Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 January 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 23 January 25 >

January 24[edit]

Category:Propaganda in fiction[edit]

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. The point made by Player017 is particularly pertinent on the opposing side. -Splash - tk 21:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is my second crack at a CfD for this today, having previously rolled back my deletion nomination. So let me approach this in a slightly different manner: "Foo in fiction" categories are often contested at CfD because they may open the door to WP:OC#TRIVIAL groupings. I believe the two videogames listed here are an example of that. Fictional propaganda may figure in their narrative, but these are a shooter and survival game, respectively. The appearance of some propaganda content is not sufficiently meaningful. However we do need the target category for all non-fiction works about propaganda, as well as fictional films, such as Orwell adaptions, where the association is more meaningful. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:24, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • rename - the "about" formulation allows us to filter this to works where the overriding theme of the work is propaganda, not just some poster on a wall in a video game.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:30, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • If I may add a thought: I also believe the "in fiction" tree is ill-suited for this topic, because all sorts of fiction could be judged to be "propaganda" for one thing or another, in the inexact (but commonly used) sense of the word. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:33, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose non-fiction books about propaganda should not be mixed with fiction. Fiction should be segregated into a subcategory. -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 07:31, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And other stuff about propaganda in fiction also exist, we should keep fictional segregated from the real. -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 10:43, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And it still can, with categories for films, or what have you. I just maintain that the "in fiction" construction is not the best way to group fictional works that are about propaganda in a defining and non-trivial way. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:03, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not definable; first it has the same problems of the "about" categories, as I've stated many times; second, one person's propaganda is another's truth. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Technically, "Works about propaganda" has more to do with propaganda than "Propaganda in fiction" as plot elements. —017Bluefield (talk) 09:28, 2 February 2014 (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:People from Davao[edit]

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. The Bushranger One ping only 02:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is no province called Davao, only there is the city of Davao. The region has its Category:People from Davao Region, the provinces Category:People from Davao del Norte and Category:People from Davao del Sur. Creator must be referring to the city when he created it. RioHondo (talk) 18:28, 24 January 2014 (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:Fashion films[edit]

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. The Bushranger One ping only 02:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I just stumbled across the recently created, and completely neglected (until I started populating it) target category. My preference would be to merge the older and better populated Category:Fashion films into Category:Films about fashion, as it is a film topic rather than a film genre, and I think the x of y name might help to avoid articles being categorized when they have only a trivial association with fashion. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:02, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, as creator of the to-be-merged category. Rationale is sound. Daniel Case (talk) 18:52, 24 January 2014 (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.

Shannara[edit]

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 all. The Bushranger One ping only 03:00, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Propose deletion:
Nominator's rationale: Only one article appears in most of these categories, Allanon, the others are empty. Allanon already appears in Category:Shannara, so this is WP:OCAT for one article to have 5 categories for itself. -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 03:03, 24 January 2014 (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:Characters with supernatural abilities in professional wrestling[edit]

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 delete, after recategorising articles as needed. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:09, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion: Category:Characters with supernatural abilities in professional wrestling Rationale: Probably narrow intersection, see WP:OC#NARROW. 108.218.0.176 (talk) 01:57, 24 January 2014 (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:Compilation Albums[edit]

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. The Bushranger One ping only 03:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete Serves little purpose since 99.999% of editors would use the correct capitalization Category:Compilation albums. Moreover, this category pops up in the auto-complete feature of HotCat so ironically, keeping this category may lead to categorization mistakes! Pichpich (talk) 00:07, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They should be. Maybe a category could be created such as Category:Excluded from HotCat and added to these redirect categories as a hidden category, making a blacklist of HotCat cats. Cat, cat, cat. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 18:12, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
HotCat is not caps-sensitive by the way. Pichpich (talk) 20:31, 31 January 2014 (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/2014_January_24&oldid=1138399394"