Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 18

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< April 17
April 19 >

April 18

Category:Chicago television shows

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) Qwerfjkltalk 12:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Current name is way too close to Category:Television shows set in Chicago and much too vague given its actual, very specific meaning, and needs to be changed. This suggestion is based on Category:Local television programming in the United States, and it's probably the best I can come up with, though alternate suggestions are very welcome. Similar issue exists for all of Television in Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota, Philadelphia, St. Louis, and the San Francisco Bay Area, so this nomination could be expanded. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 21:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I think I created this, it's hard to tell after a few name changes. The intent was to list shows made by local channels. The existing categories and subcategory support this. Fuddle (talk) 01:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Flip-flop: I like this idea better. It's longer, but more precise. Fuddle (talk) 21:35, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not opposed to this, even if it's a bit of a mouthful. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 23:10, 19 April 2024 (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:Habitats Directive Species

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 27#Category:Habitats Directive Species

Category:Shabbat observant businesses

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 (
Queen of ♡ | speak 21:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: I think "Shabbat observant" is a compound adjective that should have a hyphen. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 00:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queen of ♡ | speak 19:46, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete per Marco Mason (talk) 13:41, 19 April 2024 (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:Religious extremism

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 (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 14:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per main article Religious fanaticism. This could perhaps be speedied, but let's see if there are objections after all. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:44, 18 April 2024 (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:Music of Extremadura

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 (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 14:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 1 P, 0 C. Already in other parent. Upmerge for now without prejudice. NLeeuw (talk) 16:24, 18 April 2024 (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:Bulgarian encyclopedias

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: split as nominated.
(non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 16:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: It is not useful to lump together works from or about Bulgaria with works in the Bulgarian language that could be about different topics. Some entries might remain in the original category if they are about encyclopedias from Bulgaria. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:42, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:28, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment That an encyclopedia was published in Bulgaria does not mean that the topic is Bulgaria. Encyclopedias tend to cover a wide variety of topics. Dimadick (talk) 14:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • In practice it is very unlikely that an encyclopedia published in Bulgaria wouldn't be Bulgarian-language encyclopedia, so they would fall in the second split target. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not what Dimadick said; he pointed out that country of publication and topic do not need to match, rather than that country of publication and language do not need to match.
    Incidentally, specialised English-language encyclopedias are published all over the world all the time. Within a few seconds I just found the Encyclopedia of Coastal Science (2005), published in Dordrecht, the Netherlands. Last I checked, English still isn't the dominant native language over here, but that doesn't stop anyone from publishing encyclopaedias in English on "Dutch" soil. ;) NLeeuw (talk) 00:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Given the Option 2 outcome in the Dutch encyclopedias CfR below, I suppose I will retract my !vote for an Alt rename, and instead Split & Rename per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 08:34, 28 April 2024 (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:Dutch encyclopedias

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: option 2.
(non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 12:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Option 1
  • Option 2
  • (both options):
Nominator's rationale for Option 1: Per the actual scope of the main article,
List of Dutch encyclopedias, which I have just renamed List of encyclopedias in Dutch, because the scope as indicated by the definition in the opening sentence is 'Encyclopedias in the Dutch language', and includes several encyclopedias published in Belgium rather than the Netherlands. The connected Commonscat was already named c:Category:Encyclopedias in Dutch. The interwiki to frwiki was already fr:Liste d'encyclopédies en néerlandais, a redirect to fr:Liste d'encyclopédies par langue#Néerlandais, and to nlwiki already to nl:Encyclopedie#Nederlandstalige encyclopedieën. This also means we should Purge parents Category:Encyclopedias by country and Category:European encyclopedias, because the Dutch language is not necessarily limited by geography to Europe either (e.g. there is an nl:Encyclopedie van Suriname, published in 1977 in Suriname, two years after it became indepedent). Because I recently renamed the main article myself, speedy criterion C2D does not count, but as you can see, it has always been the main article's and category's scope. NLeeuw (talk) 12:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Update 6 April 2024 and rationale for Option 2: Belarusian, Albanian, Bengali and Tamil language encyclopedias have been added to the nomination following their speedy renaming nomination by LaundryPizza03, and Marcocapelle's suggestion to go full, and my suggestion to centralise discussion over here. The rationale for Option 2 is that it conforms with most older naming conventions to name things Fooian-language things. By contrast, emerging new conventions (Option 1) favour Things in Fooian. We all agree the current categories should be renamed, but the question is which Option is preferable. For both options, it is proposed to Purge them out of the by country and by continent trees, because these encyclopedias are by language. NLeeuw (talk) 16:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, language is generally much more a defining characteristic of a book than the country where it is published. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree. Country of publication could be defining, and it's okay that we've got a Category:Encyclopedias by country tree. But if we need to choose, I think language takes priority over country of publication. We could do both, but then we risk situations like Category:Latvian encyclopedias and Category:Latvian-language encyclopedias, which are technically distinct, but both contain the two same items in practice. Only for larger languages and countries like France versus the French language, it is evident to have separate category trees, especially if the latter has a subcategory like "Belgian encyclopedias in French" or something, showing that France and French don't always coincidence. NLeeuw (talk) 12:52, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Courtesy ping @Marcocapelle:, you might want to clarify or change your !vote based on the amended nomination and rationale. Thanks. NLeeuw (talk) 16:16, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I do not have a strong preference between option 1 and 2, both are an improvement versus current. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support option 2. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support option 2. Matches with Category:Mass media by language tree. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 23:15, 19 April 2024 (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:Estonian numismatists

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 27#Category:Estonian numismatists

Category:18th-century American slave owners

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) Qwerfjkltalk 12:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need to diffuse by century of ownership? I don't think that the category is helpful. I think diffusion by state would be more helpful. Mason (talk) 03:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It looks like the categories have been depopulated. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    FWIW: @MarcocapelleWhen I nominated the categories, there were zero pages in them, just the slave-trader categories. Mason (talk) 22:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to Category:American slave owners. Redundant layers. NLeeuw (talk) 05:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opose Whyever delete it? It is always usefull to sort people by century, and the category American slave owners is too big, and need sub categories. Nothing prevents having both a category by state and a category by century; other categories of people do. Slaves have century categories, and nothing prevents having century categories for slave owners as well. They are always helpful when a reader need to find people by century, and do not prevent the creation of other categories, such as state categories.--Aciram (talk) 12:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As the category creator,Aciram, are you planning on populating them? Mason (talk) 22:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If it's just 2 centuries, I strongly recommend against subdividing by centuries. There will be a lot of duplication without navigational advantage. Splitting by state seems doable and defining, however. NLeeuw (talk) 20:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm adding the newly-created parent categories, that are also not populated with pages, in a moment. @Aciram@Marcocapelle@Nederlandse Leeuw Mason (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think it's very helpful to start creating new empty categories with little navigational value in the middle of a CfD. That said, I'll emphasise that I favour upmerging for now without prejudice. If a newly created category can be properly filled with items and has demonstrable navigational value, there's nothing wrong with it. NLeeuw (talk) 22:00, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as nominated. It is not helpful to sort by century.--User:Namiba 00:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Diffusion by century is always useful in large categories. Dimadick (talk) 14:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not always. For example, we very intentionally don't have activists diffused by century or athletes by sport. Dimadick, are you planning on doing the diffusion? Because right now these categories are *very empty*. Mason (talk) 13:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/upmerge: Diffusing by country/state makes a lot more sense and would save from the overlap issue that NLeeuw mentioned. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 23:19, 19 April 2024 (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:Anti-Jewish pogroms by Muslims

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: split to
(non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: This category feels
WP:COATRACKy. There is no Category:Anti-Jewish pogroms by Christians, even though those are far more prevalent. Moreover, many of the incidents here were not even defined by the participation of Muslims so inclusion into the Islam and anti-Semitism article would not always be appropriate. User:Namiba 18:04, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
I originally created that category, feeling that pogroms by Muslims were notable precisely because they were much less common than pogroms by (especially Russian or other Eastern European) Christians. --GCarty (talk) 07:26, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understandable. But the effect might be that unnecessary emphasis is placed on Muslims as perpetrators in a way that is currently not done for Christians (or others) as perpetrators. NLeeuw (talk) 01:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps rename to Category:Anti-Jewish pogroms in the Middle East and North Africa, or something similar? --GCarty (talk) 08:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Meanwhile GCarty proposed another alternative which (if slightly modified) I would not oppose either. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge. If not, delete. "By Muslims" is simply unacceptable in a category name. Even when the majority of the perpetrators were Muslims, the name implies that their religion was a key factor in the process (rather than politics, economics, etc.). Usually this is either false or unknown. Would we name a cat about things done by Israel with "by Jews"? Zerotalk 04:04, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As mentioned above, I now think the this category (which I created originally) should be replaced with Category:Anti-Jewish pogroms in the Middle East and/or Category:Anti-Jewish pogroms in North Africa. --GCarty (talk) 19:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As the nominator, I suggest we merge with no objection to splitting off articles by continent for consistency's sake.--User:Namiba 20:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom and per discussion above. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:00, 18 April 2024 (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:Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim field personnel

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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 12:32, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge categories per previous discussion here. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Eureka Lott and @Natg 19 from the previous discussion on the matter. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:46, 18 April 2024 (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:The Book of Boba Fett episodes

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 (
Queen of ♡ | speak 18:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: All episodes were redirected so no content here. The child category will automatically be placed in the parent category if this is deleted. Gonnym (talk) 12:03, 18 April 2024 (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:Swedish emigrants to Japan

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 25#Category:Swedish emigrants to Japan

Tourism in Brazil by city

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 (
Queen of ♡ | speak 18:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: These only contain subcats for tourist attractions, which are already categorised in Category:Tourist attractions in Brazil by city. – Fayenatic London 11:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom (or delete, as I am not sure if tourist attractions really belong in economy). Marcocapelle (talk) 16:41, 18 April 2024 (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.

History of Ipê

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/delete.
Queen of ♡ | speak 18:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains 1 article on a museum. – Fayenatic London 11:18, 18 April 2024 (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.

Talian dialect

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 (
Queen of ♡ | speak 18:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: These categories only contain one article, That article is about Talian dialect, which I don't think we would generally categorise as geography anyway. – Fayenatic London 10:23, 18 April 2024 (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.

Tourism in Rio Grande do Sul

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 (
Queen of ♡ | speak 17:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator's rationale: Merge for now, only one or two pages in these sub-categories, and mostly it's the same regional article. – Fayenatic London 09:47, 18 April 2024 (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/2024_April_18&oldid=1221253913"