Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 December 31

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 30 January 1 >

December 31[edit]

Category:Die Hard (film series)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 January 8#Category:Die Hard (film series)

Category:Die Hard (film series) arcade and video games[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 January 8#Category:Die Hard (film series) arcade and video games

Category:AFC Ajax Vrouwen[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 January 8#Category:AFC Ajax Vrouwen

Category:AFC Ajax Vrouwen players[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 January 8#Category:AFC Ajax Vrouwen players

Transportation network companies[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. MER-C 02:51, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per WP:C2D, Transportation network company has been renamed to Ridesharing company after an RM. This is follow-up on this earlier nomination and follow-up on the opposed speedy request collapsed below. @Oculi, Rathfelder, Danstarr69, and ArmosNights: pinging contributors to the earlier CfD discussion. @Sionk: I am willing to propose upmerging the smaller categories in a later nomination, but that should not delay the implementation of the current renaming request. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:08, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy renaming discussion
    • Oppose all, on the basis 'Ridesharing' is a questionable description for many of these companies (as made clear in the Ridesharing company article). The existing categories adequately describe the contents (and several are already containing only one or two articles so their existence is questionable, they certianly shouldn't be further sub-divided). Sionk (talk) 16:53, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - again. Kudos to Marcocapelle for persisting with this (which also avoids the transport/transportation difficulty). Oculi (talk) 00:26, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Place Clichy (talk) 01:31, 3 January 2020 (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:Middle-earth plants[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 02:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one non-redirect entry, and no parent category, so I see no apparent function for this category. Hog Farm (talk) 20:27, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is nonsense. See Wikipedia:REDCAT, a few lines further down. Redirects should be categorised as if they were articles. Oculi (talk) 13:03, 4 January 2020 (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:Middle-earth swords[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. MER-C 02:52, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one non-redirect article in the Middle-earth swords category, so no point in having a subcat of weapons just for swords now. Hog Farm (talk) 20:25, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and move the one article to Category:Middle-earth weapons, Marcocapelle (talk) 22:26, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - an elegant display of the correct categorisation of useful redirects. Incomprehension is not an argument for delete. Oculi (talk) 00:03, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Oculi: I'm not advocating for this category to be deleted. I'm advocating for this category to be merged to its parent category, Middle-earth weapons. In my view, if only one Middle-earth sword has its own article, there's no real need to make a more specific category. I think if moved to the weapons category, that would provide enough of a clear category without going overly granular. Hog Farm (talk) 02:50, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Place Clichy (talk) 01:31, 3 January 2020 (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 associated with Star Trek[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 02:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Too vague to be meaningful. 109.186.52.23 (talk) 18:02, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good enough. —swpbT • go beyond • bad idea 19:12, 7 January 2020 (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 Fireman (band) songs[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 02:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 38 redirects for songs (and not one actual article) that take you to one of three albums doesn't make this a very useful category, at least no better than what Category:The Fireman (band) albums already offers. Previously nominated in March 2013 with minimal discussion resulting in no consensus (one of the song's did have an article then, which has since been redirected). StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:00, 31 December 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:Southern Death Cult[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 02:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A band with an article for one album, which is already appropriately categorized in an albums category, negates any need for this eponymous parent. WP:SMALLCAT, WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:51, 31 December 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.

Countries and territories by language family[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 January 8#Countries and territories by language family

Category:Grape pest arthropods[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. MER-C 02:54, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is an unnecessary category layer that uses a specialist term (see, for example, this). Note: A further CFD could remove similar category layers e.g. Category:Pest arthropods. Note: if (e.g. if more articles are added) an additional category layer is needed it would be better to use the term "invertebrates". DexDor (talk) 14:20, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, apart from the insects subcategory there is not much content here. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:26, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, no need for this small category, parent categories aren't very large. 19:52, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Merge we don't need tiny categories for every node in the tree of life. Creator of this category was blocked for this kind of thing. If there was a sea cucumber that attacked grapevines, Caftaric would've likely created "Grape pest deuterostomes" along with the category for arthropods. Plantdrew (talk) 03:40, 6 January 2020 (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:Potentially distressing articles[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 02:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: April 2019 category seems to contravene Wikipedia:No disclaimers in articles (and I'm not sure how it would fit into the category hierarchy?) Le Deluge (talk) 09:49, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above, and also because what is and is not distressing is entirely a matter of personal taste. It thus fails both WP:SUBJECTIVECAT and likely also WP:ARBITRARYCAT. Personally, given my favourite club's current performance, I find that 2019–20 Premier League is a distressing article. There are several articles on current British and US politics which would also qualify. Should they go in there? Grutness...wha? 13:00, 1 January 2020 (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:Science martyrs[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 January 8#Category:Science martyrs

Romanian awards[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. MER-C 02:52, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, each of the categories only contains the eponymous article and a subcategory of recipients. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:41, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:23, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • That will not change when merging. The article and subcat will just be one category layer higher. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:22, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 03:20, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Most of the useful content is in the recipients subcategories, which will remain appropriately parented. On a sidenote, the content relative to the Order of the Star of the Romanian Socialist Republic could be considered as part of the history of the Order of the Star and classified accordingly. Place Clichy (talk) 01:31, 3 January 2020 (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:Beathard family[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 02:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No parent article, no evidence that these people are collectively referred to as the "Beathard family". WP:SYNTH, WP:OCAT. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:08, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, on the basis very few of the many 'family' categories have a parent article. There seems to be an accepted convention to group related notable people in this fashion (and Beathard is sufficiently unusual to not be confused with other people). I'd question its parent cats, all the same, because most are sportsmen but a couple are not. If there was a wider discussion about the suitability of these 'family' categories, I'd be interested to know the outcome. Sionk (talk) 17:22, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 03:20, 31 December 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:Indigenous American Catholic saints[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 to Category:Indigenous Catholic saints of the Americans. MER-C 10:43, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is being used for more than saints of the Catholic Church. If it will be used for Santa Muerte and other "deities" that are folk saints outside the Church, it should not carry the name "Catholic". Elizium23 (talk) 20:12, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support In order to include saints from folk religion. Dimadick (talk) 20:27, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support For reasons above (I am the creator of the category) DiegoAma (talk) 23:19, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alt rename to Category:Indigenous saints of the Americas per WP:C2C (see first parent category), the articles are not about indigenous saints from the United States. In addition, the second parent category should be changed because it is neither by nationality nor (after renaming) Catholic, so perhaps the second parent should become Category:Saints. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:51, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as the change of scope that goes with this request is unnecessary. Feel free to create a parent category for non-Catholic saints. Place Clichy (talk) 19:43, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • This actually makes sense, but we should still change "American" to "of the Americas". Marcocapelle (talk) 21:47, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 03:20, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The by-nationality parent should be removed or replaced anyway. Being from a continent is quite something else than a nationality. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:22, 4 January 2020 (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_December_31&oldid=936365027"