Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 1

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aidan721 (talk | contribs) at 00:07, 2 March 2024 (→‎Category:Indoor ice hockey venues: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< February 29
March 2 >

March 1

Category:PFK Nurafshon players

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category for the outdated name of the same football club. BlameRuiner (talk) 08:27, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Buxoro FK players.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 22:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Victims

Nominator's rationale: Calling it this risks going into WP:SHAREDNAME territory. It's best to make it a pure container category and purge what does not apply. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional convicts transported to Australia

Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT, too specific to be necessary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional penal labourers

Nominator's rationale: Made by blocked account, far too specific to be necessary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional prisoners and detainees

Nominator's rationale: Such a high level of specificity is not required for the fictional category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indoor ice hockey venues

Nominator's rationale: The overwhelming number of venues defined by being a venue for ice hockey are indoors so this distinction is unnecessary. While outdoor stadiums are occasionally used as venues, they are not defined by hosting an occasional ice hockey event. User:Namiba 17:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:National Hockey League first-round draft picks

Nominator's rationale: The round in which a player is selected in a draft is a non-defininig and trivial characteristic. The most recent discussion on this category drew no participants in 2022. User:Namiba 15:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. None of the other U.S. sports leagues seem to have this category. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:32, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The category has been around from 2006, and being a first-round draft pick is defining. SportingFlyer T·C 23:14, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @SportingFlyer, I'd say it isn't that defining. Most of these players are defined by the team and what amount of success they have had, not which round they were drafted in. A large number first draft picks (regardless of sport) don't make it big. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:24, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I still disagree - it doesn't mean you're a star, but it can and does define how people view your career. I don't think it's necessarily the case that it is defining for every single sport but I think it is for hockey. SportingFlyer T·C 15:37, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Being a first-round draft pick in a major sports league is a defining quality and one that's often discussed in coverage. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. First overall draft picks are defining. However, other first-round draft picks are not primarily known for this fact several years into their career. It should be elaborated upon in the article of course, but not made into a category. Place Clichy (talk) 00:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep per Hey man im josh. Success or a lack of it is often noted in tandem when the player was drafted, especially for first-round picks. Let'srun (talk) 18:50, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Listify by team per Category:Major League Baseball first-round draft picks. –Aidan721 (talk) 17:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete / Listify, reasonable arguments for it being an important distinction from other draft rounds - but is probably more suitable as a list (which probably already exists?... hmm, doesn't seem to, but would be fairly easy to compile from the year draft articles) and could be linked to for each player via 'See also' or similar if too awkward to insert naturally into body of article. Crowsus (talk) 23:31, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia categories named after schools in Bangladesh

Nominator's rationale: All contain only an eponymous article and alumni category. All alumni categories are in Category:Alumni by secondary school in Bangladesh. –Aidan721 (talk) 17:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archelaus I of Macedon

Nominator's rationale: The main article has been moved to Archelaus of Macedon following a technical request, Special:Permalink/1207061825 with the following rationale: Remove unnecessary parentheses/disambiguator: There is no Archelaus II (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Archelaus_II_of_Macedon), consequently the regnal number for this page is unnecessary. Also, the majority of modern historians do not assign a number to Archelaus. – robertsky (talk) 22:00, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: it's likely that the distinction is one used by modern historians, not ancient ones. However, even if only a minority of scholars use "Archelaus I" and "Archelaus II", or the distinction is made only occasionally, due to "Archelaus II" being better known as "Aeropus II", the distinction is useful when context is unavailable—as it is for the titles of categories, which necessarily can't indicate which of two kings called "Archelaus" are intended, or whether both are included. If you have to visit the category or its contents in order to find that out, then perhaps the title isn't clear enough. So the current names may be preferable. It may be worth revisiting the move of "Archelaus I" to "Archelaus", but that's a separate discussion. P Aculeius (talk) 13:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename as nominated for now. The categories can always be renamed again, but given nobody has formally objected to the rename of the article this seems like a fairly clear C2D case. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Egyptian cricketers

Nominator's rationale: This category doesn't make any sense! It is a nationality category, yet none of those populating this category were Egyptian. They are all British officials who happened to play for a scratch team representative of Egypt. So can we keep the category as a team category? Not really, as we don't categorise teams who played minor matches (the Egyptian team played no first-class matches). So it makes little sense to keep this category, as it is misleading. AA (talk) 14:38, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There is little ambiguity that these were players of a representative team called Egypt in the British colonial cricket system. However, there was also a "Western" population in Egypt for many decades (many centuries in the case of Greeks and Italians), and it is borderline to retroactively consider that these people did not exist or that they were not Egyptian. Place Clichy (talk) 15:35, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • At second glance, the main article is indeed clear that few players on this team were actually from the local British population and that most were military on relatively short postings there. A renaming to Category:Egypt international cricketers would probably work better. Place Clichy (talk) 23:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the relevant articles can simply link to Egypt national cricket team if their match is worth mentioning at all. Expatriates in Foo are as a rule not Fooian. jnestorius(talk) 16:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete they are not Egyptian, even if playing for an Egyptian team. Also the Egyptian team was a minor team, and so it's WP:NOTDEFINING for most of them anyway. If kept, should be renamed to e.g. Category:Cricketers who represented Egypt national cricket team or Category:Egypt international cricketers. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep/purge. Nationality is a defining feature for individuals. If not kept, the category needs to be manually merged to Egyptian sportspeople etc. Mason (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • They're not Egyptian though. They're British people who played for an Egyptian team (at the time when Egypt was a British colony). And so they shouldn't be upmerged to Egyptian sportspeople category. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:11, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Good point, so it sounds like manual merging would need to happen regardless Mason (talk) 14:56, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps rename to Category:British cricketers for Egypt. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's common for players today to play for countries that aren't of their birth. Desertarun (talk) 00:27, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But they do obtain citizenship of that country in order to play, through either a relative (Kevin Pietersen - English mother), or by moving there and qualifying through residency. These guys were all there on a short-term basis acting for the British state. They were never Egyptian subjects. AA (talk) 14:36, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Different times have different rules. Desertarun (talk) 17:10, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Which is why they should be treated differently. Kevin Pietersen is a British citizen, but most if not all of the people in this category for people from 19th century Britain were not naturalised Egyptian citizens. So listing them as Egyptian cricketers when they are not Egyptians is wrong. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:29, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's my point, in the past nationality was much more fluid. So imposing our current nationality rules onto previous generations is nonsensical. When they played for the Egypt team they were Egyptian. Desertarun (talk) 19:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In this time (1st half of the 20th century), Egypt had a significant local British population. I don't think that they had any kind of Egyptian citizenship comparable to that of autochtonous Egyptians, but rather were considered British subjects in another corner of the Empire. Place Clichy (talk) 14:47, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep These cricketers appeared for the Egyptian national cricket team even if they were not of Egyptian nationality. Probably needs to be renamed to be more specific, but it's a valid quirk in the larger categorisation scheme. SportingFlyer T·C 21:40, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:21, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:52, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Syrian Turkmens

Nominator's rationale: The previous nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 13#Category:Syrian Turkmen appears flawed to me. The individual biographies should be moved down into the existing set category subcat Syrian Turkmen people. The topic category should be renamed back to match the main article Syrian Turkmen, which already uses that term as a plural without adding "s", for Syrians of Turkish origin. IIUC, "Turk-men" is already a plural, referring to people of Turkish origin, whereas "Turkmens" are people from Central Asia. – Fayenatic London 21:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pinging previous participants Place Clichy, Omnis Scientia, HouseBlaster. – Fayenatic London 21:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support nom. If this is the best way to categorize this group of people then I have no objection. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:02, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: closely related article Iraqi Turkmen is a lot more detailed on how the term Turkmen/Turkoman/Turcoman came to describe this group in Iraq and Syria, instead of just Turk. That article does use the plural Turkmens, although inconsistently. Note that the etymology comes from the transcription of an Arabic suffix, and not from English man/men as in e.g. Norseman/Norsemen. Neither article suggests that Turkman is the singular. The associated category is Category:Iraqi Turkmens. Article Turkmen Mountain consistently uses Turkmen for the singular and Turkmens for the plural. I agree with moving biographies though, which I did as it does not require CfD. There are plenty of articles about ethnic groups which use the singular or the adjective as a title, so I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case here. Place Clichy (talk) 00:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Place Clichy's explanation is very plausible. Other European languages preserve "men" in their translation of Turkmenistan while men is not the plural of man in those languages. I suppose in English "men" in Turkmenistan is also unrelated to the plural of man. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:08, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:52, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Educational institutions in Koyra Upazila

Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT. A dual merge is not needed since both pages are in Category:Schools in Khulna District. –Aidan721 (talk) 15:12, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Artificial neural networks

Nominator's rationale: Artificial neural network has been moved to Neural network (machine learning), so the category should move to match. Also, if I'm not mistaken the title should be singular since this is articles related to the concept of neural networks and not articles about specific neural networks. Justin Kunimune (talk) 14:36, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Neural circuits

Nominator's rationale: The pages related to computational and biological neural networks have recently been rearranged to clarify the terminology. The articles now use "neural network" and "neural circuit" to mean two different things, and there is now a page for Neural network (biology). Since this category is a subcategory of "Neural network" and contains pages like Cultured neuronal network and Large-scale brain network, it seems logical that its main article should be Neural network (biology) and not Neural circuit. Justin Kunimune (talk) 14:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Female political office-holders

Nominator's rationale: rename for consistency. By far most subcategories in this tree use "women" but there are also still a few using "female", especially in the top of the tree. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion in which merging in opposite direction was successfully opposed. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There is still no consensus on whether to prefer "women" or "female" as an adjective in catnames. The fact that a proposal to rename a random sampling of catnames from "women" to "female" was rejected, does not mean that all of the sudden "women" has now definitively won the argument for all of eternity. ;) NLeeuw (talk) 22:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional prison escapees

Nominator's rationale: There's too much overlap between fugitives and prison escapees. While prison escapees was the older category, I'm not sure it matters where they escaped from, just that they're a fugitive. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Iraqi coppersmiths

Nominator's rationale: Because these categories are so small, I suggest renaming coppersmiths to the parent category (Iraqi metalsmiths) and merging. Mason (talk) 14:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Too narrow an intersection. –Aidan721 (talk) 15:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tolkien fandom

Nominator's rationale: No clear scope. A mix of biographical and non-biographical articles against WP:COPSEP, along with a few WP:SHAREDNAME articles, some fanfiction, some WP:OCASSOC, etc, really not sure what is going on here. Doesn't seem to be WP:DEFINING. WP:TNT. --woodensuperman 10:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Burmese Rakhine people

Nominator's rationale: rename, Rakhine people are naturally living in Myanmar so adding Burmese is redundant. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:52, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Quantum Leap

Nominator's rationale: The category is used for both TV series. Gonnym (talk) 08:35, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, as there is a Quantum leap disambiguation page. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Am I missing something here? The category's capitalized, while the DAB page isn't. This appears to be in the right place. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Quantum Leap redirects to the disambiguation page. The title is still ambiguous. –Aidan721 (talk) 15:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anti-Zionism in South Korea

Nominator's rationale: Currently empty, but it's because I removed the only two pages that were in it. Neither page had anything in the body to support the idea that they're actively anti-zionist. toobigtokale (talk) 08:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Which articles were they? Marcocapelle (talk) 10:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • toobigtokale, if you emptied the category, which is discouraged, why did you start a week-long discussion at CFD? You could have tagged the category CSD C1. Liz Read! Talk! 17:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

People of Karen descent

Nominator's rationale: merge, only one or two articles in each of these categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Karen refugees

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Thai people of Karen descent

Nominator's rationale: rename, for the subjects of these articles it is not just that their ancestors were Karen, rather they are Karen people themselves. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. I was recently trying to categorise a Karen person from Thailand, and found this category name a bit of a mismatch for the actual scope. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Burmese Chin people

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer since all Chin people are from Myanmar. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:31, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - not strictly correct rationale, there can theoretically be pages about an Indian Chin or an American Chin person but none currently exist/ those can be subcategories later. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 14:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chin Leaders

Nominator's rationale: delete, only one article in the category, "Chin leader" is not a defining characteristic of it (it concerns a Baptist minister), and the article is already in Category:Burmese Chin people. If kept, rename to Category:Chin leaders. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - agreed with the vague definition of a "leader" per nom. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 14:52, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:South Korean female idols

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NARROWCAT & WP:OVERLAPCAT. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 04:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:L'Osservatore Romano

Nominator's rationale: There is no need to have a category for only one single article. Veverve (talk) 21:59, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As of relisting, the contents are L'Osservatore Romano and Category:L'Osservatore Romano editors‎ (which itself has three members).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The subcategory hasn't been nominated, so we are still talking about a single article. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indian superhero films by decade

Nominator's rationale: Extremely redundant, as the categories 1980 superhero films, 1990s superhero films, 2000s superhero films and 2010s superhero films and Indian superhero films exist. We don't have similar categories for American superhero films, even though there have been countless since Iron Man 2 (2010). Kailash29792 (talk) 04:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to all parents. Thank you for nominating as a whole. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:32, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I don't understand why these categories should be considered redundant, let alone extremely so. Create the categories for American superhero films if you wish.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:46, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Do we really need "1990s Indian superhero films" which has only two entries? The parent categories aren't so insanely overpopulated that they need such further subdivision. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe 1990s Indian superhero films has only 2 entries so far but the other do indeed contain a lot of films (if the number of articles is the issue). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:27, 26 February 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) 04:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge and delete make sure all movies are in their decade film category and superhero film category and then purge. SportingFlyer T·C 08:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:17th-century Japanese botanists

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one person in each of these categories, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 03:07, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Japanese bands

Nominator's rationale: Redundant with Category:Japanese musical groups. Xfansd (talk) 02:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Xfansd! I am the one who created the category "Japanese Bands". I did try to search for "Japanese Musical Groups", but I believe I typed it wrong and couldn't find it, that's why I created "Japanese Bands". Knowing now that "Japanese Musical Groups", I do believe that "Japanese Bands" should be deleted. I apologize. Macacaosapao (talk) 03:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rhodesian diarists

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one person in this category, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 01:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People of Inca royalty descent

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection, as far as I'm aware, we don't have other categories at the intersection of royal decent and ethnicity. Mason (talk) 01:27, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Spanish people of Mapuche descent

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one person in this category, which isn't helpful for navigaiton Mason (talk) 01:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mapuche farmers

Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. There's only one redirect in here, and it's already in the potential merge targets. Category:21st-century farmers Category:21st-century Mapuche people. Mason (talk) 00:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mapuche police officers

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This is a small category of one redirect, which isn't very helpful for navigation. They're already in Category:21st-century_Mapuche_people Mason (talk) 00:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Topical history overviews

Nominator's rationale: What makes something a topical overview? This category doesn't have clear boundaries. Relevant recent CFD: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_February_22#Category:History_of_computing_topical_overviews Mason (talk) 00:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American people by populated place

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag all of the subcategories as described above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting twice in a row so that the automated tagging will work (it tags for the current UTC date, and it is a royal pain in the rear to do previous days). This discussion has only been truly relisted once.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support alter merge per Aiden Mason (talk) 00:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, merge all. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, merge. I hate the term "populated place" but it makes more sense to have these in one category than several different ones. SportingFlyer T·C 08:35, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Merge all per Aidan. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_March_1&oldid=1211326735"