Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 July 1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 30 July 2 >

July 1[edit]

Category:Persecution by ethnic group[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 14:52, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: As well as being poorly-named and ambiguous, this category is also redundant to its parent, Category:Ethnic persecution, which can serve perfectly well as the direct parent for all of the subcategories. Anomalous+0 (talk) 22:42, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - this is one of user:Stefanomione's eternal rocks: "6967 categories still standing as eternal rocks in the ephemeral Wikipedia stream". Make it 6966. Oculi (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Largely overlapping scopes. Dimadick (talk) 14:53, 6 July 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:Abdullah Öcalan[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 15:18, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not enough here to warrant a category: only main article + 1 other article & one sub-cat. Merging not needed or appropriate. Anomalous+0 (talk) 22:33, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:OCEPON. --woodensuperman 08:06, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, meanwhile almost a dozen articles have been added, but most of them are not defined by Abdullah Öcalan. The subcategory is also somewhat problematic. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:10, 9 July 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:Sumo people from Kagawa prefecture[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: has already been deleted (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:42, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I created Category:Sumo people from Kagawa Prefecture, not realizing that this category existed. "Prefecture" should be capitalized, therefore this category should be deleted. Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:51, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Category has been emptied and since the creator is asking for deletion, I'll speedy this. Liz Read! Talk! 03:34, 2 July 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:Basshunter[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 14:55, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEPON --woodensuperman 13:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Woodensuperman: I added redirect. Eurohunter (talk) 15:51, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's a redirect to the eponymous article. I really think we can do without this category. --woodensuperman 15:53, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. We can do without the category, we can also do without the redirect. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:07, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • DElete though ensuring that all the content appears in the subcat (e.g. as main article) and that it is not orphaned. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:46, 6 July 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:Silver Crosses of the Virtuti Militari[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 14:53, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Clarification this category is for recipients, not for crosses... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:39, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom.--Darwinek (talk) 23:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question -- Should this category exist? It appears to offend against . It is stated to be equivalent to the British Victoria Cross, but the awards (at least at gold and silver level) appear to be so numerous that we should regard this as an ordinary military award, which would offend. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:37, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? The VC "Since 1856 has been awarded 1,358 times" (WP). See the FAR larger Category:Recipients of the Victoria Cross. Johnbod (talk) 16:15, 6 July 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:Gold Crosses of the Virtuti Militari[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 14:54, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Clarification this category is for recipients, not for crosses... . Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:39, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom.--Darwinek (talk) 23:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question -- Should this category exist? It appears to offend against . It is stated to be equivalent to the British Victoria Cross, but the awards (at least at gold and silver level) appear to be so numerous that we should regard this as an ordinary military award, which would offend. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:37, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? The VC "Since 1856 has been awarded 1,358 times" (WP). See the FAR larger Category:Recipients of the Victoria Cross. Johnbod (talk) 16:15, 6 July 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:Lords of Balaguer[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 July 20#Category:Lords of Balaguer

Orders of knighthood[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 08:39, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename for consistency with the top Category:Chivalric orders. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:14, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support To match the parent category. Dimadick (talk) 15:00, 6 July 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.
  • NOTE: These were moved again to "Orders of chivalry". – Fayenatic London 07:11, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Atlantic tropical cyclones that slowed or stalled over land[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 14:55, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is ill-defined and very subjective as there are a lot of systems that have slowed or stalled over land and no formal classifications. In fact I would argue that most systems that impact the United States slow down or stall over land. Jason Rees (talk) 00:41, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support deletion – agree with the nominator that the category is ill-defined. While I understand the general premise, numerous storms could be included here given the ambiguity of "slowing down", inevitably including a lot of storms that do not produce large rainfall totals and flooding as noted on the category page. A wide-range of systems would be included simply because the database of storms serendipitously happens to have a point where a storm's forward motion briefly dropped by a hair for an hour. Since many of the storms in the historical record do not have a precise record of their speed, it seems inevitable that inclusion into this category would run into original research. As an aside, I note the following articles in the category: Hurricane Klaus, which never made landfall; and Tropical Storm Hanna (2002), which slowed down by 2 mi/h for only a six hour period. TheAustinMan(Talk ⬩ Edits) 18:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • DElete -- most cyclones that go inland slow and become down-classified to tropical storms. They all ultimately decay away. Ill-defined and subjective. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:40, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support If there are any that don't do this, that might be defining, but this is normal, and too vague. Johnbod (talk) 16:17, 6 July 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_July_1&oldid=907485691"