Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 25

< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log
< March 24
March 26 >

March 25

edit

Category:Murdered CIA agents

edit
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: rename to Category:Assassinated CIA agents. No consensus to change "agents" to "officers". (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: More accurate. Agents refers to someone recruited to spy, rather than an agent handler referred to as a case officer. This category includes agent handlers who were employees of CIA, rather than people the CIA recruited to spy on their behalf. Longhornsg (talk) 00:37, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 21:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename as nominated or take the alternative?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I like the alternative per marco. Mason (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:American theatre people by populated place

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I think that we should repurpose this category to contain all of the theater people form Cleveland rather than delete it. Mason (talk) 22:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Dramatists and playwrights from Cleveland

edit
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: split and merge. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There's no need to diffuse American dramatists and playwrights by city. Notably this is the _only_ city category. Mason (talk) 22:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Acquitted evangelical leaders

edit
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: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A trivial intersection. User:Namiba 19:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Languages used in recruitment of Central Armed Police Forces of India

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is all kind of language trivia and this is content that is better covered in the relevant articles and in Category:Official languages of India. PepperBeast (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Combined authorities

edit
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: rename to Category:Combined authorities and combined county authorities. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The article Combined authorities and combined county authorities has been amended to include combined county authorities as they are similar to combined authorities. Other articles have been amended to reflect this change. The category should reflect this in the same manner, as it currently includes pages linked to it which are CCAs but appear in this category as CAs. TheBishopAndHolyPrince (talk) 13:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but add "in England" (or is it UK?) for clarity. Johnbod (talk) 14:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main article does not include "in England". The template Template:Combined authorities and combined county authorities does not either. I would therefore propose to leave out "in England" so that it matches with the template, the article and the other text on the category page. 15:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC) TheBishopAndHolyPrince (talk) 15:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categories often need clearer names than articles, as here. Johnbod (talk) 04:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Probably better the other way round as the article is confusing attempting to cover 2 separate things, the article needs splitting not the categories merging. Keith D (talk) 22:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I didn't think he'd last. Johnbod (talk) 04:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A concrete, updated proposal would be very much appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 19:25, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Culture by city in China

edit
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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category excludes all cities in Taiwan, which has a separate category: Category:Culture by city in Taiwan. Therefore, it's not all of 'China', but the PRC specifically. It should therefore also be re-parented from Category:Chinese culture to Category:People's Republic of China culture (now nommed for speedy renaming to Category:Culture of the People's Republic of China per C2D main article Culture of the People's Republic of China). Compare how the parent of Category:Culture by city in Taiwan is Category:Culture of Taiwan, not Category:Chinese culture. NLeeuw (talk) 09:41, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 19:08, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Those who voted for the China–PRC merger never bothered to figure out what to do with topics as such. Topics associated with culture of the PRC, e.g., should certainly be fed to a category similarly named but such scenarios have simply been ignored. 188.211.233.131 (talk) 07:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are topical subcategories for the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Serbia and Montenegro, the United Provinces of the Netherlands (the Dutch Republic), the Orange Free State, the Transvaal Republic, the United Province of Canada, the Kingdom of Great Britain, the Confederate State of America, Pakistan, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, and so on and so forth. Why can't there be subcategories for the PRC? 188.211.233.131 (talk) 16:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • From when on would it be right to equate the Soviet Union with Russia, or Malaya with Malaysia, or England or Great Britain with the United Kingdom, for the purpose of categorisation on Wikipedia? 188.211.233.131 (talk) 08:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:50, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Roman villas in Germany

edit
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: No consensus * Pppery * it has begun... 23:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Only one villa in here, which is unhelpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 03:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Seems useful in connection with Category:Roman villas by country.--Ipigott (talk) 06:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as part of a wider scheme Category:Roman villas by country. Plus others may well be added over time. Johnbod (talk) 14:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The category can be recreated when there are more pages to add. I really tried to find anything that could be added, and turned up nothing. Mason (talk) 16:57, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will note that WP:SMALLCAT has been deprecated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 19:08, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:11th-century Indian medical doctors

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 7#Category:11th-century Indian medical doctors

Personifications in mythology and religion‎

edit
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: keep. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge/delete, it happens so often that deities of these ancient and medieval mythologies are personifications of something that it does not differentiate them at all. Put it more precisely, it is not defining that they are the personification of something, it is only defining what they personify, and Category:Deities by association suffices for the latter purpose. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, if only because most if not all polytheistic deities are personifications of various concepts, and I agree that Category:Deities by association serves that purpose better. AHI-3000 (talk) 22:32, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, these well-populated categories, per nom that "it happens so often that deities of these ancient and medieval mythologies are personifications of something" seems to be a fact and observation in favor of keeping the pages instead of a negative blow to their existence. Personifications are a "thing", not an abstract thought or whim. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:04, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: those categories are sufficiently and clearly defined within their contexts in mythology and folklore, since all of them were/are considered to be inseparable from the things they personify. Personifications have been a thing since a very long time, and are easily recognised and differentiated. Moreover, all those categories have enough pages that merging them would do the opposite of cleaning up. Deiadameian (talk) 10:11, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 21:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: The issue may be the misunderstanding and misuse of the category. Most deities in Greek and Roman myths are not personifications; they embody or possess certain powers (and "associations"), but they are both cultivated as deities and treated as superhuman figures who play roles in narratives (myths). Personifications, however, are properly single-focus divinities such as Virtus or Fides (deity) who embody abstractions such as virtues or ideas; these are not actually "mythological" figures because they have no myths (no stories). They have temples, for example, or serve as icons, as on coins. In that sense they are part of Roman religion, not Roman mythology. I don't know what the nominator means in the phrase "something that it does not differentiate them at all." Medieval personification is also not the same as ancient, since personifications are allegorical or mystical aspects within a monotheistic tradition; they are not deities but are part of what we might neutrally call Christian mythology in a technical sense of narratives that explore universal truths. "Lady Liberty," by contrast, is an example of a secular (or secularized) personification. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:33, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This would very strongly reduce the content of these categories. It is (in quantitative sense) much closer to delete than to keep. I just wonder if it would be maintainable like that. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:43, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Tamil clans

edit
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: merge to Category:Social groups of Tamil Nadu. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:53, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: New category outside existing hierarchies, with only one member page. Category:Clans includes Gurjar clans, Rajput clans and Vellalar clans, but I believe those are the only other categories for "clans" within Category:Social groups of India. – Fayenatic London 17:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Funerals in Pakistan

edit
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: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:14, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary layer now that all contents are in a "State funerals" subcat. – Fayenatic London 16:50, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Latter Day Saint Style Guide Rename

edit
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: keep. No prejudice against a fresh nomination with analysis of what terms reliable sources use. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:53, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: According to the official style guide for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, When a shortened reference is needed, the terms “the Church” or the “Church of Jesus Christ” are encouraged. The “restored Church of Jesus Christ” is also accurate and encouraged. DarthTanner421 (talk) 16:34, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Rob Gronkowski

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:14, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Contains only Super Bowl LIII and Super Bowl LV, insufficient content for WP:EPONCAT. – Fayenatic London 16:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Private space missions

edit
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: withdrawn. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 14:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge and redirect. Space mission redirects to Spaceflight#Terminology. – Fayenatic London 15:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Translators from Quebec

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 2#Category:Translators from Quebec

Category:Alumni of Diocesan Girls' School

edit
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: keep. No prejudice against a nomination of the entire tree. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Typo. Diocesan Girls' School is a girls' school and the word "alumnae" should be used instead. Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 10:40, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We don't use the female version for alumni for categories. Mason (talk) 23:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My impression is that all the names follow the convention for co-ed schools. Mason (talk) 23:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:LGBT people by identity

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 2#Category:LGBT people by identity

Category:Russian comedians by city

edit
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: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge for now. There's only one city in each of these categories, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 01:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_March_25&oldid=1225197309"