Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 10 May 12 >

May 11[edit]

Category:Deaths at the Battle of Dupplin Moor[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. bibliomaniac15 03:46, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary category as the notable deaths at this battle were all Scottish. PatGallacher (talk) 22:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to parent categories, redundant category layer with just one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge to eliminate an unnecessary layer. The main article (which I have added to the subcategory) states that English casualties were light, so that we probably do not need an equivalent English category. On the other hand another parent is needed related to the Scottish wars of Indpendence of the early 14th century. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:22, 16 May 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:Genocide prevention[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 in light of the RM discussion going on currently. bibliomaniac15 03:49, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I moved the main article because "Prevention of genocide" is both more transparent what it means, and gets more than twice as many google hits. The category should be moved to correspond with it. buidhe 22:27, 11 May 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:Raja Rao Award[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. bibliomaniac15 03:50, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCASSOC, WP:OCAWARD)
The Raja Rao Award was a short lived Indian literary award from 2000 to 2009. The contents of this category are unusual: those who judged submissions, those who received the award, those who oversaw the organization, and the person the award was named after (Raja Rao) are all commingled. With a couple exceptions, the award is mentioned in passing in the articles across those groups and doesn't seem defining to any of them. The winners are already listified here in the main article while Template:Raja Rao Award includes all these articles for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:52, 3 May 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
Procedural Note to Closer I neglected tagging this category until 5/8. Additional time should be given for full discussion. RevelationDirect (talk) 16:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural relisting, since the category was not tagged until 5/8.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 19:51, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why has this been relisted when there is already a consensus to delete per OCAWARD? Peterkingiron (talk) 17:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's my fault: I missed tagging the category until a couple days after this nomination. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:41, 18 May 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:Railway stations in Hong Kong opened in 2020[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 03:55, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I propose that this category be upmerged to Category:Railway stations in China opened in 2020. This category extends back as far as Category:Railway stations in China opened in 2000. Hong Kong (and Macau) are "special administrative areas" of China and are part of China. The two stations will retain the category Category:2020 establishments in Hong Kong which they had before. We do not have categories for subnational divisions like "Railway stations opened in California in 2019" which are included in Category:Railway stations in the United States opened in 2019, (and the station should also be in "2019 establishments in California")
The category for "Railway stations by country by opening year" has only a few countries with significant numbers of new stations opening regularly (Canada, China, Russia and the United States), so should not be expanded by countries (or "subnational divisions") with only a few articles for inclusion. Likewise some categories by year or month e.g. disasters by year by country or events by month by country do not include all countries. The following categories for China include events from Hong Kong: Category:February 2018 events in China, Category:January 2020 events in China and Category:2018 disasters in China. Note that "establishments in Hong Kong by year" are included as a subcategory of "establishments in China by year" back to 1998 - apart from 2020.
copy of CFDS discussion
We do not have categories for subnational divisions like railway stations in California opened in 2019 or railway stations in Hong Kong opened in 2020. And the categories by country should be restricted to those countries with a number of new railway stations in all or most years e.g at present only China, Canada, Russia and the United States. Hugo999 (talk) 21:49, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – We create separate categories for Hong Kong to overcome complications related to its status as a semi-autonomous territory and history as a British overseas territory. This is a long-established convention for the ~16,000 Hong Kong-related articles on Wikipedia. The comparison to California is not apt because Hong Kong is not a Chinese province. Chinese laws do not apply in Hong Kong. The bulk of Hong Kong's railway stations opened before Hong Kong became part of China in 1997. Should those fall under the category for UK or China? Neither – Hong Kong categories should remain, as is the norm for all other category trees. Thank you. Citobun (talk) 00:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: While Hong Kong (and Macau) are not provinces but "special administrative areas" of China they are part of China; and apart from Category:2020 establishments in Hong Kong which you created, the earlier categories e.g. Category:2019 establishments in Hong Kong are subcategories of Category:2019 establishments in China, back to 1998. The categories for Railway stations in China will not extend further back than Category:Railway stations in China opened in 2000 as the wholesale building of new lines and stations (like the 19c "railway mania in Britain"?) seems to have started in the 2000s. Earlier categories for Chinese and Hong Kong railway stations will remain in Category:Railway stations opened in 1999 etc. Thank you. Hugo999 (talk) 05:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sounds reasonable, but let's then move this to full discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:19, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Citobun. We keep separate subcats for everything in Hong Kong, and creating random exceptions to that principle will make the category tree a nightmare to maintain. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Citobun and BrownHairedGirl: pinging other contributors to speedy discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:06, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It would have been a different situation when there would have been subcategories for every single country, because in those cases we usually still distinguish Hong Kong as well. But in this case country subcategories are highly exceptional and then a separate Hong Kong subcategory is really not needed. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:06, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Hong Kong is 'highly exceptional'. Oculi (talk) 11:33, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: What (highly)"exceptional" circumstances for Hong Kong (and presumably Macau)? Hong Kong is regarded as part of China, not a separate country; as is shown by say "2018 in Hong Kong" being a subcategory of "2018 in China". The "Railway stations opened in China by year" categories (like some other categories given above by year or month) do not have subcategories by subnational subdivision and there are only subcategories by country for a few countries (here Canada, China, Russia and the United States). Hugo999 (talk) 11:23, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 19:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is not unlikely there are more of these Chinese categories with Hong Kong articles. The aim of having the Hong Kong tree exactly replicating the tree of China is unmaintainable. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- Whatever the outcome, we need a new Hong Kong stations category, for example merging both 2020 and 2015 (and any other siblings to) to Category:Railway stations in Hong Kong opened in 21st century or in Hong Kong Special Economic Region (which I intend to refer to the period since the end of colonial rule by UK. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment:Comment: Railway stations in other countries by year will (or should be) in the categories of Railway stations opened in ABCD and ABCD establishments in Fooland; I do not see the justification for extra categories e.g. by century. Hong Kong stations post-1997 will be in the category of ABCD establishmenmts in Hong Kong. For Australia Wyndham Vale railway station is in the categories “2015 establishments in Australia” and “Railway stations opened in 2015” For Canadian stations e.g. West Harbour GO Station it is in the categories “Railway stations in Canada opened in 2015” and “2015 establishments in Ontario” i.e. the establishment category is at the state (America) or province (Canada) level. Another country which could justify “Railway stations by year of opening” categories is Japan. PS congratulations to BHG for creating the category Category: Railway stations in Great Britain by year of opening (about 200 years!) and for creating a subcategory for every possible year! Hugo999 (talk) 08:57, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have just created and fully populated Category:Railway stations in Hong Kong by year of opening. About 165 articles, spread across 13 categories. I think it works rather well, and there is no need to upmerge.
If the consensus of this discussion is to merge, then that should include all these new categories. But I hope that isn't the consensus. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:02, 19 May 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:Statistical theorems[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) 09:49, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per other categories in Category:Mathematical theorems. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:16, 11 May 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:Iraqi Central League[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. in light of the contested move. bibliomaniac15 19:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match with the name of the parent article, Iraq Central FA League, which was moved per WP:COMMONNAME. Hashim-afc (talk) 18:03, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 16:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support to match parent article name. GiantSnowman 16:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - parent article was recently moved without discussion (now reverted). GiantSnowman 16:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wrong Venue/Procedural Oppose First open up an WP:RM discussion on the talk page of Iraqi Central League where readers knowledgeable in the topic can come to a consensus. (Then, by all means, rename any related categories with WP:C2D.) RevelationDirect (talk) 03:08, 15 May 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:Iraqi Central League seasons[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. in light of the contested move. bibliomaniac15 19:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match with the name of the parent article, Iraq Central FA League, which was moved per WP:COMMONNAME. Hashim-afc (talk) 18:03, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 16:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support to match parent article name. GiantSnowman 16:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - parent article was recently moved without discussion (now reverted). GiantSnowman 16:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wrong Venue/Oppose in CFD The right place to start here is to open a formal WP:RM on the talk page of Iraqi Central League. (If there is consensus to rename the main article then, by all means, speedy rename any related categories through CFD.) RevelationDirect (talk) 00:23, 14 May 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:Literary work on the Third World War III[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. Consensus favors the original nom rather than the alt nom, despite the difference with the rest of the cat tree. bibliomaniac15 04:00, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Third World War III" is nonsensical. Otherwise, not sure whether the category should exist, but if it should, it should be renamed to be more in keeping with other novel categories. DonIago (talk) 17:25, 11 May 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:Perching birds[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 04:02, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These categories appear (e.g. see Passerine) to be the same topic. DexDor (talk) 11:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - passeriformes are literally all birds that perch, and they are distinguished by that feature. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 08:11, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- As mist of us do not know bio-Latin, I wonder if it might be better to reverse merge, leaving a cat-redirect. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge It may be that passeriformes are all birds that perch, but it is certainly not the case that all birds that perch are passeriformes, so the category fails to be defining. Johnbod (talk) 21:12, 16 May 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:Potter artists[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. bibliomaniac15 04:04, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I just created this category as I noticed a number of people listed under Category:Art pottery, but on second thought, aren't all potters artists? At least Category:Potters is under Category:Artists by type, so this seems redundant. Although historically there might have been potter craftsman whose works would not be considered artistic, so maybe there is potential for keeping this and refining the categorization of potters in general? Thoughts? Keep this, or delete it (and depopulate people from Category:Art pottery?). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - not at all needed. We have too many categories in this area already, with whole trees for Category:Potters, Category:Ceramists and others. There would be definitional problems, as you suggest. Art pottery is not at all the same as Ceramic art, so it was wrong to remove people from the former category ANYWAY. Please restore any changes I miss. Incidentally, it is not clear that William Ault was actually a hands-on potter himself, though he may have been, still less an artist. He is probably best seen as a businessman who understood the importance of artistic design at his end of the pottery business. He is not at all the same sort of "potter" as say Auguste Delaherche or the Martin Brothers. Potter also means pottery owner, and many notable potters since ancient times may not have done the job themselves. Johnbod (talk) 11:58, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Category has been emptied. Liz Read! Talk! 19:56, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It only ever contained William Ault , who, as described above, was not certainly either. If it was decided to keep it, it could be populated, with several sub-cats. But it essentially duplicates existing cats, & is not a term in common use. Johnbod (talk) 21:10, 18 May 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:Radio stations in insular areas of the United States[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 23#Category:Radio stations in insular areas of the United States

Category:People from Queens, New York[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. bibliomaniac15 19:19, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per consistency with the main Queens article and categories i.e. Category:People from Manhattan, Category:People from Brooklyn, Category:People from Staten Island, etc. cookie monster (2020) 755 03:53, 11 May 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:Swedish Curling 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) 00:27, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OVERLAPCAT, WP:OCAWARD and WP:OCASSOC)
My web translator calls this award "Big Curlers" but Swedish Curling Hall of Fame is probably a reasonable translation. There's not much info available about this award. The official web site in Swedish doesn't give much information but, in practice, these seem to be awarded within a year or two of becoming a Swedish curling champ. We already have Category:Swedish curling champions which closely overlaps. A number of these articles mention the award in the intro but they're consistently from the same enthusiastic editor who created this category. The contents of the category are already listified here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:23, 11 May 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.

Category:National Lacrosse 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) 00:27, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCAWARD (WP:NONDEFINING)
The National Lacrosse Hall of Fame is given to college level Lacrosse players in the United States usually many years after graduation. These recipients fall into three groupings:
1 No Article: A large majority of the winners likely don't have the notability to ever have a Wikipedia article.
2 Happened to Play in College: Many of the people who do have articles have them for reasons unrelated to Lacrosse, like General Robert E. Kelley or football player Jim Brown.
3 Actually Defined by Lacrosse but Not This Award: Some of the recipients are known for college Lacrosse like coach Gene Corrigan and player Stan Cockerton. Even with this group, the award tends to get a passing mention and doesn't seem defining.
All these articles are already well categorized under Category:College lacrosse players in the United States or the like. The contents of the category are already listified here in a separate list article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:23, 11 May 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_May_11&oldid=958319990"