Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 November 28

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) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:14, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Music pages for manual succession box removal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Empty category, underlying bot stopped running when it's operator died in 2019 * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:09, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Well, I'm sorry to hear that. To his credit, I believe the project that created the need for the category has been long completed and the category is no longer necessary. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:56, 30 November 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.

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. bibliomaniac15 05:28, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Chilean popular singers to Category:Chilean pop singers

Nominator's rationale: No definition offered, but I think they are the same thing. I dont think we have any other "popular singers" categories. Rathfelder (talk) 10:48, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. I can't see why there should be two categories unless pop and popular are terms used differently in Chile. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:10, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Chile is a very special scenery: supporters of the current right-wing government who'd prefer pop music and opponents (a broad movement of people who just achieved by a won national referendum to have a changed, renegotiated constitution) who'd prefer popular music (not just an economical sum of music sales; poorer people can't always afford market participation). So, No it's not just the same (as it would be in the US or UK). --Just N. (talk) 21:40, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I didnt see anything in the articles to support this distinction. Rathfelder (talk) 20:51, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• If I understand this correctly, the political discussion is just about the name of the type of music, not about whether the two are the same sort of music. So merging or reverse merging could still apply. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:47, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I dont object to reverse merging in principle, but it would give us a category unlike that in any other country, and I am not convinced that the music or the singers are unique. There are certainly other countries where music is politically controversial. Rathfelder (talk) 22:15, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose merge, just delete. These singers are of various genres; "popular" seems rather to indicate that they were top sellers of their times. – Fayenatic London 15:02, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• That may be a possibility too. Articles in the category mention e.g. Bolero and Latin pop as the relevant music genres. It is not clear whether that belongs to pop music. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:21, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 20:59, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:59, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Fayenatic london. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 19:36, 8 December 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.

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:Eastern Cape Division cases. bibliomaniac15 05:28, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Transkei Supreme Court cases (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Pointless category, only has a single item, and is highly unlikely to be expanded beyond this.

• Full Upmerge -- This concerns a case in the court of a defunct semi-independent statelet, since re-amalgamated into Eastern Cape. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:46, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Category:Eastern Cape Division cases only, there is nothing in the article that justifies merging to Category:Transkei. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:19, 6 December 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.

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:

soft delete (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:21, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

• Propose deleting Category:Mike Tyson Mysteries (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Has only two pages (the main article and a list of episodes) and unlikely to every have more. Trivialist (talk) 14:20, 28 November 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.

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) User:力 (powera, π, ν) 19:37, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

• Propose deleting Category:Video games set on fictional planets (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale:

• Oppose The setting of a work is always defining. Dimadick (talk) 18:44, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural oppose Really, the entire category of Category:Works set on fictional planets and subcategories would need to be nominated for this to be valid. That said, I think this is defining. Works such as Dune (novel) are clearly defined by their fictional planetary setting. Video games whose planet is not mentioned at all, should not be included since it is irrelevant to their story._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:17, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• What you are saying, in wp jargon, is that the category should be containerized. Containerization is perfectly in line with the rationale of the nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:10, 5 December 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.

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. bibliomaniac15 05:26, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Video games featuring protagonists of selectable gender (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale:

• Oppose This doesn't mean that the category should be deleted just because it's a common feature. There are most games where the player character can be either male or female, and not just one gender for the remainder of the game. HarmonyBunny00 (talk) 08:09, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Gender representation in video games is a notable topic covered by multiple sources, which this category falls under. While this is a fairly common feature in western RPGs, it is still uncommon in all other genres. Ding Chavez (talk) 11:00, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Most reviews don't preface themselves with "X is a game in which the player can select their gender" because it's almost always a non-defining aspect of a game. Having a gender select does not show that said gender select is relevant at all to the game's story or themes._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment While you are right that most reviews don't preface themselves like that, many do bring it up as a major point. Most professional reviews of Mass Effect for example specifically brought up the choice between playing a male or female Shepard as a major aspect of the game. For example, here are a couple of articles I found from a quick google search from major video game news outlets (all frequently cited on Wikipedia and not considered unreliable sources as far as I can find) that are specifically about gender choice in video games: [1], [2], [3], [4]. Ding Chavez (talk) 18:46, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Zxcvbnm. Contents should be merged to Category:Video games with customizable avatars where applicable. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:47, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  First we should make sure that category does not run afoul of the same issue. It is extremely common to have a customizable avatar, especially in online games, so what benefit will come from painstakingly going through and confirming this for every video game. I checked a recent Mass Effect review and as I thought, it doesn't mention the customizability, mostly just focusing on the ability to roleplay Paragon or Renegade, which is more important to the game's story. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 00:28, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree with ZXCVBNM. if anything, I think Category:Video games with customizable avatars is even less defining than this one, so if this category is deemed NONDEF and deleted then that category should probably be nominated for deletion as well. Ding Chavez (talk) 18:46, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Ding Chavez. Gender representation is important, and while this may be a common feature, that does not mean it is not a defining feature. (Oinkers42) (talk) 19:12, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @(Oinkers42):Should I presume this to mean you support its deletion rather than oppose it? If it is "not a defining feature" as you say, then it should not be a category. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:12, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Zxcvbnm:, I think you misunderstand, I said "that does not mean it is not a defining feature.", intentionally using a double negative. I do support keeping it. (Oinkers42) (talk) 22:15, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - gender representation (and the lack thereof) is treated as important by RSs writing about video games, especially in role-playing games where the protagonist is supposed to be a representation of the player. The Mass Effect series is as mentioned before a big, obvious example, but is not the only one - see for example these articles about protagonist gender choices and the development and marketing thereof in Persona, Assassin's Creed, Far Cry, Vampire: The Masquerade... There is a lot.--Alexandra^IDV 13:56, 13 December 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.

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. bibliomaniac15 05:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Zaminder (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Zaminder is a mis-spelling. The correct term in Zamindar. The Zamindar article refers to Indian Landlords. There is no Zamindar category (a disambiguation exists); ergo, this cat is superfluous. Whiteguru (talk) 03:12, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment This is an empty category. Could have been tagged for speedy deletion CSD C1 or for misspelling. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:27, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment while Category:Zamindar does not exist, we have Zamindars of Bengal and Zamindar. Are we sure that there are no notable individuals who should be in the category? Peterkingiron (talk) 20:02, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, overlaps with Category:Indian landlords. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:41, 6 December 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.

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) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:42, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:British Indian (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Cat dropped from article. British India is the more appropriate category. Whiteguru (talk) 03:05, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Another empty category that could have been speedied. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:28, 28 November 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.

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: manually merge so that every article is placed where it belongs (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:46, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Veterans of the Spanish Civil War to Category:Military personnel of the Spanish Civil War

Nominator's rationale: Both categories cover the same topic. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 01:12, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:09, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose -- All of Category:Veterans of the Spanish Civil War appear to have fought on the Republican side (I checked). Instead rename to Category:Republican veterans of the Spanish Civil War. The nom is no more appropriate than merging Union soldiers with Confederates in the American Civil War. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:09, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If all in the category fought on the Republican side, then it should be merged to Category:Spanish military personnel of the Spanish Civil War (Republican faction). Lettler^{hello • contribs} 20:25, 3 December 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.