Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 November 23

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< November 22 November 24 >

November 23[edit]

Category:Austrian Empire military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars[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. Another nomination may be needed, in which case please make a group nomination covering as much of Category:People of the French Revolutionary Wars as needs renaming. – Fayenatic London 08:02, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The "Category:Austrian Empire military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars" has to be renamed, since the French Revolutionary Wars ended in 25 March 1802, while the Austrian Empire was created only in 1804. The proposed accurate description should be: "Category:Habsburg Monarchy military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars".(KIENGIR (talk) 10:56, 8 September 2019 (UTC))[reply]
Marcocapelle, please have in mind that the term "Austria" might be ambigous and recently we are fixing these problems with proper wikilinks in the related pages, after and issue and discussion, however despite the unliked "Austria" will remain part of many articles as soon the context is set in the lead or the infobox. However, partuclarly regarding your comment, Beaulieu was fighting for then the Habsburg Monarchy (inside of it was the Archduchy of Austria btw. among many other countries), but not the Austrian Empire that did not exist then. More accurately, what you refer was the Imperial Army of the Habsburgs, not solely anytime Austria, not even the members or commaders were just Austrian.(KIENGIR (talk) 11:41, 8 September 2019 (UTC))[reply]
  • That is a bit beside the point I was trying to make. We should have a category for the Imperial Army and a category for the Austrian Empire, but diffusion by war leads to biographies being in a multitude of those categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:54, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marcocapelle, I understood your original point as well, even if I did not react to it. Yes, your suggestion for the Imperial Army until 1804 and for the Austrian Empire after 1804 looks fine.(KIENGIR (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2019 (UTC))[reply]
  • Marcocapelle, You meant like "Category:Habsburg Imperial Army military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars"? In case please proceed with the renaming if everyone agrees, I never did that by a category, I do not wish to commit any technical mistake...Thank You.(KIENGIR (talk) 15:31, 8 September 2019 (UTC))[reply]
  • I meant to refrain from referring to French Revolutionary Wars. Besides I suppose that "Habsburg" is redundant since Imperial Army already implies the relation with the Habsburg Monarchy. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:39, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Understood, I can support also this version.(KIENGIR (talk) 15:49, 8 September 2019 (UTC))[reply]
  • Rename I suspect the object is to cover the period 1790 (or 1792) to 1815. The category is well populated so that it should be Kept somehow. I would suggest Category:Austro-Hungarian military leaders 1790-1815. The period of the Revolutionary War may be an artefact of British history, as Austria was not at war with France for the whole period. Siblings may also need attention: the British sibling has one general in it, but there must be lots more. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:53, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Peterkingiron, thank's for the support for renaming, but there are problems with the details you presented. This particular category is valid only until 1804 (because that year the Austrian Empire was created. The suggestion of "Austro-Hungarian military leaders 1790-1815" would cause a bigger problem, since Austro-Hungarian refers to Austria-Hungary that emerged only in 1867, on the other hand in the Imperial Army not just Austrian, Hungarian, but generals with other nationality were present. Hence, still my original proposal seems the best "Category:Habsburg Monarchy military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars" or at least "Category:Habsburg Imperial Army military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars".(KIENGIR (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2019 (UTC))[reply]
Yes this is complicated, as is the whole notion of the Holy Roman Empire. Yes there were officers from other German states serving in the army, certainly in Turkish wars; and not as mere mercenaries. Perhaps Category:Hapsburg Imperial military leaders 1790-1815 would fit. This avoids a hiatus at 1801 (end of Revolutionary War) or 1804 (when HRE was replaced by Austrian Empire). There was a long period of war from the Revolution until Waterloo and the Congress of Vienna. The ruler throughout had the title of emperor, though the title changed. I think the 1867 transition was more about how Hungary was governed and the creation of a German Empire. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:37, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Peterkingiron, I'add that HRE was not necessarily replaced by AE, we could only say a partial "transformation" along 1804-1806, better to say the HM's and HRE's overlapping titles, territories and assumed dominions etc. had been "clarified" in a way regarding the transformation. However, your point is as well seems fine. Let us now summarize the proposals until now, and maybe together with Marcocapelle you could eliminate at least two versions of the four proposals, thus soon we may propose our final candidate (and excuse me that I present your proposal with 'b' instead of 'p'):
(1) Category:Habsburg Monarchy military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars
(2) Category:Habsburg Imperial Army military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars
(3) Category:Imperial Army
(4) Category:Habsburg Imperial military leaders 1790-1815 (KIENGIR (talk) 18:01, 13 September 2019 (UTC))[reply]
To Marco's point, we should also consider what to do with Category:Military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars by nationality. Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:27, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We should rename it as well (replace "nationality" with something else, since Habsburg Monarchy was not a country, not a nation, etc., what would be the best English word, affiliation?)(KIENGIR (talk) 19:10, 14 September 2019 (UTC))[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 08:51, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Relisting commment: rename to what? MER-C 08:51, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom The Habsburg Monarchy article covers the years 1282 to 1918, from the reign of Albert I of Germany to the deposition of Charles I of Austria. Dimadick (talk) 10:11, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- Part of the point of my suggestion was to apply the period 1790-1815 (or perhaps 1792-) to avoid the question of whether this ended in c.1802 or 1815. I am making no further comment on which of the options for the first part is best. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:20, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
MER-C, to your question:
1st task, rename Category:Austrian Empire military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars to one of the following:
(1) Category:Habsburg Monarchy military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars
(2) Category:Habsburg Imperial Army military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars
(3) Category:Imperial Army
(4) Category:Habsburg Imperial military leaders 1790-1815
2nd task:
rename Category:Military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars by nationality to [[:Category:Military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars by ''affiliation''?]](KIENGIR (talk) 18:20, 26 September 2019 (UTC))[reply]
Since the whole thread is silent for a while, I make my final proposals that should be accepted if noone objects:
  • 1st - chosen 2 - rename Category:Austrian Empire military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars -> Category:Habsburg Imperial Army military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars
  • 2nd, rename Category:Military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars by nationality -> Category:Military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars by affiliation(KIENGIR (talk) 18:44, 12 October 2019 (UTC))[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 22:32, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alternative , per earlier discussion:
  1. Split Category:Austrian Empire military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars to Category:Military leaders of the Imperial Army and Category:Military leaders of the Austrian Empire.
  2. Delete Category:Military leaders of the French Revolutionary Wars by nationality and subcats (except French) in a separate discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:04, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - For GB/UK, 1792-1815 was a period of continuous war, with a short break in the middle. For some other countries, war was more intermittent, as French victories knocked them out of the war or made them French allies. Nevertheless the period c.1790-1815 constitutes a distinct historical period in which there was a lot of military activity. However there is no satisfactory global name for these wars, which is why I was suggesting the use of dates, when the discussion was more active a couple of months ago. This is complicated by the change in title of the Austrian ruler from Holy Roman Emperor to Emperor of Austria, which was much more a change of name than anything else. WP tends to treat successive names of countries as if they were distinct entities, when in fact there is much continuity. I therefore do not think that a split is the right answer. I would prefer us to go back to the suggested Category:Habsburg Imperial military leaders 1790-1815, which avoids naming the wars or splitting imperial titles. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:45, 26 November 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:Spaceflight portal[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. MER-C 09:09, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT - There is only one portal that fits with this category and Portal:Spaceflight is already in Category:Transport portals so we don't need this subcategory with only one portal which fits with this. Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:57, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have not seen any categories just been populated with subpages before, can't imagine it adds much value. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:02, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 22:31, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, useful for keeping track of pages created to be featured within a portal. I acknowledge that Special:Prefixindex can also find such pages, but category is more convenient. In this case it turns out to be incomplete, in comparison with [1], but that could be remedied by coding the category in relevant templates, and creating a sub-cat for "On this day" and DYK pages. – Fayenatic London 10:10, 28 November 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.

Norwegian awards[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 December 5#Norwegian awards

Monegasque awards[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 December 5#Monegasque awards

Greek awards[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 December 5#Greek awards

Polish awards[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 December 7#Polish awards

Romanian awards[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 December 7#Romanian awards

Category:Cloud infrastructure attacks & failures[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 December 5#Category:Cloud infrastructure attacks & failures

Category:Allotropes[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 December 14#Category:Allotropes

Category:Fauna of Saudi Arabia[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 08:57, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category was deleted in 2018, but has been re-created without afaics any discussion.  As usual with such categories (created by an editor interested in the country rather than in biota) it's very incomplete (there are hundreds of species found in that country - e.g. see List of birds of Saudi Arabia).  It's better to categorize animals by regions - e.g. in Category:Fauna of the Arabian Peninsula and in categories such as Category:Endemic fauna of Saudi Arabia (where applicable). No upmerge is necessary because both pages in this category are already well categorized.  Suggest salt. DexDor (talk) 11:46, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Categorising fauna and flora by every country in which they occur is liable to create terrible category clutter. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:51, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:G4. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:03, 23 November 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:Linguistics, Language, and the Public Award 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. I will list this on the manual page to give time for an editorial decision to make a list. MER-C 08:58, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OCAWARD. Note that we do not even have an article about this award. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:32, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah there should at least be a stand alone article about the award in order to add a list, but I am not sure whether the award is notable at all. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:55, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Anyone's welcome to create a list (subject to it being referenced, passing GNG etc), but deleting the category shouldn't be conditional on there being a list. DexDor (talk) 14:15, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: If the award is not notable to deserve discussion then the mention of the award should also be deleted from Linguistic Society of America. Hyacinth (talk) 01:02, 29 November 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:Charlotte City Council members[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 09:03, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to clarify that this article is only for those city council members from this city and not the many other the municipalities called Charlotte. TM 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:40, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:27, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just for clarity I don't oppose this so if no one else objects feel free to close this as move. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:30, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Sometimes we need a disambiguator for a category, where the main article does not, because it can have an "otheruses" capnote, something that does not work for categories. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:27, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as unambiguous. No other city named Charlotte is large enough to justify an article on its city council, let alone creating a category for its city council members. - Eureka Lott 19:22, 23 November 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:Speakers of the Iraqi Kurdistan Parliament[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 all, appending (Iraq). – Fayenatic London 16:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Full list of final renames/merges
Nominator's rationale: Iraqi Kurdistan is a cultural and geographical region, while Kurdistan Region is the autonomous region which these topics pertain to. This can be compared to Spain v. Iberian Peninsula or Republic of Ireland v. Ireland. Regarding the merging proposals, we really don't need so similar categories. --Semsurî (talk) 17:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why should these topics remain as 'Iraqi Kurdistan' when it is misleading though? Category:Iraqi Kurdistan also states in the intro: "Iraqi Kurdistan is a geopolitical region of Iraq." which is also ambiguous. What does geopolitical even mean? Category:Kurdistan Region should be created and every topic that has to do with the autonomous region and not geography should be moved to that. --Semsurî (talk) 19:06, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Geography-related topics should remain under "Iraqi Kurdistan" categories, while those that pertain to the political entity should be moved to 'Kurdistan Region'-relate categories. Anything else is simply absurd. We don't have a category named Category:Media in Anatolia either. --Semsurî (talk) 19:09, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, I have meanwhile created Category:Kurdistan Region. Iraqi Kurdistan, as such, was not a political entity, so it does not make too much sense to have a tree for Iraqi Kurdistan as if it was a political entity. Generally I would prefer splitting the content of these categories between Iraq and Kurdistan Region. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:03, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I can support that solution. --Semsurî (talk) 21:02, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:24, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Extended content
Nominator's rationale: The current name refers to a cultural and geographical area, while the second is the name of the autonomous region Kurdistan Region. The article is about the latter. Semsurî (talk) 22:22, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, I suppose this requires a batch nomination. There are many categories with Iraqi Kurdistan in the name. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:58, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I will propose renaming for similar categories as well. --Semsurî (talk) 16:45, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The broader discussion is on tomorrow's page. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:16, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as nom - Kurdistan refers to the land inhabited by Kurds, who are split between Turkey (where they are treated as insurgents); Syria where an insurgent movement is currently dominant in part of the country; Iraq (subject of present discussion); and Iran. The Iraqi area is officially Kurdistan Region, but who knows what polity will emerge from the Syrian conflict for Syrian Kurdistan. I according consider that Iraq or Iraqi should remain part of the name. I would not oppose a change to Category:Education in Kurdistan Region (Iraq) Category:Education in Iraqi Kurdistan Region, etc. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Adding a disambiguator "(Iraq)" makes sense indeed. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:01, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Oculi and Semsûrî: what are your opinion about Peterkingiron's proposal above to add "(Iraq)" as a disambiguator? ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 19:42, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Trialpears:, I can support the "(Iraq)" proposal. --Semsurî (talk) 19:48, 20 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:National parks in Conwy County Borough[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 09:00, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, the three categories only contain Snowdonia. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:07, 15 November 2019 (UTC) Marcocapelle (talk) 21:07, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:20, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just delete -- Snowdonia is bigger than any of these. It is in Category:National parks in Wales which does not need to be split by council areas. I would not oppose adding Snowdonia to the geography categories, but do not think it is really necessary. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:33, 23 November 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:Comedy game shows[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: keep. MER-C 09:24, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicative of Category:1980s American game shows. Not enough WP:N to break out from Category:1980s American game shows, nor no WP:V source defining subgroup from main. AldezD (talk) 18:27, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also nominating Category:1930s American comedy game shows, Category:1940s American comedy game shows, Category:1950s American comedy game shows, Category:1960s American comedy game shows, Category:1970s American comedy game shows, Category:1980s American comedy game shows, Category:1990s American comedy game shows, Category:2000s American comedy game shows, Category:2010s American comedy game shows. AldezD (talk) 18:29, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:20, 23 November 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:Venetian archaeological sites in Greece[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. MER-C 03:17, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Archaeological" is redundant and possibly misleading, e.g. a still standing set of city walls is not, strictly speaking, an "archaeological site". Constantine ✍ 13:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:27, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to Category:Archaeological sites in Greece. Do we need to have every type of archaeological site from every country when there are only two or three in some categories? I don't see the advantage to this over-categorization for the sake of category consistency with the whole. Alternatively...
Dual upmerge to Category:Archaeological sites in Greece and Category:Venetian archaeological sites. --Doug Mehus T·C 15:57, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The point of the nomination was that the sites aren't archaeological sites. This alternative does not solve that problem. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:07, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose renaming. Faulty argument from the nominator. The archaeological in archaeological site isn't redundant: a site is any place, an archaeological site is a place with physical evidence of past human activity. By the same token, standing remains like walls are archaeological sites. Renaming would be confusing and break consistency with the rest of the Category:Archaeological sites tree. – Joe (talk) 16:52, 2 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:Powermasters[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 09:01, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category only consists of four pages, one of which is a redirect and one will be deleted within days. The rest might also get deleted within months. There are simply too few pages to deserve a separate category. JIP | Talk 12:32, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:27, 23 November 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:Plaza Sésamo[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 09:01, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category for a television show without the volume of content necessary to warrant one: apart from the eponym itself, the only other content here is a single character from it. Bearcat (talk) 03:05, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. The Dutch sibling category, though fairly populated, can probably also be nominated as a case of WP:PERFCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:35, 23 November 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:Spectacles[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 09:02, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Virtually unmaintainable category for a concept that is too broad in scope to be usefully WP:DEFINING of its contents. Just seven topics have been filed here: four specific opening ceremonies of sports festivals and three theatrical performance events, and that's literally it. But let's consider what else could be filed here: every other opening and closing ceremony of every other sporting event; every concert tour by any major pop or rock artist who's ambitious enough to do more than just stand there and sing; award ceremonies; art and music and film festivals; public parades; dance balls; every performance art show; and on and so forth. Literally anything that fits the definition of "an event that is memorable for the appearance it creates" would belong here, which makes the category so broad as to be effectively pointless because it can subjectively encompass the vast majority of all entertainment events that exist at all. Bearcat (talk) 02:54, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. 128.194.3.149 (talk) 05:20, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per previous comments and we already have the more meutrally phrased Category:Events. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:29, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Whether an event or performance is spectacular is a matter of opinion. We cannot have POV categories, that is ones that depend on the editor's POV. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:13, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above—subjective. buidhe 22:30, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Either delete or expand to include monocles and pinces-nez. Grutness...wha? 02:25, 25 November 2019 (UTC) (yes, yes, I know)[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:Spectacle[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 09:02, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for an eponymous concept, one book about that concept and one film adaptation of that book. This is not enough content to need a dedicated category. Bearcat (talk) 02:35, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, also per WP:SHAREDNAME, the book and film deal with a much broader topic than with spectacles as we usually understand the term. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:45, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Apart from the book and film (and I am not sure if spectacle in French truly translates to the same in English), I do not see what is different from the item above. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:15, 23 November 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_November_23&oldid=942698017"