Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 12 May 14 >

May 13[edit]

Category:Elena Paparizou[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: procedural keep. in light of the RM going on at Talk:Elena Paparizou. Renominate if necessary. bibliomaniac15 19:06, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: The main article about this artist and its other related pages have been moved, and so the categories about them need to be renamed as well. Keivan.fTalk 23:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy Rename Per WP:C2D. Since the the name change was made by consensus in an RM at Talk:Helena Paparizou, the categories should blindly follow. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:03, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (was Mild support but oppose speedy). The RM was not consensual, closed as no consensus after a single opinion expressed (an opposition), and the article boldly moved a year later. However it does seem that her work is indeed marketed as Helena Paparizou in the latin-script world, despite it not being how one would usually transcript her Greek name. I'd like the article to better explain why, but you can't always get what you want. Place Clichy (talk) 13:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC) Changed to oppose on second thought. The renaming was not consensual and goes against consensus established on the talk page that Elena Paparizou is her name and that Helena is the name of her act. I have reverted it. Place Clichy (talk) 23:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly was just checking if there was an RM at all and did't look at the outcome. Vote changed. RevelationDirect (talk) 18:30, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Which consensus are you talking about? There was a single vote on the talk page! I wouldn't call that consensus. Not to mention that there are no English references that call her Elena in an official capacity. But, since everyone's demanding a discussion I started a move request / discussion on the talk page. You're welcome to participate. Keivan.fTalk 16:15, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See discussions here, here and here at least. Nobody contends that her legal name is Elena Paparizou, and that she started using Helena as an artist name ca. 2004 (not at the start of her career), and it is described as such in the article. Let's follow the RM, the categories should follow the name chosen for the article anyway. Place Clichy (talk) 22:04, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Defer @Keivan.f: Thank you for starting an RM. The category should match whatever that outcome is, whether I agree with it or not. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:48, 17 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.

Video game series[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 29#Video game series

Category:Albums produced by Andrew Watt (musician)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 29#Category:Albums produced by Andrew Watt (musician)

Category:Númenóreans[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. MER-C 14:14, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge per WP:RCAT. This category is exclusively redirects, so the redirects should be in a redirect category, not an article category. Hog Farm (talk) 18:37, 13 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:Peers nominated by Paddy Ashdown[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:Life peers created by Elizabeth II removing the three hereditaries Timrollpickering (talk) 12:02, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Clarification; they are life peers, not hereditary peers. HandsomeFella (talk) 19:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Unnecessary disambiguation for most of them, and inaccurate in the case of Margaret Thatcher, who also nominated three hereditary peers. Opera hat (talk) 10:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cmt: Ok, I didn't see that. We can split that category then. HandsomeFella (talk) 13:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:SMALLCAT as the required split leads to an unnecessary small category while there is no apparent advantage. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cmt: it would lead to one category with 7 entries and one with 3 entries. The William Hague category has 5 entries ... HandsomeFella (talk) 21:19, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -- No new patents of hereditary peerage have been granted by any of these, except William Whitelaw by Mrs Thatcher and she knew this would in effect be a life peerage, as he only had daughters who would not inherit. The other exception was Earl of Stockton to which Harold Macmillan was entitled (by precedent) as a past Prime Minister. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • (new !vote is below) Oppose per Peterkingiron. I would also favour deletion or upmerger. The WP:DEFINING characteristic here is that the person got a peerage, thereby entitling them to sit in the House of Lords. The issue of who nominated them is a relatively trivial detail, which should be captured in lists. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:49, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Harold Macmillan (1st Earl of Stockton), William Whitelaw, 1st Viscount Whitelaw and George Thomas, 1st Viscount Tonypandy are all in Category:Peers nominated by Margaret Thatcher. Opera hat (talk) 08:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reason I started creating these categories was as a means of demonstrating which leaders have appointed the most/least peers. The House of Lords is often criticised as being one of the largest upper houses in the world, and I thought it would be interesting to know the extent to which different PMs contributed to its size; once fully populated these categories would provide this. Lists I've encountered previously only show total number of creations per prime ministerial term, and do not filter out peers nominated in a resignation honours list or by opposition leaders. Opera hat (talk) 08:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @HandsomeFella, Peterkingiron, and Carlossuarez46: please comment on the alternative proposal to merge. – Fayenatic London 10:06, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Going to give this some time to let some of the respondents here comment on the merits of merging per BHG. It's clear at least that there's no consensus to rename according to the nom.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 18:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I don't agree with User:BrownHairedGirl's description of these categories as trivial or non-defining. A nomination to a permanent seat in the legislature is about as significant a piece of political patronage as you can get, so I think the identity of that political patron is always going to be important to the biography of a peer. Who has nominated whom always causes comment in the media around the times the honours lists are published. Opera hat (talk) 16:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Opera hat, a comment or two at the moment of appointment is a long way from a WP:DEFINING characteristic. -BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:29, 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:Letters by alphabet[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/move per Fayenatic london. bibliomaniac15 18:13, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Cover (more or less) the same topic. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Category:Letters by alphabet is the older one, and its page history should be moved over the target page. The same duplicate categories have been copied into Arabic and Vietnamese Wikipedias, see Wikidata items [1] & [2]; I volunteer to merge them if this is agreed in enwiki. – Fayenatic London 20:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom, keeping into account Fayenatic's comments. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:55, 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:Wikipedians who have the Dubious – discuss template imitated in their signatures[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: speedy delete per G7 Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 12:21, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:UCAT's requires that

the purpose of user categories is to aid in facilitating coordination and collaboration between users for the improvement and development of the encyclopedia

.
This category groups users who seek to disrupt discussions by using their signatures to mimick a cleanup tag, so it's an impediment to collaboration, and as such it's a clear no-no. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:47, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: the category's creator, Rebestalic posted[3] on their talk to say I don't mind if it's speedy-deleted.
Please can some admin speedy delete this per WP:G7? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What a professional proposal, and yes, I don't mind at all Rebestalic[dubious—discuss] 12:18, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete while I'm not necessarily adverse to the template itself—I thought it rather clever the first time I saw it used by an editor who is well-known to be both highly dubious and much discussed 😏—a user category based upon its usage appears, frankly, as an exercise in self-indulgence and navel-gazing. Thanks to BHG for filing. serial # 12:27, 13 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:First Secretaries of the Moscow City Committee of the CPSU[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 29#Category:First Secretaries of the Moscow City Committee of the CPSU

Category:Redirects from other disambiguation[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/keep. to the singular "disambiguation". bibliomaniac15 04:16, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Fix grammar. Already correct with Category:Redirects from natural disambiguations. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 03:48, 13 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:Guggenheim Fellowships[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 and purge individual biographies bibliomaniac15 04:19, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:CATNAME#Special conventions
In an earlier CFD nomination, we agreed not to categorize individual people as Guggenheim Fellows. However, in that nom I neglected to include a rename for the parent category, Category:Guggenheim Fellowships, and in good faith editors are already adding biography articles due to the vague title. The intent of that category is to hold annual lists like List of Guggenheim Fellowships awarded in 1976 so this new name will avoid confusion, especially in WP:HOTCAT. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:48, 13 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:Evening Standard Awards[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, merge and purge as nominated. MER-C 09:48, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)
Evening Standard is a London newspaper whose critics give out awards for film and theater. In the biography articles, these awards get a passing mention (if any). In contrast the BAFTA Awards and Laurence Olivier Award do seem defining for British film and theatre actors, respectively, and are typically in the lede. All of these winners are already listified under either Evening Standard British Film Awards or Evening Standard Theatre Awards. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:48, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Background We previously deleted similar film awards from Empire magazine here and an award from this newspaper for the best pubs in London here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:48, 13 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
  • Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as non-defining (e.g. for Sam Mendes whose article text makes no mention of this award). DexDor (talk) 05:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and purge per nom. No objections in principle to listifying, provided that any such lists are fully sourced and meet the notability criteria at WP:NLIST. A bare dump in article space of a category's contents will be deleted at AFD, as I repeatedly found when making such lists after closing a CFD nomination like this one. I suggest that a listing of each category's contents dumped on the talk page of this CFD log may be some help to anyone who wants to create such lists … but actually making valid mainspace lists is a non-trivial task. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the contents are already all in Evening Standard British Film Awards or Evening Standard Theatre Awards. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:06, 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_May_13&oldid=961602832"