Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 March 17

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< March 16 March 18 >

March 17

Category:Snakes by taxonomic synonyms

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 as now empty. – Fayenatic London 09:06, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
...
Nominator's rationale: These categories are very unusual - e.g. (1) they consist almost entirely of redirects (the few other pages (Petscan) are a mix of articles, SIAs and dabs and are in appropriate other categories), but aren't named "Redirects ...", (2) they have "by" in their name, but aren't container categories, (3) no other type of animal/plant has such categories.
Note: Many of the redirects might be valid members of Category:Redirects from alternative scientific names of reptiles, but do not currently have the template that would put them in that category.
Note: I recently removed several pages from these categories (e.g. an article about wasps). DexDor (talk) 21:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment not sure what is gained by cobbling together all snake redirects. Many people's biographies have redirects from alternate spellings (see all the synonyms for Muammar Gaddafi), but a category of them all doesn't seem to aid people find an article. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This CFD isn't proposing any cobbling together (it's about deleting some very unusual categories that are not like normal categories for redirects) and anyway categories for redirects often are large (e.g. Category:Redirects from alternative scientific names of insects has many thousands - readers are not expected to use such categories so that doesn't matter). And, redirects do not need to be categorized. DexDor (talk) 06:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - a problem is that
    Oculi (talk) 04:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Heleionomus is listed on the Python article; it's in the (collapsed) synonyms section of the taxobox; you need to uncollapse to see it. However, there are other redirects not listed in the respective articles.
Bothrochilus albertisii.Plantdrew (talk) 15:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
Ah, so you are recategorising them like this. Seems legit. – Fayenatic London 23:55, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete eventually, but wait until the members of the categories are placed in Category:Redirects from alternative scientific names of reptiles. These redirects basically haven't been touched since 2007. Some of them may need to be retargetted as lumping/splitting of species over the last 13 years will have affected what is considered a synonym of what. I'll work on categorizing as alternative scientific names and retargetting as necessary, but I'm not sure I'll finish before this CfD would normally close. Plantdrew (talk) 15:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's no rush (I've had these cats on a CFD to-do list for years). There are over 2000 redirects in these categories. DexDor (talk) 19:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Categories like that are normally populated by a template òn the redirect pages (is there a bot that could convert them?). Having said that I wouldn't object to these categories being renamed/merged like that. DexDor (talk) 19:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I agree that there doesn't appear to be much point in reader-side categorization of redirects - especially as we also have talk page categories such as Category:Redirect-Class amphibian and reptile articles. DexDor (talk) 19:24, 18 March 2020 (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:Eurasian Americans

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 Timrollpickering (Talk) 14:29, 25 March 2020 (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:Boa Python films

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 Timrollpickering (Talk) 14:30, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overly-specific category using non-standard syntax. Think we can merge this into an existing category easily enough. DonIago (talk) 19:20, 17 March 2020 (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:Tasmanian criminals

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:Criminals from Tasmania. – Fayenatic London 09:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category name is in conflict with category description.

The name indicates the nationality of subjects, whereas the description disregards the nationality of subjects. There may be a better (shorter) name than my proposed target. Captainllama (talk) 14:18, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

...
response Excuse me JarrahTree? I'm not taking issue with any editors, what on Earth makes you think that? Would you please explain your comment? Captainllama (talk) 04:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC) [edit] If you are going to contribute please address the issue rather than imposing your own agenda. This nothing to do with Australia. This is nothing to do with crime. This is a naming issue, this is where we discuss category names, this is the appropriate place for this discussion. The people in category "Peruvian ventriloquists" must be both Peruvian and ventriloquists. A Japanese ventriloquist who happens to have performed in Peru doesn't qualify. Equally, an Australian who commits a crime in Tasmania should not be categorised as a Tasmanian criminal, yet the category description allows this. Captainllama (talk) 05:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
reply to response - apology it has encouraged a reply like that, it wasnt intended to specify that way - it was suggesting the whole australian project does have other similar titled categories - to simply apply the proposal to one of the collection was more of the intention of the comment - maybe cfd is indeed the place, but to take a singular item when others exist seems a bit short sighted - however - Marcocapelle's comment below suggest all of this is redudant in a manner of speaking. JarrahTree 07:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, a country subdivision as the place of a crime is a non-defining characteristic of a criminal. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Renaming the category this way is not necessarily an improvement and would put it out of synch with all other states/territories within Category:Prisoners and detainees of Australia by jurisdiction where the phrasing "Category:Persons who have committed crimes in XX" is not used. Better would be to just delete it (thank you for pointing out the irregularity here) and moving the 3 pages included to other related categories. Eg. Bryant also appears in 2 other subcategories here (so just delete); Avery could be moved to Prisoners and detainees of Tasmania; and Howlett to Prisoners and detainees of Tasmania as well. Thanks. JabberJaw (talk) 23:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, there is no problem with the name of the category per se, just the contradiction between the name and the description. I brought it here to discuss but the Twinkle procedure apparently required a suggested rename. I attempted a name to fit the description but in view of "the place of a crime is a non-defining characteristic of a criminal" it is the description which needs to be ditched, and in view of CFD 2011 the category should be renamed "Criminals from Tasmania", per "Category:Criminals from Western Australia" etc. So:
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/2020_March_17&oldid=951066500"