Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 April 5

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< April 4
April 6 >

April 5

Category:Philippines topic navigational boxes

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
(non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:21, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: The only template in Category:Philippines topic navigational boxes specific to "topicality" is {{Philippines topics}}, which is a regular navbox, unlike templates in the category Category:Configurable area-topic templates (e.g. {{Asia topic}}). The other members of the category: subcat Category:Philippines political leader navigational boxes and template {{Philippine Supreme Court composition}} aren't related to configurable topic-templates at all, and should be categorized under Category:Philippines navigational boxes and other subcategories of Category:Philippines templates. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:15, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support as template's creator. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 00:01, 6 April 2023 (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:Baseball chronology category header templates

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 and delete.
(non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale:
WP:SMALLCAT. One template. Dual merge is not needed since template is already in that tree. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:48, 5 April 2023 (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:1905 Intercollegiate Athletic Association of the United States football season

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
(non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale:
WP:SMALLCAT. One entry. Also not seeing any evidence that this association even existed for this season. –Aidan721 (talk) 19:31, 5 April 2023 (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:Triangle players

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) 00:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Unlike percussion instruments such as the tambourine or marimba, the triangle is not a primary instrument of any of these players. It is simply played as a common instrument as their duties as percussionists. See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 21#Category:Gong players Why? I Ask (talk) 19:20, 5 April 2023 (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:Ancient Greek women rulers

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:Ancient Greek queens regnant. bibliomaniac15 19:26, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:
WP:C2C The description explicitly states: Women who ruled in their own right in the time of Ancient Greece. For the wives of kings, see Category:Ancient Greek queens consort. The standard term for that is queen regnant, and there is in fact a Category:Ancient queens regnant, to which it should be re-parented. All 6 women in the category are already confirmed as queens regnant. All siblings of the category in Category:Ancient Greek rulers are also monarchs. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 18:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Tyrants weren't kings nor queens. Marcelus (talk) 20:17, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tyrants can be kings and queens, sometimes ruling only a single city. "One of the earliest known uses of the word tyrant (in Greek) was by the poet Archilochus, who lived three centuries before Plato, in reference to king Gyges of Lydia." However, "Alexander renounced his alliance with Antigonus and was bribed with the title of governor of the Peloponnese to reconcile himself to Cassander." Presumably Cratesipolis is miscategorized as tyrant, as she was only a governor "in subjection under Cassander." Cassander was styled a king.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:13, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Etazeta of Bithynia is a bit of a question mark, but I would not purge it. Nicaea of Corinth was the successor of her husband, although it seems not for very long. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:41, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed. Having a very short reign is never a reason not to categorise someone as a monarch; e.g. Dipendra of Nepal was king for only 4 days while in a coma, but legally, he was the king, and is thus categorised as such. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:03, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom and above clarifications. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:08, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I really don't see what the point of all these recent moves has been. I don't think "ruler" is worse than "monarch" in many cases. Not to mention some ancient rulers weren't monarchs but sometimes diarchs or tetriarchs etc.★Trekker (talk) 20:18, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If you'd like to understand the background of this process, I'd recommend you to read the Rulers CfM. If you don't think "monarchs" is worse than "rulers" in this CfR, there is no reason for you to oppose this CfR. If you don't care, there is no reason for you to participate in this CfR in the first place (or you could just vote 'Neutral'). Lastly, there are no 'diarchs or tetriarchs' in this CfR, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:51, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As far as I see it all these moves have been pointless and potentially harmful.★Trekker (talk) 00:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Precedents of the past several months have shown the community is thinking otherwise. In the overwhelming majority of cases, it has been decided to move away from "rulers" to something clearer and more defining on a case-by-case basis. Therefore, the community is recognising that these noms have a point. And I still don't see you objecting to anything related to this specific CfR. If you could provide examples of "harmful" moves, and reasons why they are "harmful", that might be helpful for the community to take into account. Otherwise it seems little more than a vague general objection to a process based on an unsupported personal opinion, which provides nothing useful for the community to take into account. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:14, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — purge to diarchs and tetriarchs as necessary.[sarcasm]
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Balance so far: 4 support (myself included), 2 oppose. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 18:09, 27 April 2023 (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:Gabon culture

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: I'm just going to close this as No action - please feel free to start a new discussion at editorial discretion. - jc37 09:01, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge and rename to Category:Culture of Gabon per C2D Culture of Gabon. Nagsb (talk) 18:38, 5 April 2023 (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:Saparmyrat Nyýazow

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
(non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Category named after
more common spelling, and this proposal would bring the category in line with that article. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:54, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator comment: Just saw the speedy criteria and I think this meets
Saparmyrat Nyýazow and then moved back after an RM. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:58, 5 April 2023 (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:Classic Reruns TV affiliates

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
(non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:18, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Speedy rename: Rebranded 4/3/2023 Mvcg66b3r (talk) 14:43, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename I also changed the main article in the category header, which had turned into a redirect. - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:59, 10 April 2023 (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:Association football events curtailed due to the September 11 attacks

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
(non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale:
WP:SMALLCAT, there will only ever be 4 notable events in this category. There doesn't seem to be a good upmerge category, since the tree only contains these articles until you get up to Category:Aftermath of the September 11 attacks, which seems like a bad category for these articles to be in. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:53, 5 April 2023 (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.

Top scorers

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) 00:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Being the top scorer in one season of the
WP:NOTDEFINING, because there are comparatively few games in a cup tournament like this compared to a league season. And no evidence of significant coverage of these top scorers. If this category is deleted, then its two parent categories will be empty, and they are not needed either, since Category:Association football league top scorers exists, which has sub-categories that look not to violate NOTDEFINING (and which have some notable associated lists for top scorers in some leagues). Joseph2302 (talk) 10:50, 5 April 2023 (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:Manchester overspill estates

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
(non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: No evidence they are all overspill estates, as our article only lists Wythenshawe as such. The proposed name would be consistent with Category:Housing estates in England and its sub-categories Joseph2302 (talk) 08:23, 5 April 2023 (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:Rivers Worn Down From Erosion

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) 00:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Poorly named
WP:SMALLCAT. We don't currently have any scheme of categorizing former rivers by what particular process ended their riverhood, so it's questionable whether this category would need to exist at all, particularly if it can't be much, much more populated than just two articles -- but even if it's justified, it still needs to be renamed as this is not the correct naming format for Wikipedia categories. Bearcat (talk) 01:29, 5 April 2023 (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:Deaths from pneumonia by country

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: procedural close.
(non-admin closure) William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Is this huge category necessary? does not seem necessary to categorize pages via death by one disease. Ebbedlila (talk) 01:22, 5 April 2023 (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:Online tickets selling Android applications in India

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) 00:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Badly named category for an overly granular intersection of traits. While we do have categories such as Category:Travel ticket search engines, we do not have any scheme of subcategorizing them for platform (Android vs. iPhone vs. Windows, etc.), and it's not clear that India would have a special need for such categories if other countries don't have them. And even if there were a basis for keeping this, it would have to be renamed anyway. Bearcat (talk) 01:19, 5 April 2023 (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:Ethel Cain concert tours

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) 00:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Category which exists solely to hold a list and two differently-named redirects back to that same list. This kind of thing does not assist navigation at all; it would be fine if the tours had their own standalone articles, but we don't need a category for three different ways of getting to the same article. Bearcat (talk) 00:57, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete might have made sense if it held three articles, but it's one list article and two redirects to that list. Not worth a category. Pichpich (talk) 18:52, 7 April 2023 (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:Rina Sawayama concert tours

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) 00:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Category which exists solely to hold a list and a bunch of differently-named redirects back to that same list. This kind of thing does not assist navigation at all; it would be fine if the tours all had their own standalone articles, but we don't need a category for five different ways of getting to the same article. Bearcat (talk) 00:56, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:04, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and the debate just above (Category:Ethel Cain concert tours). Pichpich (talk) 18:54, 7 April 2023 (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:Films without soundtracks

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. We could perhaps build a list as suggested, but this category of 8 unsourced entries isn’t even a big help towards doing that. So we can follow the delete consensus here. Courcelles (talk) 11:52, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Clarifying the intent of the category. Trivialist (talk) 00:35, 5 April 2023 (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/2023_April_5&oldid=1157911296"