Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 May 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 27 May 29 >

May 28[edit]

Category:People in cannabis[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: rename first category to Category:People involved in cannabis, merge the second. The current name of the category is clearly faulty and there is consensus to change it. Outright deleting the category failed to garner enough support to execute the proposal. ℯxplicit 00:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It seems "and" expresses better association here than "in", which implies they are inside it or are growing in it. But open to other options. Brandmeistertalk 23:26, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd suggest Rename Category:People in cannabis to Category:People associated with cannabis, considering it is in the "People by association" upper category. As for Category:Women and cannabis, I'd simply delete/upmerge it because I don't see why this category needs to be sub-categorised according to sex. "In" or "associated with" are so vague, I would have thought we should only have sub-categories in the category (i.e. authors, researchers, politicians etc.) Sionk (talk) 18:41, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename somehow, with either "and" or "involved in" being acceptable (I have no opinion on the delete proposal), because as noted by the nominator, "in" sounds like a machine-translator picked the wrong preposition. Nyttend (talk) 00:03, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete (upmerging if/where necessary) - we shouldn't categorize together pro-cannabis people, anti-cannabis people, researchers etc (and politicians etc who shouldn't be in this category). DexDor (talk) 13:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC) DexDor (talk) 19:50, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not too sure about merging. The subcategories do have in common that they are about people. The parent category Cannabis contains all sorts of different things. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:29, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • That particular category appears to be for people actually in an a/i - not for people who have a different connection (e.g. aircrash investigators, air-safety campaigners...). DexDor (talk) 19:25, 7 June 2017 (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.

Muslim historians by country (1)[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: rename. ℯxplicit 00:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename by adding "of Islam", in accordance with this earlier discussion. And in addition there is a small improvement in the name of the Al-Andalus category, consistent with Category:People of Al-Andalus. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:03, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, on the basis the current names suggest Islam is the religion of the historians, rather than their topic/focus. There would be no need to categorise historians by their personal beliefs. Sionk (talk) 05:20, 7 June 2017 (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.

Muslim historians by country (2)[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 as nominated, save for the New Zealand category, where the first of the three proposed targets will be excluded. ℯxplicit 00:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
:Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT. (Note, actually I'm not too sure about the third merge target, e.g. to Yemeni Muslims, especially in countries with an overwhelming Muslim majority). Marcocapelle (talk) 18:03, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Category:Muslim historians does not need to be comprehensively diffused for every individual country that they might happen to be from — nationality is not a WP:DEFINING characteristic of being a Muslim historian per se, especially given that the base criterion being captured here is "historians who are Muslim" and not necessarily "historians of Islam" per se. It's probably justifiable in a few special cases where there are a lot of them, but we don't need a WP:SMALLCAT for every country that might happen to have had just one or two. And à propos of nothing, let's just say I'm not the least bit surprised by the identity of who created these (or at least the couple that I actually checked.) Bearcat (talk) 12:27, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, with the additional possibility of moving some to the "Historians of Islam" categories per the 'Muslim historians by country (1)' rename discussion. There's no need to categories historians by their personal religious beliefs. Sionk (talk) 05:25, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for the New Zealand cat. The sole member is primarily a military historian and is inappropiate for the new cat. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:43, 16 June 2017 (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:Fictional characters who died from a drug overdose[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: rename (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 20:11, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match parent category Category:Drug-related deaths, to comply with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction (by not using the past tense for fictional events) and for clarification - at least one character in the category died by having her drink spiked by a drug that killed her, but not necessarily an overdose. —anemoneprojectors— 16:38, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - it matches the parent category and gives a wider ambit than simply "overdose". Sionk (talk) 18:45, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support To match the parent category. Dimadick (talk) 07:58, 31 May 2017 (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:Fictional characters who committed suicide[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:  Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 June 22#Category:Fictional characters who committed suicide. ℯxplicit 00:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match parent category Category:Suicides and to comply with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction (by not using the past tense for fictional events). —anemoneprojectors— 16:38, 28 May 2017 (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:Fictional characters who have self harmed[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:  Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 June 22#Category:Fictional characters who have self harmed. ℯxplicit 00:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Firstly, self-harm is hyphenated. There is no parent category for real-life self-harmers, but people who self-harm are referred to as "self-harmers" in the self-harm article. Additionally, the use of past tense in the category title goes against Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction. —anemoneprojectors— 16:38, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:NONDEF, the characters aren't defined by this particular behavior. Perhaps listify. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:42, 11 June 2017 (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:Fictional students who have had a relationship with a teacher[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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 20:20, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The title currently goes against Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction by its use of past tense for a fictional event. I am also proposing that the category be expanded to include articles for the teachers involved as well as the students. However, if anyone is in disagreement that the teacher and student be combined into one category, then it should be renamed to something like Category:Fictional students who have a relationship with a teacher. —anemoneprojectors— 16:38, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; this is really too trivial of a thing for a category. Nyttend (talk) 00:05, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I agree with Nyttend, this isn't really a particularly WP:DEFINING basis on which to categorize fictional characters. We do not need a comprehensive scheme of fictional characters who did X for every possible value of X — even though they're not real people and are thus segregated to their own separate category scheme rather than intermingling with real people in real-people categories, the categories for fictional characters are still meant to capture defining characteristics rather than comprehensively capturing every attribute that a character happens to possess. Colour me surprised that the new CW teen-drama version of Archie hasn't been filed here, too — if the reason we can't file him there is because it applies only to one particular version of Archie and not all of the others, then that in and of itself is a reason why this isn't a good idea: reboots and adaptations and other ways in which there can be multiple versions of the same character with different life experiences, rather than a single definitive version, are far too common in 2017. Bearcat (talk) 12:19, 3 June 2017 (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:U.S. Army All-American Bowl football players[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. ℯxplicit 00:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEF. The U.S. Army All-American Bowl is a high school football all-star game. No notable athlete would mark playing in it as a career high point. TM 11:51, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 13:20, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and WP:DNWAUC. Category:American players of American football etc are sufficient categorization. DexDor (talk) 16:49, 9 June 2017 (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:Racing drivers born in YYYY[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. ℯxplicit 00:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
List of categories
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorisation. As far as I'm aware, we don't usually create "<profession> born in YYYY" categories. DH85868993 (talk) 09:10, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – Category:Births is indeed not subcatted other than by Category:Births_by_year (and long may this persist). Oculi (talk) 12:34, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per the above comments. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 12:40, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination and comments above. – Sabbatino (talk) 14:15, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dslete or merge back to ensure we do not lose a date of birth category altogether. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:55, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Seems somewhat unnecessary over-categorisation. Eagleash (talk) 10:48, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Year of birth is not WP:DEFINING of a racing driver per se — the only possible effect it has is on the question of whether their inevitable retirement from that career is in the past or the future as of today — and indeed we do not subcategorize any other individual occupation by year of birth. However, do watch out for whether these categories were added alongside or as an outright replacement for the standard "YYYY births" category — nothing special will need to be done beyond the deletion if the original category is still present, but the original category will have to be readded if this replaced it. Bearcat (talk) 12:07, 3 June 2017 (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/2017_May_28&oldid=1138411248"