -- but if it is kept it definitely needs to be renamed. Bearcat (talk) 14:32, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯxplicit 05:44, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vandalized works of art in Washington (state)

Nominator's rationale: single article contained in this category, seems to exist only because of the Lenin statue article Dennis Bratland (talk) 05:36, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mont Pelerin Society members

Nominator's rationale: delete, being a member of the Mont Perelin Society is a non-defining characteristic, it is often not even mentioned in the article. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- We do not normally allow categories for Society memberships. A lot of them are listed in the main article, including the Board 2008-10, which suggests that the article is not being regularly maintained. I would have expected to find the current board. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:36, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Social economists

Nominator's rationale: delete, we do not have an article on Social economics except as a redirect to Socioeconomics and I think that neither of the articles would belong in Category:Socioeconomics. No need to merge, the articles are already in the tree of Category:Economists by nationality. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:17, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_August_7&oldid=854421703"