Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 March 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 25 March 27 >

March 26[edit]

Category:Buildings and structures in Duitama[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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:36, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, only 1 building article in this category in a small city which is primarily notable for historical reasons. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:20, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Duitama may be a "small city" to some standards, but is the third biggest city in Boyacá. The fact the category is not filled with more buildings does not make the category by itself obsolete. There is the UPTC which has a building in Duitama and more notable buildings, such as the regional bus station. I agree there needs to be more added to the category, but not that the category itself is not notable (enough). Tisquesusa (talk) 21:24, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • The third city of a province of just over 1 million people is not that impressive. And besides it is not just the category, also the article Duitama is lacking sources about potentially notable buildings. A bus station is seldom notable, there are not enough articles about them in Colombia to populate a Category:Bus stations in Colombia. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:37, 26 March 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:Buildings and structures in Chleby[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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 00:12, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, Chleby is a small village, Category:Chleby does not even exist. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:11, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agree I was the one who created the category, but I do understand it makes sense to merge, no problem. Dan Koehl (talk) 22:35, 26 March 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:Phones with dual rear cameras[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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Thanks to various OEMs, we now have triple cameras, if not more, on some phones. Yet the category title suggests that only phones with 2 may be included. ViperSnake151  Talk  17:07, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree I was the one who created the category, and was about to propose the exact same renaming a couple of days ago. --uKER (talk) 17:19, 26 March 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:Terrorist incidents attributed to Islamic extremism[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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 00:14, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Clearly duplicate. wumbolo ^^^ 14:34, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom Same scope, and it is unclear to me what "extremism" indicates here. Dimadick (talk) 14:38, 26 March 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:Sexuality books[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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Needs a broader name for clarity on scope of category. At first glance I thought I had found another pair of duplicate book categories. But then I saw that *this* one is the parent to Category:Books about sexuality, along with a range of other subcats for books dealing with a variety of sexuality-related topics. I am entirely open to a different name if somebody comes up with something better. Anomalous+0 (talk) 09:57, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why not simply downmerge to Category:Books about sexuality? Marcocapelle (talk) 17:37, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I was pretty sure I had explained why merging these 2 categories did not make sense -- in contrast to the pair of categories for Books about education (below). Take a good look at all of those subcats, and you will see that there needs to be an umbrella/parent category. The only real question is what name it should have. The current name is just too close to Category:Books about sexuality for readers and editors to be able to grasp the distinction. Anomalous+0 (talk) 09:55, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The distinction is not clear to me, sorry. And using "-related" does not help, that is simply too vague. By what criteria would you say that an article in the parent category does not fit the narrower category? Marcocapelle (talk) 18:21, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's all about the subcategories. As I said above, if it was merely a case of duplicate categories (like the pair for "Books about education") it would just need a simple merge -- transferring the articles from one category into the other. But that is NOT the case here.
No doubt some of the articles currently in Category:Sexuality books can/should be moved into Category:Books about sexuality. But others should be moved into one of the other subcats. And that array of subcategories needs to have a properly named umbrella/parent category. They are all for books about topics/issues that are related to sexuality -- but they are NOT "Books about sexuality" per se. So Downmerging the entire Category:Sexuality books into Category:Books about sexuality would leave all of those subcats dangling, without a parent category grouping them together. Anomalous+0 (talk) 07:34, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Its not necessary to have a properly named umbrella/parent category for subcategories. Rathfelder (talk) 09:38, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am working on a revised proposal, hope to have it later today. Anomalous+0 (talk) 13:03, 1 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:Education books[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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 00:14, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These are duplicate categories. "Books about XYZ" is the prevailing formulation and is better grammatically. (Probably wise to leave it as a category redirect page.) Anomalous+0 (talk) 09:53, 26 March 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:RedJet Records[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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:26, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary category for a record label with only one musical act populating it. The artist is not mentioned in the article for the label and the label isn't mentioned in the artist's article, so probably not a particularly defining trait. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:57, 26 March 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:Conspicuous Service Cross (New York) recipients[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) DannyS712 (talk) 00:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OVERLAPCAT and WP:OCAWARD (WP:NONDEFINING)
The Conspicuous Service Cross (New York) is automatically given to any New York residents who receive the Medal of Honor, the Distinguished Flying Cross (United States) and 20 other federal medals. It is also automatically awarded to all New York residents involved in Pearl Harbor, the D Day landing, or who were declared missing in action, or were killed in action. These underlying reasons may be defining; automatically receiving this award as a thank you fron New York is not. This is one of the rare instances where I don't favor listifying since the awared would be too common. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:06, 26 March 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.

1 article/1 subcategory Halls of Fame parent categories[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: upmerge (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:53, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT
This nomination is just for the museum/organization parent categories, not for the inductees subcategories: Category:Arena Football Hall of Fame inductees, Category:Canadian Music Hall of Fame inductees, Category:English Football Hall of Fame inductees & Category:World Golf Hall of Fame respectively. Each nominated category contains only that subcategory plus the main article (Arena Football Hall of Fame, Canadian Music Hall of Fame, English Football Hall of Fame, World Golf Hall of Fame) and I see little to no room for future growth. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:06, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 08:52, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - serves as 'parent' cat for the inductee subcat. GiantSnowman 08:54, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do you see any growth potential for any of these categories?RevelationDirect (talk) 23:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to parents. The nominator is right that these categories are a pointless layer, and fail WP:SMALLCAT ... but if they are deleted, some pages will be removed from relevant categories. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:31, 26 March 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_March_26&oldid=891189633"