Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 April 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< April 17 April 19 >

April 18[edit]

Category:Descendants[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. MER-C 09:20, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category was created as a parent category of long-standing Category:Descendants of individuals, and therefore only has one subcategory as content. However, can you be a descendant of something else than an individual? Place Clichy (talk) 15:10, 18 April 2019 (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:XYZ (English band) members[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 May 2#Category:XYZ (English band) members

Category:Swedish-speaking Finns[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 May 2#Category:Swedish-speaking Finns

Music festivals[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 May 2#Music festivals

Category:Principality of Turov[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. MER-C 09:20, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT and by having a link to Principality of Turov in the header of Category:Princes of Turov all relevant articles are being kept together anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:03, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for Now No objection to recreating if we ever get to 5 or so articles but it doesn't aid navigation in the foreseeable future. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:30, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:38, 24 April 2019 (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:Obsolete templates[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: soft redirect (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 17:50, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting
Nominator's rationale: This category is meant for templates [that] may be obsolete, but they may also have historical importance. It is currently empty (except for its also empty sub-category) and should be deleted for two main reasons:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Category:Obsolete OTRS templates was not tagged for this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 07:24, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have tagged it for this CfD now --DannyS712 (talk) 07:27, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean Toward Delete If these are empty and aren't serving to improving Wikipedia, I'm inclined to dump them unless someone comes forward that says "they help becasue of this". (No objection to Geolodus's soft redirect proposal though). RevelationDirect (talk) 01:32, 20 April 2019 (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 who were rejected for the Victoria Cross[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. A list of the current contents is available at Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 April 18#Current contents of Category:People who were rejected for the Victoria Cross. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 07:15, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per some through-the-looking-glass version of WP:OCAWARD
The Victoria Cross is the top medal from the United Kingdom so receiving it is obviously defining. This category asks the opposite question: Is not receiving it also defining? The biography articles in this category offer sad stories of British dying in battle, who were submitted for this award, but it was determined there wasn't enough documented valour so they received a different medal instead. I suspect a great deal of applicants were denied though and it's just not mentioned in their Wikipedia articles. Imagine all the other anti-categories we could create! - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:17, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • OTHERSTUFFDOESNOTEXIST is not a valid rationale. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 06:02, 4 April 2019 (UTC).[reply]
  • Delete oddly specific category. People rejected for policical office? People who never got an Order of Canada? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legacypac (talk • contribs) 07:19, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Terminate With Extreme Prejudice - Good grief, what's next?!? Category:Models rejected by Victoria's Secret?? This category could serve as the basis for a Monty Python movie. Category:Ministry of Silly Walks, anybody?? Seriously, though, we don't have a category for nominees who didn't win the Nobel Peace Prize. Anomalous+0 (talk) 09:12, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- There has to be a selection mechanism for such awards, so that there are inevitably people who are for one reason or another judged to be not quite of the requisite standard. The basis for this category seems to be that a person was recommended for the award but not given it, the reasons sometimes not being wholly apparent. One of the difficulties has to be that the bravery must be witnessed by someone of suitably high standing. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:49, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I would suggest reading some of the entries here, in order to understand the significance of the category. And it's a sad comment on contemporary society to compare the VC to lingerie modelling. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:20, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The Victoria Cross is a gallantry award, and the people of the category were military veterans who were at least nominated for it. More defining for their careers than most medals. Dimadick (talk) 18:16, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 07:10, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or turn into an article. If there are significant issues to be discussed, they can be covered in an article (or list article), but hard to see this works as a category. Bondegezou (talk) 09:41, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Anomalous+0....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:36, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and listify. The topic is notable (like people who refused a Nobel Prize), but is not defining enough to be worth a category. A list of rejections with associated circumstances and every worthy detail will be a lot more valuable. Place Clichy (talk) 15:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete (possibly listify). I thought there was a guideline against "not" categories, but the closest I could find is WP:CANDIDATECAT (which doesn't quite fit this). In the interests of consistency of categorization we shouldn't have categories like this. There is also the issue of the whether this characteristic can be reliably sourced (e.g. see the Robert Williams Michell article). DexDor (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Listify and then delete -- While the Victoria Cross is the preeminent British (and Commonwealth) award for gallantry and only very rarely awarded, those nominated for it but not awarded it represent a sort of AWARD category. The VC itself and George Cross (for gallantry not in the face of the enemy) are notable enough to warrant having a category (under the exception to OCAWARD), but its non-award should not. The content would make an interesting tabular list with date, name, citation, and reason for non-award. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:19, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I copied the current contents of the category here so no work is lost if anyone wants to create a list article. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:53, 26 April 2019 (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:Professional Darts Corporation Hall of Fame inductees[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. MER-C 09:20, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCAWARD (WP:NONDEFINING)
Each year, the Professional Darts Corporation holds an annual PDC Awards Dinner and this is 1 of 9 awards given out that night. The Hall of Fame is internet only and was established in 2005. Most of the articles don't mention the award although a few mention it in passing or in the lede. The award does not seem defining. We don't have a main article so I created this redirect and the contents of the category are listified here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:03, 18 April 2019 (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/2019_April_18&oldid=895114612"