Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/Today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion policies for the official rules of this page, and how to do cleanup.

Deletion of a category may mean that the articles and images in it are directly put in its parent category, or that another subdivision of the parent category is made. If they are already members of more suitable categories, it may also mean that they become a member of one category less.

How to use this page

[edit]
  1. Know if the category you are looking at needs deleting (or to be created). If it is a "red link" and has no articles or subcategories, then it is already deleted (more likely, it was never really created in the first place), and does not need to be listed here.
  2. Read and understand Wikipedia:Categorization before using this page. Nominate categories that violate policies here, or are misspelled, mis-capitalized, redundant/need to be merged, not NPOV, small without potential for growth, or are generally bad ideas. (See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Manual of Style.)
  3. Please read the Wikipedia:Categorization of people policy if nominating or voting on a people-related category.
  4. Unless the category to be deleted is non-controversial – vandalism or a duplicate, for example – please do not depopulate the category (remove the tags from articles) before the community has made a decision.
  5. Add {{cfd}} to the category page for deletion. (If you are recommending that the category be renamed, you may also add a note giving the suggested new name.) This will add a message to it, and also put the page you are nominating into Category:Categories for deletion. It's important to do this to help alert people who are watching or browsing the category.
    1. Alternately, use the rename template like this: {{cfr|newname}}
    2. If you are concerned with a stub category, make sure to inform the WikiProject Stub sorting
  6. Add new deletion candidates under the appropriate day near the top of this page.
    1. Alternatively, if the category is a candidate for speedy renaming (see Wikipedia:Category renaming), add it to the speedy category at the bottom.
  7. Make sure you add a colon (:) in the link to the category being listed, like [[:Category:Foo]]. This makes the category link a hard link which can be seen on the page (and avoids putting this page into the category you are nominating).
  8. Sign any listing or vote you make by typing ~~~~ after your text.
  9. Link both categories to delete and categories to merge into. Failure to do this will delay consideration of your suggestion.

Special notes

[edit]

Some categories may be listed in Category:Categories for deletion but accidently not listed here.

Discussion for Today

[edit]
This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024_August_30


August 30

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:Books about the history of San Francisco

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge per WP:NARROWCAT; only two articles. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Palestinian Joint Operations Room

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories Mason (talk) 03:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those are different types of categories, Category:Palestinian Joint Operations Room member groups is a "set", but the other is a topic. I was not sure whether to remove the topic category from the pages when I created the set? But if "overlapping" is a problem, then I can clean that up now, i.e. removing the category from anything that is also in the set? FourPi (talk) 04:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
> removing the category from anything that is also in the set?
Please don't do that. Wait for others to see what the category currently looks like.Mason (talk) 13:26, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete? Merge? Keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:31, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian ministers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I've been working a lot on fixing the capitalizations of the subcategories and aligning the categories in Category:Government ministers by country and I don't see why these would be two separate categories. It makes sense to merge "Canadian ministers" (which isn't the typical Minister of x of Country title) to the target from my point of view instead of throwing all the positions into a deeper category. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Striking my old vote; I explanation below makes sense and I didn't put the two together. Lean oppose with a preference to rename category. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus appears to favor a rename, but some discussion on the rename target would be helpful :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:27, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prejudice and discrimination in fiction

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:XY, this is an unhelpful multi-target category redirect. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:08, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional Bengali Hindus

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:XY, this is an unhelpful category redirect. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Khwarezmid rulers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: More consistent with other articles and categories about the region (like Category:People from Khwarazm)‎. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 18:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films about First Nations people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created category not offering a particularly obvious distinction from its parent. Since every film in Category:First Nations films is about First Nations people by definition, it's not fully clear what would distinguish a First Nations film that belonged here from a First Nations film that didn't. Note as well that Category:Films about Native Americans, the most seemingly equivalent category to this as word order goes, is not a subcategory of a broader "Native American films" parent, but is itself the base category for films with Native American themes, characters and settings, and thus a sibling to Category:First Nations films rather than an uncle.
Also, Category:First Nations films is one of the categories that will likely need renaming per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 26#Category:First Nations, but as the issue has to do with ambiguity arising from the term's increasing usage in Australia, its new name will need to have the words "Canada" or "Canadian" in it somewhere, so reverse merging this the other way isn't the answer to that. But even if and when that does get renamed, this still won't be necessary as a separate subcategory of it. Bearcat (talk) 16:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Houses 1100-1500

[edit]
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: merge, these are mostly isolated single-article categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:43, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Optical microscope components

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I don't see a reason to have both of these categories. Most of the entries in Category:Microscope components are particular to optical microscopes. I would be amenable to deleting Category:Microscope components instead and putting this category in its place. Srleffler (talk) 13:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To put my rationale another way, if properly populated Category:Optical microscope components would suck nearly all the entries out of Category:Microscope components and leave the latter pointless. While there are other kinds of microscope, I doubt there is much need to categorize their components. Better to have one category that covers microscope components in general. An alternative would be to have only a narrower category that is particular to optical microscope components, with components of other types of microscope left uncategorized.--Srleffler (talk) 14:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Microscope components per COMMONNAME, even though they will all be optical. Other microscopes are the exception to this, and they can be placed in sub-categories. We thus avoid a parent container empty of anything except subcategories. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Noblemen

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need an intersection between men and nobility under EGRS? I'd be find with this if it were limited to specific titles. But, as this is coded, I foresee this becoming a mess if we have untitled male nobility by nationality categories. Mason (talk) 12:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1501 establishments in Venezuela

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category:1501 establishments in Venezuela is a single-member category which is unhelpful for navigation (and Category:1500s establishments in Venezuela would have the same problem if that was the upmerge target). Upmerge for now to the century level and delete the categories which will then become empty. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:18, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ukrainian occupation of Russia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Inherently flawed category; categories about military occupations do not contain occupied settlements, as the category can become rapidly out of date, especially in an ongoing war such as this one, and editors should not be expected to add or remove this type of category every time a settlement is captured or by either side. Typically, as is the case with Category:Russian occupation of Ukraine, these categories contain articles about the occupations themselves, not occupied settlements, but for this topic there is only one article pertaining specifically to the occupation, the main article on the only oblast which is partially occupied. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 11:43, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete both?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Beijing Municipal Committee of the Chinese Communist Party

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Three eponymous categories for political committees, each only containing the eponym with no other content at all. As always, everything that exists does not automatically get its own eponymous category just to recursively contain itself -- these would be fine if there were at least four or five spinoff articles to file in any of them besides the eponyms, but are not needed for just one thing. Bearcat (talk) 11:24, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible that given 2 days I could quickly write these entries to keep these categorized? TinaLees-Jones (talk) 11:52, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is the population enough to keep the categories?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Numbers not in Wikidata

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To move where the articles have been recategorized to via the {{Cite The Numbers}} temp. Consistency with Category:The Numbers ID different from Wikidata. Trailblazer101 (talk) 05:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy redirect. There's no need to discuss this, especially since the proposed target "rename" already exists as a category, meaning the only thing that needs to happen is a categoryredirect. Bearcat (talk) 13:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]