Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 19

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Peterkingiron (talk | contribs) at 18:14, 25 December 2023 (→‎Category:History of Chitral). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< December 18
December 20 >

December 19

Category:Anti-anarchism in Japan

Nominator's rationale: This category has near-complete topical overlap with its parent, Category:Anarchism in Japan. The parent topic is sufficient for addressing the history of anarchism (and by extension, anti-anarchism) in Japan. czar 23:06, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Shouldn't it be upmerged then? Mason (talk) 00:14, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They were already in the parent category at the time. But per the below edit, now they'd have to be dual-merged. czar 04:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from the British Central Africa Protectorate

Nominator's rationale: Dual merge. This underpopulated category doesn't help with navigation. Mason (talk) 23:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just delete, there is only two sentences in the whole article about it, while the article is mainly about the subject's stay in China. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I would not oppose deletion, but the alternative is to merge to as category for the successor entities Nyasaland or Malawi. This may be anachronistic, but that hardly matters. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:55, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Emigrants from the Grand Duchy of Tuscany to France

Nominator's rationale: Dual merge, these categories are a small intersection that doesn't help navigation. In the same spirit as Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_May_7#Emigrants_from_former_countries Mason (talk) 22:09, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom, with regret, since Italian is rather anachronistic. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:46, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Italy was not a nation at the time, but the term was in contemporary use, e.g. by British Customs. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional intergovernmental organization personnel

Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT made, predictably, by a blocked user. Unnecessary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Only two subcategories and no top-level articles. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:01, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional nihilists

Nominator's rationale: delete, not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't think it's defining - I can see the idea of someone becoming a villain, criminal or what have you because of a nihilistic perspective, but that in itself is overly vague and incredibly subjective. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional torturers

Nominator's rationale: Delete per WP:NONDEF. This is not defining, or a character could be part of a more defining category (such as executioners, spies, soldiers or what have you). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, it is an aspect of the story, not a defining characteristic of the characters. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the ones I checked had verifiability issues, so this is clearly attracting many inappropriate entries though it may be defining for some fictional characters. (t · c) buidhe 08:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional illeists

Nominator's rationale: Can this possibly be defining? It's generally just a character quirk, if that. It is far too minor to be a defining trait for a fictional character. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:54, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pirates Constructible Strategy Game

Nominator's rationale: Contains only the main article and a redirect to that article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I removed the redirect, because even if the category would be kept the redirect would be unneeded in it. Now it simply becomes a matter of WP:C2F. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:54, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Midtown Manhattan

Nominator's rationale: Not really necessary. Midtown is a collection of neighborhoods in central Manhattan. It isn't a neighborhood itself. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: there were a few people whom I've moved to the appropriate subcategories in Category:People from Manhattan. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:56, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    merge per nom Mason (talk) 22:32, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge as this category now only contains subcategories. However, this is emphatically not per nom, since our article on Midtown Manhattan clearly says that this is also a neighborhood, and "Midtown" refers both to a central business district and to the wider collection of neighborhoods around that district. At some point in the future, a new subcategory may need to be created for people from the central business district, including Charles K. Eagle, but this is outside the scope of this CfD. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC) (Edited. Epicgenius (talk) 21:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC))[reply]
    @Epicgenius, Midtown Manhattan is a district with several neighborhoods within it. Since there are categories for New York City for boroughs Category:People from New York City by borough and neighborhoods Category:People from New York City by neighborhood, it would not make sense to create ANOTHER category for people who live in business districts in New York City (see Category:Central business districts in New York City) when the other two cover them sufficiently. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Omnis Scientia, yes, Midtown Manhattan can be considered to consist of several neighborhoods. This includes the neighborhood roughly bounded by Eighth Avenue, 59th Street, Park/Lexington Avenue, and 42nd Street. With the exception of the blocks surrounding Times Square, this area doesn't really have a separate identity and is known merely as "Midtown Manhattan". This makes up the central business district I was talking about. There is no category for this area, but other midtown neighborhoods such as Hell's Kitchen and Chelsea have their own subcategories.
    Since there is no category for people from the area I was talking about, I am not convinced that "it would not make sense to create another category" for this area. If there exist categories for people from the Upper West Side and Upper East Side (which are larger), I think it makes sense to have a category for people from central Midtown, for greater precision. Epicgenius (talk) 15:46, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Epicgenius, Upper West Side and Upper East Side are explicitly labled as neighborhoods. Meanwhile, Midtown Manhattan's article lists neighborhoods within it. Also, there are unofficial boundaries on maps in the three articles and the Midtown Manhattan one shows it is a collection of neighborhoods. Clearly not the same. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:54, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, but you still haven't addressed my point that there is, at present, no category for people in the central portion of Midtown. I'm sorry, but I'm still not seeing why this particular part of Midtown should not have a category.
    Also, if you are using the maps in the infoboxes as a basis for nominating this category for deletion, it's worth noting that the maps are simplified. Both the UWS and UES have sub-neighborhoods, but these were all consolidated into one shape when the maps were created. The UES contains sub-neighborhoods such as Yorkville and Lenox Hill, while the UWS includes Lincoln Square and Manhattan Valley. Epicgenius (talk) 15:57, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm assuming it is because they partially overlap since neighborhoods tend not to have boundaries. And there are former historic neighborhoods as well. I should also add, I'm going by the Template:Manhattan which lists Midtown as a section and the remaining you have listed as neighborhoods.
    Additionally, not every neighborhood in the New York City has a category for people. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:35, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of festivals in the United States by state or region

Nominator's rationale: Adding to older nom Mason (talk) 19:36, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content, "region" is redundant. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:45, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, but I think renaming it to be Category:Lists of festivals in the United States by state or territory would be capture the broader intent and mean that Puerto rico and other territories could be added if they were to ever exist Mason (talk) 22:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting in light of the late addition.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlastertalk 19:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rename with territory in both instances (it's currently specified only in the music category and not in the lists one). Even if the likes of Puerto Rico and Guam and the US Virgin Islands don't already have lists yet, the category should be consistent with other like categories so that PR and Guam and USVI lists can be added to them, instead of having to go through another round of follow-up renaming, when somebody gets around to creating them. Bearcat (talk) 16:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename both per Bearcat. –Aidan721 (talk) 03:54, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sports coaches

Nominator's rationale: Only category for American tennis coaches by state, contained five pages, three of whom were not from Indiana (and have been categorized accordingly). Better to merge with the above listed categories. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlastertalk 19:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Immigrants to the South African Republic

Nominator's rationale: The political regime isn't defining and effectively this category serves to remove people from more specific categories. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Struben&oldid=1189382104 Mason (talk) 23:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlastertalk 19:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose -- This refers to the Africaans republic also known as Transvaal, existing 1852-1902. This would need to be distinguished from settlers in Cape Colony and Natal, which were British colonies. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Boston sportscasters

Nominator's rationale: Category seems trivial. Additionally, I don't see any similar category for other cities. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Manually merge, much of the content will already be in other subcategories of Category:American sports announcers. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    merge per nom Mason (talk) 22:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom (with caution not to duplicate-categorize people who are already in other subcategories of the target, per Marcocapelle). The thing about broadcasters is that they can move around from one city to another over the course of their careers, so if we catted them for individual city-worked-in, they could potentially have to be bloated into numerous city broadcaster categories. So individual city just isn't a useful point of categorization here. Bearcat (talk) 16:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

X in fiction VI

Nominator's rationale: Conversion from X in fiction to Fiction about X, as this must be a defining trait. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

X in fiction V

Nominator's rationale: Conversion from X in fiction to Fiction about X, as this must be a defining trait. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    support per nom. Mason (talk) 22:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: Should some end with plurals? crises, burglaries, invasions, robberies Fuddle (talk) 03:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:French colonial empire war fiction

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary intermediate layer. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    support per nom. Mason (talk) 22:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Older versions of cartoon characters

Nominator's rationale: Rename per actual contents and for being unnecessarily specific. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional female domestic workers

Nominator's rationale: Dual merge to Category:Fictional domestic workers, and Category:Fictional females by occupation for the subcategories. There is no obvious need for this WP:NARROWCAT created by a blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:45, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional male domestic workers

Nominator's rationale: Dual merge to Category:Fictional domestic workers, and Category:Fictional males by occupation for the subcategories. There is no obvious need for this WP:NARROWCAT created by a blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:43, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No merge unless Category:Fictional female domestic workers is merged as well. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:45, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@LaundryPizza03: I was about to nominate it above, I guess this is a case of jumping the gun slightly :P ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge both per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Works by setting

Nominator's rationale: Setting is inherently an attribute of fiction, so these two categories are redundant. There is a large overlap in the actual contents. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:39, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm worried that nonfiction would get caught up in the merge. Is literally everything in here fiction? ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:49, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd also need to know what exactly the subcategories would be renamed to standardize them. There is an obvious naming disconnect between one and the other. If it is to be moved, the subcategories should be renamed at the same time to avoid a ton of work. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:54, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We should use "Fiction set in X" if we choose "Fiction by setting" as the target, or "Works set in X" if we choose "Works by setting" as the title. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom and undoubtedly further cleanup in the category tree will be needed. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:06, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Turkish arms traffickers

Nominator's rationale: Only two articles, with no other nationality subcategories in the parent. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters by beliefs or ideologies

Nominator's rationale: "Beliefs or ideologies" seems like a random and unnecessary narrow intersection that may also be subjective (Is vegetarian really an ideology or just a health choice?) It is better off being merged as unhelpful. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Fictional characters by attribute; none of these are behaviors except for Category:Fictional vegan and vegetarian characters. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose AHI-3000 (talk) 17:56, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:NOTAVOTE. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Category:Fictional nihilists to Category:Fictional characters
  2. Category:Fictional characters by political orientation to Category:Fictional characters by attribute
  3. Category:Fictional characters by religion to Category:Fictional characters by attribute
  4. Category:Fictional vegan and vegetarian characters to Category:Fictional characters by behavior

Category:21st-century African-American sportspeople

Nominator's rationale: A non-notable intersection. User:Namiba 21:58, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. African Americans in sport and by extension African-American sportspeople is a very notable intersection , whereas diffusion by century is needed because the category is quiet large. If not kept, it should be merged to it Category:21st-century African-American people and Category:21st-century American sportspeople. Mason (talk) 01:58, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This should be deleted because African-Americans are not a unique, identifiable group in the 21st century as they were for much of the 20th. They're the majority in many sports and filly integrated across the board.--User:Namiba 02:14, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How does this jibe with Wikipedia:EGRS? Mason (talk) 15:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I argue that African-American sportspeople in the 21st century do not "constitute a distinct and identifiable group with a specific cultural and political context" as required by EGRS. That's why African-American basketball players was recently deleted. If anything, European-Americans are a more distinct and identifiable group in certain sports in the US i.e. basketball, track and field, and American football.--User:Namiba 14:41, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting would remove these people from Category:21st-century African-American people. Please tell me you're not saying that being African-American in the 21st century is not a defining characteristic Mason (talk) 19:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone who is documentably African-American should be recategorized. As discussed regarding the basketball category, a significant number, likely an overwhelming majority of articles, make no claim on ancestry so simply merging them doesn't help this major WP:BLP issue.--User:Namiba 18:11, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't find this part of the argument compelling. Deleting a category because it isn't explicilty noted doesn't seem like a good practice. Are you going to be doing that recategorization? And how can you only want to do this for 21st century african americans? I don't find the argument compelling either: that black people being in the majority of athletes means that they aren't defining. Wouldn't that argument apply to women in many professions? Should we get rid of 21st-century American women writers, educators etc? Mason (talk) 21:53, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You think we should include information in articles which is not verifiable? User:Namiba 03:09, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You have not answered any of my questions about how this nomination is extremely problematic. Mason (talk) 22:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you rephase your questions more clearly? Because honestly, they're difficult to answer as you have posed them. I think I have clearly explained why this category fails WP:EGRS but I will rephrase. 21st-century African-American sportspeople do not "constitute a distinct and identifiable group with a specific cultural and political context." This is what is expected per our guidelines. No sport openly discriminates against African-Americans in the 21st century. The top performers in many sports, both team and individuals, are African-Americans in the present-day. It would be nearly impossible to write an article about the experiences of African-Americans in sports in the 21st century because their ethnicity is not defining to nearly the same extent as it was in previous periods. As such, this category should be deleted.--User:Namiba 20:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per @Smasongarrison. It helps with navigation. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:15, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:18, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional yogis

Nominator's rationale: Contains only Dhalsim. It can possibly be merged somewhere, but I am not sure where. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:13, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional deserters

Nominator's rationale: Only has one member. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:09, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose AHI-3000 (talk) 17:56, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nations at the Maccabiah

Nominator's rationale: Contain only one category each which are all present in Category:Maccabiah Games competitors. Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge in principle, per nom. But preferably upmerge to all parent categories, because upmerging is automated while downmerge requires manual re-parenting. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jewish organizations based in New Jersey

Nominator's rationale: Such organizations are not (as far as I can tell) divided by state AND is very small. There were two pages which were, in fact, based in New York City which I've moved accordingly. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:26, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional natural scientists

Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT that only contains two smaller categories. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:10, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge we don't need to divide Category:Fictional scientists any further than by occupation. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. By the way, Category:Fictional characters by occupation looks like a gigantic chaotic mess right now. AHI-3000 (talk) 17:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have subcategorized dozens of categories already, so it was an even more chaotic mess before. Though it should be said that a lot of the categories were originally in the right place before they were removed to go into the now-deleted categories and now have to be recategorized. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And I still feel like we need Category:Fictional people in law enforcement as a layer. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:53, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting Category:Fictional characters by occupational types was one thing, but I think we should've kept most of the subcategories within it, especially the subcategories for illegal occupations, judicial/penal system, law enforcement, military, etc. And regarding these scientist subcategories, I think we also at least should've kept "Fictional scientists by field" to contain them. AHI-3000 (talk) 20:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jewish Community Center

Nominator's rationale: Merge category; basically serves the same purpose. WP:OVERLAP probably applies here. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters who break the fourth wall

Nominator's rationale: I do not think this is defining - what about a character who randomly looks at the screen and shrugs as a gag, but is otherwise a normal character who isn't cognizant of the audience? It's simply too vague to distinguish between minor moments of fourth wall breaking and characters who are aware of the audience at all times. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The category only includes characters who break the fourth wall as a defining characteristic, as defining characteristics are the cornerstone of Wikipedia categories. Therefore, the category does not include characters who have only broken the fourth wall once or twice, but instead lists characters who are known and recognised for doing it. I kept this in mind when I originally created the category and added the characters to it.The Editor 155 (talk) 15:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The question's whether "executing a fourth wall break" can even be defining, or if it's a trait of the story itself rather than the character. Perhaps the character has some ability that would let them be aware of the fourth wall, but would belong more in characters who have superhuman powers or the ability to manipulate reality. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for these reasons given by The Editor. AHI-3000 (talk) 18:32, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, Zxcvbnm has a fair point that it is a characteristic of the work, not of the character. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as defining. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional nuclear engineers

Nominator's rationale: Made by blocked user. No clear need for such a specific category compared to just engineers - many of these characters are not primarily known as having a "nuclear", "mining" or "chemical" specialty. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you excluding the other similar subcategories of Category:Fictional engineers? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't found them at that point. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:39, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, not all engineers are the same. I at least think chemical and nuclear engineers could be valid categories, I dunno about mining engineers. AHI-3000 (talk) 20:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Time travel in Star Trek

Nominator's rationale: Must be a defining trait, but Fiction about X is not grammatical in this case. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:18, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

X in fiction IV

Nominator's rationale: Conversion from X in fiction to Fiction about X, as this must be a defining trait. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:16, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Time travel and multiple reality role-playing games

Nominator's rationale: Mixture of time travel and multiverse concepts. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:13, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Multiple time paths in fiction

Nominator's rationale: Undefined mixture of multiverse and time travel concepts; for example, Final Destination and The Minority Report are about precognition, while Category:Time loop is self-explanatory. The entries and subcategories are, or should be, in other branches of Category:Time in fiction or Category:Parallel universes in fiction, but the merge targets are not necessarily the same in all cases. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per nom while adding to any other category that may be relevant. This, however, is overly vague to be a category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:28, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Neurotrauma

Nominator's rationale: Consistency with main article Brain damage; not doing speedy because it is possible that this name is not encompassing of the spinal cord and peripheral nervous system. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose renaming (as the person who originally created the cat) for the reason LaundryPizza mentioned: not all neurotrauma is brain damage. Many of the articles are about spinal cord or other neural injury (TIL Hand of benediction is a thing). Also I'm not sure it'd be accurate to imply that all brain damage is trauma related, e.g. I don't think you'd call stroke or hypoxia neurotrauma. Also, not all trauma necessarily results in damage, e.g. concussion is a transient loss of function. Rather than changing the cat name, maybe we should correct the implication in brain damage that neurotrauma is a synonym. Maybe neurotrauma needs its own article and then it could be the main article instead. But I'd defer to whatever WP:MED thinks. delldot ∇. 11:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose per delldot and a brief review of this paper for definitions. (It's complex that brain damage) Chen, A. Y. and Colantonio, A. (2011). Defining neurotrauma in administrative data using the international classification of diseases tenth revision. Emerging Themes in Epidemiology, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-7622-8-4 Mason (talk) 04:35, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History of Chitral

Nominator's rationale: renominate per WP:IAR, this category was part of a District of Chitral batch nomination, to be split in District in Lower Chitral and District of Upper Chitral, see [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 November 19#Chitral District II]]. However, the split of this particular has not been implemented yet, and can't be implemented. It is not about the history of any district but about the history of a former princely state. This new proposal reflects that. If renamed, it should also be re-parented, see categories in Chitral (princely state) article. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@LaundryPizza03 and Qwerfjkl: courtesy ping to nominator and closer of previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:34, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support based on actual contents. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Chitral's status as a historical and cultural area was not affected by its split into two administrative areas in 2018. Its history is wider than the history of the princely state abolished in 1972. From a pragmatic point of view the two districts created in 2018 share so much history that it would not be meaningful to attempt to split articles relating to their history before 2018 between the two districts.--Mhockey (talk) 21:18, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there was no discussion of it (I was not aware of it), and it needed discussion.--Mhockey (talk) 19:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- The content largely seems to relate to events before 1972. If we can devise a name, it might be feasible to have a category for everything up to the split in 2018. Perhaps Category:Chitral (state) would deal with that, provided a headnote is added, explaining that anything after the split in 2018 should not be placed in the category, but the two for the successor states. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:14, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ancient Greeks by death

Nominator's rationale: Cleaning up the acient greeks by death category. We don't intersect cause of death with nationality for many of these category. If Category:Ancient Greeks who died from disease is kept, it should be renamed: Disease-related deaths in Ancient Greece Mason (talk) 05:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, a comment on each of these categories separately below. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Weak oppose on merging Category:Ancient Greeks by death, we do categorize cause of death by country and this seems to be an approximation of that.
  2. Support renaming Category:Ancient Greeks who were murdered per naming convention.
  3. Support renaming Category:Ancient Greeks killed in battle per naming convention.
  4. Just delete Category:Ancient Greeks who died from disease, death from disease should be container categories by type of disease.
  • Different proposals require different responses. P Aculeius (talk) 14:39, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose: I'll be guided by Marcocapelle on this one—upmerging would delete useful categorization that's consistent with other extant categories.
  2. Weak support: "murder victims" doesn't sound like an ideal formulation, but looks like an improvement over "who were murdered". Perhaps "homicides" might be an alternative.
  3. Oppose. "military personnel" smacks of hypercorrectness and is a jarringly modern and technical description that simply does not belong in classical antiquity. "Killed in action" is 20th-century military jargon for "killed in battle". Keep it simple, and avoid jargon—the current title is fine, and much better than the proposed alternative.
  4. Oppose. "Disease-related deaths" sounds like a statistical category that would include all mentions of plague or pestilence, not just specific persons who died from various diseases, which is what the current title suggests. Marcocapelle may be correct about specific categories for types of disease, but "disease-related deaths" would make the scope of the category vaguer.
Looking over that category, I see that it includes generals, common soldiers, and military engineers, of whom at least the first two could arguably be called "soldiers", but I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to include "admirals", and not sure whether "women in Greek warfare" might include non-fighters. So it may be that "military personnel" was chosen simply because the category creator could not think of any other phrase that would include all of these subcategories. Not sure I can think of a better one—certainly not off the top of my head. However, there's no need to limit "Ancient Greeks killed in battle" to soldiers, or some category of combatants including admirals, Amazon warriors, centaurs, etc. (maybe "warriors" would work for the parent category?). "Ancient Greeks" includes all of the above, and potentially other categories—the only limitations being that they were Greek and that they were slain in battle. So we don't need to have a perfect term covering everyone's roles in warfare. P Aculeius (talk) 22:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fiction about mermaids

Nominator's rationale: I recently closed this discussion to move Category:Fictional mermen and mermaids to Category:Fictional merfolk, and to split other entries into a new category, Category:Fiction about merfolk. However, Category:Fiction about mermaids already exists as the parent to "Fictional merfolk". I'd like to suggest that "Fiction about mermaids" be renamed and the split redirected to the newly renamed category instead. bibliomaniac15 05:51, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Mason (talk) 06:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for the sake of consistency with the Fictional merfolk category. AHI-3000 (talk) 18:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per precedent. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Category is primarily for mermaids, not other merpeople. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support There is a gender-neutral term available. After this, we can probably use WP:CFDS for the rest. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:11, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Suburban Minneapolis School Districts

Nominator's rationale: Not a useful way to categorize school districts with both Minneapolis and Saint Paul, Minnesota being central cities and differing definitions of which suburbs are more affiliated with which city. More useful category would be Minneapolis-Saint Paul area school districts but I'm not sure if that category is even needed. Eóin (talk) 02:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Masonic buildings in Norway

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT (1 article). It's already in the Norway subcategory. User:Namiba 01:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Mason (talk) 06:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for now, without objection to recreate the category when it can be better populated. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:10, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters with neurological or psychological disorders

Propose merging or renaming these related categories into each other:
Nominator's rationale: So we have this set of four categories connected together, which are all about mental/neurological/psychiatric/psychological disorders. I don't have a formal plan yet, but I think we can all agree that at least one or more of these categories are redundant or superfluous. They certainly need to be merged and simplified somehow. AHI-3000 (talk) 02:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Update: per LaundryPizza03's suggestion, my current proposal is to keep Category:Fictional characters with mental disorders, and merge the other three categories into it. Any subcategories that are not about mental disorders should be removed. AHI-3000 (talk) 06:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle: I think that we should model the names after the people with disabilities categories. Mason (talk) 06:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Going by Smasongarrison's suggestion, we should merge all to Category:Fictional characters with mental disorders, which is the fictional counterpart of Category:People with mental disorders, and then purge subcategories that are not for mental disorders. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I like Laundry's suggestion. If the real-life counterpart is about people with mental disorders, then the combined fictional character category should follow a similar naming pattern. AHI-3000 (talk) 18:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters with density control abilities

Propose merging Category:Fictional characters with density control abilities into Category:Fictional characters who can turn intangible
Nominator's rationale: I'm not totally sure yet, but from my observation of these two categories, there's not much difference between them, and there's significant overlap between both categories. If there's proven to be any real difference between them, then I will withdraw this merging proposal and just leave one of these categories as a subcategory of the other one. AHI-3000 (talk) 01:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Uzbeksitan navigational boxes

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: speedy delete. CSD C1, G7 Liz Read! Talk! 03:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Misspelled, duplicate to Category:Uzbekistan navigational boxes. Recategorize contents to the correctly spelled category and delete. DB1729talk 00:18, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, my bad. I've recategorized the contents of the cat with the typo. It should now be deleted. Nataev talk 02:53, 19 December 2023 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_December_19&oldid=1191772830"