Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 31

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< March 30
April 1 >

March 31

Category:Stanford University places

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:Stanford University campus and add Category:University and college campuses in California as a parent category. - jc37 08:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Places" is vague and not used elsewhere on Wikipedia. User:Namiba 20:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The main issue is some of the items aren't "buildings and structures" for example a lake, a creek, arboretum, garden so what category or categories should they go under? Erp (talk) 21:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let's wait and see if the campus categories can be populated with much else than buildings and structures. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:53, 2 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 in Australia by year

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. – Fayenatic London 20:38, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All categories contain just the two season categories that overlap with that year. Merge to YYYY in Australian sport and YYYY in baseball. Not enough content per year to warrant a separate category. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:33, 31 March 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.

People by millennium

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 Timrollpickering (talk) 13:25, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: delete/merge, redundant category layer for historical people who can be categorized by century, and there are too few articles about prehistoric individual people to keep separate categories. This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nederlandse Leeuw, Fayenatic london, Dimadick, Peterkingiron, William Allen Simpson, and Laurel Lodged: pinging contributors to previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:12, 31 March 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:Surnames of Southern Asian origin

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) 22:04, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Southern Asian and South Asian refer to the same region of origin; and South Asian is the more common term. Zhen Zhen (talk) 18:38, 31 March 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:Kvitka Cisyk

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) 22:04, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Lacks content required per
WP:OCEPON to warrant eponymous category. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Delete, as usual, the songs and albums categories are linked to each other directly and the soundtracks category only contains a redirect. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for Now with no objection to recreating if it ever gets up to 5+ direct articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:52, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete — currently 2 subncategories, and they all are
    WP:SMALLCAT as well.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:14, 8 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:Static Shock characters

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) 22:05, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT. ★Trekker (talk) 17:51, 31 March 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.

Buildings by family

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. ✗plicit 02:21, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: rename per
WP:OCASSOC. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:46, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Support Took a 2nd look. This makes the (defining) relationship clearer. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:53, 4 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:L-type stars

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 Timrollpickering (talk) 13:25, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Calling brown dwarfs "stars" is not semantically accurate, considering that they're classified separately from stars for their lack of hydrogen fusion. There is only one instance of a proper star that's considered spectral class L (V838 Monocerotis), but that's only an unusual circumstance. The M-class spectral type has two categories for Category:M-type stars and Category:M-type brown dwarfs, so the L-class spectral type should be split similarly to accommodate these two types of objects. Nrco0e (talk) 16:40, 31 March 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:T-type stars

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 Timrollpickering (talk) 09:46, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Calling brown dwarfs "stars" is not semantically accurate, considering that they're classified separately from stars for their lack of hydrogen fusion. Nrco0e (talk) 16:40, 31 March 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:Y-type stars

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 Timrollpickering (talk) 09:45, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Calling brown dwarfs "stars" is not semantically accurate, considering that they're classified separately from stars for their lack of hydrogen fusion. Furthermore, calling Y-type brown dwarfs "stars" is even less accurate considering that they straddle the mass line between planets and brown dwarfs. Nrco0e (talk) 16:40, 31 March 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:ACC Women's Twenty20 Championship

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) 22:06, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale:
WP:SMALLCAT, only 3 articles, and the 2013 event wasn't a Twenty20 tournament, so shouldn't be in this category, leaving only 2 valid articles (and no evidence that this tournament will be run on multiple future occasions to generate enough articles for a separate category) Joseph2302 (talk) 16:32, 31 March 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:Cricket at the Asian Games – Women's tournament

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) 09:47, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No need for a separate category for the women's tournaments at this games. Whilst there are separate, short article about the women's events in 2010, 2014 and 2022/2023, there's no reason why these couldn't be in the parent category Joseph2302 (talk) 16:29, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Templates do not belong in mainspace categories. –Aidan721 (talk) 23:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This category has been emptied. Liz Read! Talk! 05:01, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't empty it, for the benefit of others, it contained the 3 articles linked in my nom. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:46, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say that you had emptied it, Joseph2302, according to the script I used, it only held a template that was removed by another editor. Of course, the script doesn't indicate any contents that have been deleted so the category might have held other pages that have since been deleted. But it's empty now. Liz Read! Talk! 18:41, 3 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:Asian Test Championship

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) 22:07, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale:
WP:SMALLCAT, only 2 instances of this tournament ever, meaning there will never be more than 3 articles in this category. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:25, 31 March 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:Flanders Campaign 1793–94

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 May 31#Category:Flanders Campaign 1793–94

Category:Businessman from Gujarat

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) 22:07, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: merge per
WP:OCEGRS, male businesspeople from Gujarat are not a notable topic in their own right. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:11, 31 March 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:Businesswoman from Gujarat

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. – Fayenatic London 12:32, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is an empty redundant category. There is already a category Category:Businesswomen from Gujarat.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:10, 31 March 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:Buisnesman from Gujarat

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: speedy delete, emptied by creator so G7 applies.– Fayenatic London 12:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These categories should be deleted because: (1) it is redundant: there is already a Category:Businesspeople from Gujarat, and (2) "Buisnesman" is a typographical error for Businessman or Businessmen. -- Toddy1 (talk) 09:22, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the above 2 as empty categories.
    Oculi (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
@
non-diffusing subcategory of Category:Businesspeople from Gujarat. I do not know whether Category:Businessman from Gujarat should be deleted or whether it would be better to make it a non-diffusing subcategory.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:01, 31 March 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:Children of Julius Caesar

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. bibliomaniac15 00:08, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per
WP:SMALLCAT, only three children. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:56, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
  • I rather perceive "Family" to be the standard and would only create "Children" in case of a large number of children. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree. I have been responsible for creating many of the first hundred (or so) "Family of", "Children of" and "Wives of" categories as well as subsequent category trees and it has always been standard to keep "Children of" and "Wives of" separate if there are at least three items (and in this case there are the sub-categories as well) I have been involved in several of these deletion discussions before and I stand by the consensus of those that three is enough.★Trekker (talk) 17:58, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge While I favor 5, 3 might be enough. But here only 1 of the 3--Julia (daughter of Caesar)--seems clearly define by the relationship. (The other 2 are obviously defined by royal inheritance, just not JC per se.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 19:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I respectfully disagree, being Caesar's adoptive son is the only reason Augustus was able to become a powerful player in the politics of the late Roman Republic. And the weight of Caesarions relationship to the dictator can be seen in something as obvious as his very name, his ancestry was hugely important to his mother's and step-father's politics his entire life.★Trekker (talk) 10:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge — 3 is never enough. The small tradition is 5, and arguably should be 10. There are far too much of this Wives and Children fragmentation.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:49, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all to "family of X". I don't think we should be splitting these families up unless there is great need... - jc37 08:12, 7 May 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:Coasts of Nigeria

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: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This seems to be "coastal provinces of Nigeria", but only some of them are included. It doesn't seem necessary on
Walt Yoder (talk) 03:49, 31 March 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_March_31&oldid=1157911425"