Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 August 6

< August 5	August 7 >

August 6

Category:Lists of fictional books

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:Lists of fictional things. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 20:19, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Lists of fictional books to Category:Lists of fictional things

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT, it's unlikely the category will expand to encompass further lists. As such, it's small enough that it can be merged. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:20, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - If merged, UpMerge to all parents. - jc37 23:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An upmerge to the other parent Category:Fictional books is unnecessary, the articles are already in subcategories of it. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:50, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom, @Jc37: did you mean support? –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 08:06, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sorry, I just don't believe in the affirmation "unlikely the category will expand to encompass further lists". There are so many different sorts of books: cook books, atlases, catalogues, spell books, advice literature... and all could have fictional lists. --Just N. (talk) 12:48, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Given reason is not convincing. --Just N. (talk) 12:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, if ever we have 5 lists of fictional books we can recreate the category, but that is not going to happen soon. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge This clearly fails the smallcat guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2021 (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:Lists of fictional robots

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. bibliomaniac 1 5 04:41, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Lists of fictional robots to Category:Lists of fictional things

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT, it's unlikely the category will expand to encompass further lists. As such, it's small enough that it can be merged. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:11, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - If merged, UpMerge to all parents. - jc37 23:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An upmerge to the other parent Category:Robotics lists is unnecessary, both articles are already in that category. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom, @Jc37: did you mean support? –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 08:06, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge We do not need a cluttering of lists categories for just a few lists.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:57, 20 August 2021 (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:Medieval Flemish people

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. It seems that the target categories are also in need of a discussion of their own, but for now there seems to be a consensus to perform this particular merge. bibliomaniac 1 5 04:41, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Medieval Flemish people to Category:People of medieval Belgium
Propose merging Category:Medieval Flemish women to Category:Women of medieval Belgium

Nominator's rationale: merge, ethnic differentiation between Flemish and Walloon people was not applicable in the Middle Ages. Flemish just meant from the County of Flanders, for which we already have a category. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:05, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Some of these people have no close connection to Flanders. Adeliza of Louvain was from the Landgraviate of Brabant and had a step-brother who served as Count of Flanders. Brabant has never been an area exclusive to the Flemish people, as reflected by the modern area of Walloon Brabant. Dimadick (talk) 05:35, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Alt~~ disperse to Category:People of the Burgundian Netherlands or to Category:People of the Habsburg Netherlands as appropriate. There was no such thing as "Belgium" in the Middle Ages. Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:40, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we'd better leave the merge of the target to a separate discussion. Dispersing to Category:People of the Burgundian Netherlands or to Category:People of the Habsburg Netherlands is not applicable anyway, since the content of the categories is pre-Burgundian. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:56, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alt 2 Delete all 4 (nominated and their targets). Instead, disperse to Category:10th-century people of the Holy Roman Empire etc and to Category:10th-century French people etc as appropriate. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:56, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I still think we'd better leave the merge of the target to a separate discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:43, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was no such thing as medieval Belgium. These articles need to be dispersed. Rathfelder (talk) 19:57, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Reverse merge We should not be categorizing people by an entity that did not exist until 1830 hundreds of years before it came into being. What next Category:Medieval Yugoslav people and Category:Medieval Czechoslovak people? I am 100% convinced such categories would exist if A-Wikipedia had been started before 1990, or B-Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia had survived to the present. Wikipedia is drowning in presentism, it is bad enough that 1989 is the largest birth year category, we need to stop trying to impose the present on the past. I am shocked we do not have Category:Medieval Israeli people.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:00, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse merge would be anachronistic too. Medieval Flemish people were people from the county of Flanders, not from Brabant or Liege. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:35, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which means after we reverse merge it, we should perge those from Brabant and Liege.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:27, 23 August 2021 (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:Burials at al-Baqi' cemetery

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 August 14#Category:Burials at al-Baqi' cemetery

Category:Indian yoga gurus

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 August 25#Category:Indian yoga gurus