Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 June 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 1 June 3 >

June 2[edit]

Category:Seven Sister States[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 13:55, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT of Category:Northeast India. The only content is the eponymous articles and categories of these seven states. Seven Sisters is an alternate expression sometimes used to refer to Northeast India, as explained e.g. in Northeast India § Seven Sister States. There is therefore very little potential content that would not fit in Northeast India categories. Place Clichy (talk) 22:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:27, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree but leave cat-redirect. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:08, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree Seven sister state is just an informal term used to refer to northeast states excluding Sikkim. There is no need for this category as it is never been approved by the 7 governments of respective state neither by government of India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taal Saptak (talk • contribs) 05:15, 17 June 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:Jewish American basketball people[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) 00:16, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Recent category (25 April 2020) which largely overlaps existing categories such as Category:Jewish basketball players‎, Jewish men's basketball players or Jewish women's basketball players, most of which are already American (or Israeli). Also, the scope is less clear, mentioning basketball "people" while parent categories use "basketball players". Place Clichy (talk) 22:13, 2 June 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:Redirects from CAS Numbers[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:Redirects from CAS Registry Numbers. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:11, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Correct the capitalisation of this and {{R from CAS Number}}. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:46, 2 June 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.

American television stations by former network affiliation[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 Timrollpickering (talk) 23:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Categories grouping television stations on a former characteristic that isn't a useful or defining grouping. Affiliate stations can drop a network affiliation and reaffiliate with another network almost literally at will, and even owned and operated stations can very easily be sold to different owners, so it's not useful to categorize television stations by former network affiliations that they don't carry anymore -- that can lead to extreme category bloat, because stations have sometimes been affiliated with numerous different networks over the course of their histories. Even after having randomly spotchecked just four articles, I've already found one station (KELO-TV) which is catted in four of these at the same time, and one (KULR-TV) which is catted in five of them — and at least in theory, it would be within the realm of possibility for a station to have to be catted in all 12 of them. So for the same reasons that we don't categorize radio or television stations by past owners or radio stations by dropped formats, we categorize television stations only for their current (or last, in the case of a defunct station) network affiliation, and don't pile on extra categories for past ones. No objection to listifying if desired, but this isn't the category system's job. Bearcat (talk) 20:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I was prepared to defend the DuMont one until I started clicking through the category: KENS#History and many others have "secondary affiliations" where they carried a few programs for a network and which means they are categorized under each which is definitely non-defining. Interested in other editor's viewpoints on primary affiliations. RevelationDirect (talk) 22:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in order to prevent excessive category clutter in the articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 5 June 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:Former CBC Television stations[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 Timrollpickering (talk) 23:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category grouping television stations (and some "lists of transmitters" that are really just redirects to television stations) on a former characteristic that isn't a useful or defining grouping. Affiliate stations can drop a network affiliation and reaffiliate with another network almost literally at will, and even owned and operated stations can very easily be sold to different owners, so it's not useful to categorize television stations by former network affiliations that they don't carry anymore -- that can lead to extreme category bloat, because stations have sometimes been affiliated with numerous different networks over the course of their histories. So for the same reasons that we don't categorize radio or television stations by past owners or radio stations by dropped formats, we categorize television stations only for their current (or last, in the case of a defunct station) network affiliation, and don't pile on extra categories for past ones.
And for an even more concrete example of why this is not a good idea, there are stations in here (CHCH-DT, frex) that literally haven't been CBC-affilated since the 1960s, and thus aren't permanently defined by that association.
The argument that this should be kept because we do this in the United States, which is likely to be attempted by the creator of this, also does not wash: the similar categories that exist for the United States were virtually all created within the past few months by the same person who created this one, and consensus was always against this in the past for precisely the reasons I outlined above. So it's not that this needs to be kept because similar categories also exist for the American networks -- it's that the American categories also need to be deleted for the same reasons, although I'll be batching them in a separate discussion. Bearcat (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Defer To the outcome of the US former networks above, whether I agree with the outcome or not. RevelationDirect (talk) 22:24, 2 June 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:Nizams Dominion[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 June 12#Category:Nizams Dominion

Category:Nizams Special Soldiers[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 July 11#Category:Nizams Special Soldiers

Category:(Nizams) Asaf Jahi Dynasty[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. bibliomaniac15 18:34, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Procedural nomination; opposed speedy. The category contains the 7 Nizams of the Asaf Jahi dynasty. The renaming was opposed by Gonnym (talk · contribs) on the Speedy page without stating a rationale. – Fayenatic London 20:18, 2 June 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:Redirects from nicknames[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 June 12#Category:Redirects from nicknames

Category:Political figures of Richmond, California[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. bibliomaniac15 18:34, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Standard is Politicians from X. Nominated to match the rest of the tree. User:Namiba 18:21, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Per WP:C2C, consistency with established category tree names. RevelationDirect (talk) 22:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom Dupilicate categories with identical scopes. Dimadick (talk) 15:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, while it is well-intended to separate politicians active as a politician somewhere from politicians born and raised somewhere, we do not make this distinction anywhere else. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:37, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- obvious duplicates, Peterkingiron (talk) 19:18, 7 June 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:Redirect category 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: Merge to Category:Redirect templates Timrollpickering (talk) 23:32, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The name does not really resemble the use of the category. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unless user:Paine Ellsworth can tell us why anyone still needs this, it should probably be merged to Category:Redirect templates. – Fayenatic London 20:47, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:Redirect templates, pending clarification from creator. RevelationDirect (talk) 22:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 2015 and '16 a lot of time, mine and other editors, was spent on testing rcat templates to make sure they worked as they should both within and outside the shell template (presently named "Redirect category shell"). Haven't used this category for a long time, so merging it into the "Redirect templates" category is fine with me. I would only say "keep" if other editors were to chime in and say they are still using it for testing purposes. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 12:10, 3 June 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:Three Rivers Community College (Missouri)[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 Timrollpickering (talk) 23:32, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: School was renamed; C2D. SportsGuy789 (talk) 17:13, 2 June 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:Adams State College alumni[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 Timrollpickering (talk) 23:33, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Adams State College was renamed to Adams State University in 2015. The precedent is to use schools' modern names for all historical alumni. 71.56.244.35 (talk) 14:42, 2 June 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:Meadowbrook Polo Club[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 Timrollpickering (talk) 13:23, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Eponymous single-page category. Wire723 (talk) 12:34, 2 June 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:Death of George Floyd[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 Timrollpickering (talk) 13:22, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: While I could imagine putting this in Speedy renaming after the article was moved from Death of George Floyd to Killing of George Floyd, I expect some editors will want to debate it. That said, if an admin decides it should be renamed in two days per C2D, that is certainly fine with me.-- Mike Selinker (talk) 12:17, 2 June 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:Italian drama road moves[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 been speedily renamed (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 08:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Typo. Errix (talk) 10:07, 2 June 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:Scotty Emerick 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 Timrollpickering (talk) 13:24, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single member of the category is a redirect. Provides no help to readers. Richhoncho (talk) 09:59, 2 June 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:Shelly Fairchild 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 Timrollpickering (talk) 13:24, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single member of category which is also a redirect. No help or assistance to readers. Richhoncho (talk) 09:53, 2 June 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:Holocaust plays[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 Timrollpickering (talk) 13:25, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The current title is somewhat ambiguous and the 'about X' name is common anyway if you look at the Category:Plays by topic. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:00, 2 June 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:Sexual orientation and society[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. bibliomaniac15 18:26, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Sexual orientation" mostly applies to the L, G, and B and is a subset of LGBT. "LGBT and society" makes more sense as a parent category, not a child of this one. But this one contains some LGBT subcategories and articles that go beyond the scope of just sexual orientation. Given that many but not all articles span both, it's probably most natural just to merge up into "LGBT and society". -- Beland (talk) 03:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • If kept, reverse the hierarchy (make LGBT the parent category of sexual orientation) and move some content from sexual orientation to LGBT. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:30, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmmm, I think the current order is correct, sexual orientation can be > than LGBT which is just 4 types of s.o. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • There is nothing about heterosexuality in the category. There is also nothing about transgender in the category (the T of LGBT is unrelated to sexual orientation) so that's why I said it should be a subset of LGBT. But if we cannot reach consensus about the hierarchy, that would be even more reason to merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:22, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment In theory, I get the idea that this would also include straight/asexual content. In practice, the nominator is correct that this is LGBTQ content. RevelationDirect (talk) 10:02, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Marcocapelle that, while we have lots of content on the encyclopedia that is about heterosexuals and heterosexuality, in practice this category is the same as LGBT. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:50, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • With the above two reactions it has become clear there is consensus for merging to LGBT and I am perfectly fine with that too. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 5 June 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.

Films by demographic audience[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. bibliomaniac15 05:22, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Option A
Option B
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate categories for the same purpose, i.e. films for children/teens/adults. In case option B is preferred, other categories may be renamed as well: Animation by demographic, Animated television series by demographic, Television series by demographic, Anime and manga by demographic, Japanese manga magazines by demographic, Categories by demographics. Place Clichy (talk) 08:24, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment/question, "adult movies" is meant as a genre for sure. Can we perhaps merge all of them to "by genre" categories? Marcocapelle (talk) 15:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle: Good point. Until recently, Category:Adult films was a soft redirect to Films about sexuality. However in this acception adult is a mere euphemism for erotic or pornographic films, which are otherwise correctly categorized by genre as such. There are other art forms such as animation or comics where the word adult is clearly used to describe works that are not oriented towards a young audience but that cover a wide variety of topics and genres that are not sexual in nature, I would therefore not rule out the room for a demographic/audience category scheme (that's a lot of negatives). The main concern behind this nomination is the duplicate. Place Clichy (talk) 17:10, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    So currently, adult animation is the only content that certainly does not belong in a "by genre" category. That sounds like merging (while purging adult animation) is also an option to consider. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Comics are also a form of art where the adult target would be defining regardless of genre, at least for Franco-Belgian comics which I know better. Category:Adult comics is currently poorly parented imho, but Category:Anime and manga by demographic is definitely one such category by readership and not by genre. I guess that in cinema or television, non-sexual adult films are probably the mainstream type of films, so this characteristic would not be defining. Place Clichy (talk) 18:23, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I find Category:Novels by age-group, which is similar (but excludes say men's/women's interest groups). I have a feeling there was a 4th way of describing this method of subcatting in some other tree. It should be Category:Categories by demographic. Category:Magazines by interest is another (wider). Oculi (talk) 18:34, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Oculi: that's a very good catch, many thanks! While the focus of these variously named categories seems to be on age rather than gender or other demographic (e.g. education, wealth or ethnicity), I guess that the structure seen in Category:Mass media by interest is the closest thing to a well-organized category by demographic target audience. I also think I like by age-group better than by demographic or by audience. AS the term mass media may not be applicable for all, I suggest creating a new Category:Entertainment by age-group or Category:Entertainment by interest and moving there the various categories discusssed above, renamed such as: Category:Films by age-group, Category:Animation by age-group, Category:Television series by age-group, Category:Anime and manga by age-group etc. I wonder if the hyphen is appropriate though. However, this structure should only host material for which this age-group target is defining, and certainly not to place every film or series or novel in an age or gender category. Place Clichy (talk) 18:23, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment by age group is really a ratings (in countries where there are such) categories, do we want to do that as different content triggers different ratings (violence doesn't trigger much ratings fuss in the US but nudity does; in Scandinavia it seems the other way around). I don't think that certain ratings (other than adult, where age restrictions preclude minors from attending) denote the demographic of the audience and many films work on several levels (Shrek comes to mind). Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:55, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 02:57, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 03:09, 2 June 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:Oxudercinae[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 Timrollpickering (talk) 09:28, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Categories both contain Mudskippers. Lymantria (talk) 12:16, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Mudskipper and Oxudercinae are not synonymous, all of the mudskippers are members of the subfamily but not all of the members of the subfamily are called mudskippers, some are called gobies and many don't have common names.Quetzal1964 (talk) 19:24, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 03:04, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose possibly reverse merge. "Mudskippers" is ambiguous - is it a taxon, fish with a particular name or fish with a particular characteristic? See Plovers CFD below. DexDor (talk) 20:54, 12 June 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:Transformers: Chojin Masterforce character redirects to lists[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 to rescope; rename to match main article Timrollpickering (talk) 09:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Transformers: Chojin Masterforce redirects to Transformers: Super-God Masterforce, so the category should be renamed accordingly. Morriswa (Charlotte Allison) (talk) 05:29, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 04:01, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 02:57, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support rename. The English name appears to be Super-God Masterforce so the category should follow. --Gonnym (talk) 10:55, 30 June 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:Plovers[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 13:56, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category puts a bird that is usually not found near bodies of water under Category:Shorebirds.  The articles are all in more appropriate categories (e.g. Category:Charadriinae). DexDor (talk) 12:44, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:Charadriinae, but leave a redirect, as this is a plausible search term. (alternatively reverse merge, as the taxonomic family name is obscure to non-specialists). Peterkingiron (talk) 15:59, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The 4 articles are already in scientifically-named categories so no merge is necessary. Categories using scientific names are generally better than those using common names as they are more clearly defined and form a complete non-overlapping set. A non-specialist can go to the Plover article and from there go to the (scientifically-named) category (or just use normal hyperlinks to other articles). DexDor (talk) 19:33, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PS re reverse merge - it should be noted that the interwiki links are generally on the scientifically-named categories (e.g. Category:Plovers has 1, Category:Charadrius has over 20). DexDor (talk) 05:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Are dotterels and kildeer plovers or not (every other species in the genus with these two has plover in the name)? A shared name element is not a defining characteristic. Plantdrew (talk) 01:10, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 02:54, 2 June 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:Houses in Lynnfield, Massachusetts[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. bibliomaniac15 05:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge to category:Houses in Essex County, Massachusetts. Small category (2 articles) for a small town. User:Namiba 14:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominating:

  • Dual merge per nom. @Namiba: please use the standard nomination format "Propose merging X to Y and Z" to make the merge targets crystal clear to everyone. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 02:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The format is certainly poor as Marcocapelle pointed out; the rationale says they are all to be merged with Category:Houses in Essex County, Massachusetts. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:19, 3 June 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.

Language of countries[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: Status quo there was a rough consensus against merging/renaming/deleting these categories. (non-admin closure) --Trialpears (talk) 22:09, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge/rename/delete, the categories initially stroke me as oddly-named because the "of country" format almost suggests that languages are owned by countries. In fact for all of them more natural merge or rename targets are possible, as indicated. These container categories may have been created in order to make it more explicit that expatriate content is also allowed, but the articles are in a language subfolder which allows expatriate content anyway. So if that was behind it, it was a nice thought but not effective. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:10, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If merged, the primary target for the first one should not be as nominated, but matching the current name without the country, I.e. Category:Mass media by language of India to Category:Mass media by language – as it is currently a diffusing sub-cat of the latter. Manual merging and further work would also be needed re other parents.
As for the nominated target Category:Mass media in India by language, it is currently used for "mass media in India by medium and language". If we want a category for "mass media in India by language and medium", whether merged into the former or kept separate, some of the language categories would require splitting into India-specific sub-cats, N.B. Tamil (also covers Sri Lanka, Malaysia and sundry others) and Urdu (Pakistan as well as India). This has been partly done e.g. for newspapers – see the sub-cats of the newspaper category nominated above. – Fayenatic London 18:43, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's not 'by language and medium' - Category:Mass media in India by language will necessarily contain the subcat Category:Newspapers published in India by language. Oculi (talk)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 02:50, 2 June 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:Canada's Sports 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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 00:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)
The Canada's Sports Hall of Fame recognizes Canadian athletes for their performance much earlier in their lives. This category groups athletes from different sports and different eras in one large category while the articles are already well grouped under their respective sports which better aid navigation: Gordie Howe is in 16 hockey categories, Barbara Wagner is in 13 skating & Olympic cats, and Ferguson Jenkins is in 29 baseball cats. This award tends to get mentioned in a list with other awards, although there are exceptions where it's in the lede or omitted entirely, so it doesn't seem generally defining. The contents of the category are already listified at List of members of Canada's Sports Hall of Fame. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:58, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Background We previously deleted similar national All Sports halls of fame for Germany here, Scotland here, and New Zealand here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:58, 2 June 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:Jack Kirby 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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 00:19, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)
The Jack Kirby Hall of Fame was an award from 1989 to 2001 named after Jack Kirby that recognized long careers as comic book artists. Like most halls of fame, this award reflects the fame of people that are already prominent in their profession and isn't defining. That's reflected in the articles where this award is generally listed in passing with other hall of fame inductions (Over the course of a weekend, one enthusiastic editor moved that awards paragraph to the intro for about half of these articles though.) The contents of the category are already listified here for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:58, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
*RFC There is an open request for comments on proposed changes to WP:OCAWARD. Your input (pro/con/other) is always welcome here. -RD
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/2020_June_2&oldid=1073192601"