Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 June 24

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< June 23 June 25 >

June 24

A few more award categories

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/merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per
WP:NONDEF, per previous discussion and many discussions before. In the first couple of categories there are in particular a lot of bishops, otherwise the categories are mostly of heads of state, nobility, ministers, generals etc. to whom the granting of the order is merely a gesture. Some categories are not only for heads of state, politicians etc. but still there are not defining at all, people in these categories are notable for something more defining. Upmerge the eponymous articles to their country parents. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:09, 24 June 2015 (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:Broadcasters, actors and facilitators on Channel 10 (Israel)

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. MER-C 12:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not an appropriate or useful category, as all members of this category will or should already be linked at Channel 10 (Israel). General Ization Talk 17:37, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per
    WP:NONDEFINING. We don't normally categorize actors by the TV shows or movies they've appeared in, nor the characters they've played, and nor should we categorize something as trivial as the channel on which an actor or broadcaster currently (or formerly) appears. --Animalparty-- (talk) 18:37, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete per
    WP:CSD#G5 for having been created by a banned user. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:50, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
On that basis, I depopulated the category since only the banned user had populated it. General Ization Talk 19:15, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename and purge -- the present category is too broad: appears to offend against
    WP:OC#PERF. However we do have categories for media people by the company they work for, normally employees of the comnpany. Category:Channel 10 (Israel) People would seem to be a valid category. Those who merely appear occasionally for one performance or a series should not appear. I am sorry that the nom should have seen fit to empty the category, "out of process" before nominating it, even where a banned user is involved. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:54, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete as not useful and also created by a banned user. Kierzek (talk) 01:05, 30 June 2015 (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:Science and technology magazines

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The different types of audience deserve sub-categorization.
Fgnievinski (talk) 17:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Oppose It will be very difficult if not impossible to define each category clearly. Just one example among many is the Scientific American, which is directed towards a lay public but also has many academics reading it. The recently created Category:Popular science magazines should be merged back into this one, as it suffers from the same definition problem. The current cat is not unwieldy, but if it is considered too large, a more useful approach could be to place more articles in subcategories. Existing subcats could be slightly refocussed to help with this. For example, the Category:Astronomy magazines could be renamed to "Astronomy and space magazines" and then, for example, Ad Astra and Sound & Vision (magazine) could be placed in it. Many entries in the main cat actually belong in already existing subcats (Popular Astronomy (US magazine) and Planetary Report both also should go in the astronomy magazines cat), so that the problem probably seems larger than it is. If one of these magazines is clearly directed towards a professional instead of simply a lay audience, it could additionally be placed in the Category:Professional and trade magazines. --Randykitty (talk) 17:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fgnievinski (talk) 18:41, 24 June 2015 (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:Agricultural magazines

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, though there does seem to be consensus that the current name is incorrect. A re-nomination is probably in order. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:58, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: some members are newspapers, not magazines (e.g.,
Fgnievinski (talk) 14:49, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Actually,
    Fgnievinski (talk) 05:31, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Oppose "serials" as unfamiliar to most, & so confusing (see Serial). I'd question whether things like "The Western Livestock Journal is a weekly livestock industry newspaper..." need to be treated as newspapers anyway. Johnbod (talk) 17:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@
Fgnievinski (talk) 19:41, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
But a couple of levels up, the whole magazines category is in Category:Periodicals. Johnbod (talk) 17:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@
Fgnievinski (talk) 19:41, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
It seems like this category is a mix of magazines and newspapers. We could just name it like that: Category:Agricultural magazines and newspapers. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:53, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Might be best. Not worth splitting, & the ambiguous "serials" should be avoided. Johnbod (talk) 19:56, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question I just don't hear the word "serials" in common usage in American English. Is it a more common term in other regions. RevelationDirect (talk) 12:36, 26 July 2015 (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:Children Stars Figures in Israel

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. MER-C 12:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Aside from its creation by a banned user (
WP:CSD#G5), the category does not have any clear criteria for inclusion. Presumably it might include Israeli child actors, but people not conforming to that criterion have been added (by the banned user). WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:29, 24 June 2015 (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:People from New Eagle, Pennsylvania

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:13, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per
WP:SMALLCAT. Small community with just 3 entries. ...William 11:23, 24 June 2015 (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:Recipients of the Canadian Centennial Medal

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. MER-C 12:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This another
WP:NON-DEFINING award recipients category. According to Canadian Centennial Medal "Some 29,500 medals were issued". DexDor (talk) 06:00, 24 June 2015 (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:Lepus californicus

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. MER-C 12:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is redundant and unnecessary per
Lepus californicus. While conceivably there may some day be articles for each of the dozen or so geographic races or subspecies, I don't see that as likely to occur anytime soon, and until anything like that happens, this category does not serve to group similar articles, nor facilitate navigation. Note that none of the categories containing Category:Lepus californicus contain categories for species, rather more specific geographic or topical categories, with species articles being categorized in the relevant categories. --Animalparty-- (talk) 02:45, 24 June 2015 (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:Science 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: do not split. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: need to mirror distinction among Category:Scientific works, Category:Works about science, and Category:Cultural works about science‎. Current subcategories of of Category:Science books seem to belong to Category:Scientific books, while member pages seem to be Category:Popular science books. Proposal:
Category:Books about science Category:Works about science
Category:Scientific books Category:Scientific works
Category:Scientific literature
Category:Popular science books Category:Cultural works about science‎

Fgnievinski (talk) 01:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

  • I just removed the engineering magazines subcategory from the parent
    Fgnievinski (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Now, extending the analogy further, you'd think that
    Fgnievinski (talk) 18:52, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
I still think that splitting into "popular" and "academic" involves the editor expressing a POV. In some cases, it will be obvious which a book belongs to, but not always. The same question arises as to whehter a book is a "Textbook". Peterkingiron (talk) 15:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@
Fgnievinski (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • @
    Fgnievinski (talk) 04:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Agreed; I've tagged the parent cat
    Fgnievinski (talk) 03:03, 9 July 2015 (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:Presidential museums in Kansas

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: double upmerge as nominated. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:16, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: O-CAT. Only one article in this category, which can be merged to its parent cats Category:Presidential museums in the United States and Category:Biographical museums in Kansas

Am also nominating the following cats with 1 or 2 pages in them, each of which can easily be upmerged:

p 01:24, 24 June 2015 (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/2015_June_24&oldid=1138408839"