Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 3 May 5 >

May 4[edit]

Category:Incidents involving impersonating Law Enforcement[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 18:06, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 22:47, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete per WP:SMALLCAT basically. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Thank you for the nom and allow me to raise awareness for this category that I think is important. Watching today's news item 2020 Nova Scotia attacks, I felt like impersonating law enforcement is a major challenge for the contemporary society's security model, where we rely on law enforcement to execute measures that non-law enforcement are not allowed to perform. However civilians have no good way to validate if a law enforcement is a legit one, and we have seen multiple incidents before. I urge editors to join and contribute to flag any incidents of this category. I disagree with the nom's WP:SMALLCAT with quickly a few examples such as Ted_Bundy, 300 million yen robbery, and this category will only grow. I wonder if this would convince the nom. (COI: page creator) xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 21:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment respond to @Marcocapelle:,
  • For 2020 Nova Scotia attacks, this is a objective defining characteristic according to "Wortman impersonated a police officer by driving a replica police car and wearing a police uniform"
  • For Ted_Bundy, "He would typically approach his victims in public places, feigning injury or disability, or impersonating an authority figure, before knocking them unconscious and taking them to secluded locations to rape and strangle them.". You could imaging individual incidents are probably not WP:GNG enough to warrant a separate page, but this is a incident related to policy impersonation.
  • For 300_million_yen_robbery, "They were stopped in the street next to Tokyo Fuchū Prison by a young uniformed officer on a police motorcycle."
In addition, there is another one: Securitas_depot_robbery. And that's why I respectfully disagree with nom's main argument WP:SMALLCAT
I feel like we shall invite more editors who regularly edit criminal cases related topics etc to join the discussion to feedback on whether according to their domain knowledge it would be WP:SMALLCAT or otherwise. Could anyone help us notify the PROD for appropriate list? xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 18:12, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, these are not articles about incidents involving impersonating Law Enforcement, they are articles that also happen to contain an incident involving impersonating Law Enforcement. Please do make that distinction. 2020 Nova Scotia attacks is about shootings and fires, Ted Bundy is about a serial killer, 300 million yen robbery is about a robbery. If you feel that the topic's coverage in Wikipedia is underdeveloped, then by all means expand the article Police impersonation. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is nothing new about impersonating Law Enforcement. Its been happening for hundreds, maybe thousands, of years. But I'm not convinced that it is sufficiently defining to constitute a category. Rathfelder (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Nom's SMALLCAT rationale makes no sense: there are clearly a lot of potential additions to this category. I don't understand the other objections, either. How is putting things into this category POV pushing? What is the "nothing new" argument supposed to mean? I agree that some of the articles mentioned, like Ted Bundy, might not be great fits for the category, but that's not really the issue. Dicklyon (talk) 00:26, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unnecessary. But even if kept it needs renaming, as the current title is in execrable English and has unnecessary capitalisation (we don't capitalise "law enforcement", which is not a proper name). -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:33, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but as Crimes involving police impersonation. A slightly fuller explanation can be provided in head note, to say that it includes other uniformed law enforcement officers. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:23, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Peterkingiron: I agree with renaming. xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 17:38, 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:Ontario mass media[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: already moved to Category:Mass media in Ontario via WP:CFDS. bibliomaniac15 21:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category Mvcg66b3r (talk) 18:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge somehow. Obvious duplicate, but I am not sure which format better fits the convention. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge as nominated since "Mass media of province" is the standard format of the sibling categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:59, 5 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:Labor historians[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 21:49, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match Labour as well as to reflect the non-US origins of the majority of those in the field. User:Namiba 18:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per parent Category:Labor history and upwards. Labour is a dab page. Oculi (talk) 21:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change. The majority of countries using English use the spelling with "u." Accordingly, the category should change.Dogru144 (talk) 21:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral You couldn't pay me to wade into this WP:ENGVAR nomination but you all have fun! RevelationDirect (talk) 00:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - much though I dislike the US spelling, the entire tree of Category:Labor is spelt that way. If you want to take the whole tree for renaming, feel free, but we tend to go with first usage unless there is a strong reason to change. Grutness...wha? 04:30, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Oculi and Grutness, there is no reason to single out one category from the tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:41, 5 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:A Song of Ice and Fire location redirects[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 12#Category:A Song of Ice and Fire location redirects

Category:Batwoman (TV series)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 15#Category:Batwoman (TV series)

Category:Sports events postponed due to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic[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 rename. @Lugnuts: please do not pre-empt moves by creating and populating such categories manually; it makes more work for the admins to check. I will now delete the target page that you created, in order to make way for the move of the older category with all its page history. – Fayenatic London 22:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match parent articles Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on sports and COVID-19 pandemic Joseph2302 (talk) 09:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support speedy category renaming per WP:C2D and WP:C2C.
    SSSB (talk) 13:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- I hope we can settle on using "COVID-19" for all categories about it. I note that the main article is using an expanded name, rather than the abbreviation, but this makes for very verbose category names. The abbreviation can be expanded in a headnote. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Now the main page has been moved. I thought this would be a given.... Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 16:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. If - Heaven forbid - we need to again disambiguate by year later, we can do it then. Grutness...wha? 04:31, 5 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:Dungeons & Dragons magical items[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 18:08, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT - there is only one page in this category that could actually be called a standalone article about a magical item. The redirects should be removed as they are not meant to be in such categories. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Perfectly legitimate category. There's no problem with redirects being in categories. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:30, 7 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:Buddhist magazine stubs[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 18:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The recommended minimum for a stub type is 60 articles. With only 2 articles currently, and a total of 7 articles in Category:Buddhist magazines, there is not enough material to justify a dedicated stub category. The stub template {{Buddhism-mag-stub}} should be kept and is not included in this nomination. (Category creator notified using Template:Cfd notice) -- Black Falcon (talk) 02:50, 4 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:Hungarian Ice Hockey 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. bibliomaniac15 21:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OVERLAPCAT, WP:OCAWARD and WP:OCASSOC)
A large majority of the biography articles in this category don't even mention the Hungarian Ice Hockey Hall of Fame, so it doesn't seem defining. While this is not officially an Olympic hall of fame, it sure looks like on in practice: 10 of the 12 articles are in Category:Olympic ice hockey players of Hungary or other Olympic categories. (The other two—1, 2—are already well categorized.) While being in the Olympics is certainly defining for athletes, getting an award later for that same participation is not. The contents of the category are already listified here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. -
*RFC There is an open request for comments on proposed changes to WP:OCAWARD. Your input (pro/con/other) is always welcome here. -RD
Delete Per previous outcomes, especially this one. Gotitbro (talk) 00:58, 4 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:Cape Cod Baseball League 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. bibliomaniac15 21:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCAWARD (WP:NONDEFINING)
The Cape Cod Baseball League is a summer league played by college students at beach resort towns. This Hall of Fame is really recognizing these student players for accomplishments much later in their baseball career, as the league's motto makes clear: "Where the Stars of Tomorrow Shine Tonight". These articles tend to mention playing for the league in passing and this award not at all so it's not defining. For any reader interested in the topic, the winners are already listed here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:34, 4 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
Delete Same rationale as above. Gotitbro (talk) 00:58, 4 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:Operas set in Pakistan[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 18:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Currently only used in historically set (Alexandrian) operas where it is both anachronistic and retrospective. Similarly we have Category:Operas set in Ceylon (not Category:Operas set in Sri Lanka), a more better cat might be Category:Operas set in the Punjab but this cat is definitely not apt here. Gotitbro (talk) 00:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Gotitbro needs to explain why Pakistan should be treated differently from every other country in the world! In this and many, many other areas we categorize by modern political entities. It is untrue to say all the operas are "Alexandrian", Le roi de Lahore is set in medieval times, with Lahore threatened by Muslim invaders. If you want to rename Ceylon to Sri Lanka, fine, do a cfd, but what has that to do with the issue here? Gotitbro and another editor have twice emptied this category before adding a speedy deletion tag, which is a gross abuse of proper procedures. Johnbod (talk) 00:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How is it treating it differently from "every other country", I don't see any other historically set opera being applied modern-day nation-sate cats elsewhere (would be like adding cats relating to modern Israel to a Palestinian opera); especially hen I have already pointed out above another example where the cat is properly used (Ceylon/Sri Lanka). And I only CSD'd the cat at the time because I did not realize it was against policy/procedure. And none of your arguments point to why the cats should be kept. And how is it untrue that all most of the articles you added the cat to are operas about Alexander? Gotitbro (talk) 00:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See for example Category:Operas set in Belgium. Does your last sentence have any point now? Johnbod (talk) 02:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It seems that I created this, presumably because it was listed at Special:WantedCategories. I usually shrug at the possible deletion of such categories, and refrain from comment, but the history of attempted out-of-process deletions caught my eye, and Johnbod is quite right to complain about that.
The underlying issue here is a broader failure of the community to make a decision on what I call anachrophobia: the fear of anachronism. At its extreme, this leads some editors to rip apart broad swathes of the category tree.
The core issue is fairly simple: what political geography to use when describing the past. The difficulty is that Wikipedia's geographical categories are all based on current political geography, and will probably have to remain that way because it would be way too complex to try to devise a categorisation scheme which would accommodate all the boundaries. The animation at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFYKrNptzXw of only about 250 years of European political maps shows such a fluid kaleidoscope in much of Europe that I hope nobody would even try to capture it in the category system, and much of Asia has been similarly fluid.
So I agree with Johnbod that best we can do is to categorise by categorize by modern political entities. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete until there are operas set in present-day Pakistan – which none of the operas formerly in this category are. Lahore wasn't associated with Pakistan until the early 1940s. Pakstan/Pakistan is a 20th-century entity (unlike Belgium). -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, Belgium is a 19th-century creation, like Pakistan entirely unknown previously. But several of the Belgian operas are set in the Middle Ages - for example the best-known, Lohengrin (opera), which begins in Antwerp in the 10th century. Please explain your thinking. Johnbod (talk) 11:57, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Belgians have been mentioned by Caesar ("Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, ..."). The word Pakistan didn't exist until recently, and unlike Myanmar, it's not the result of a renaming/transcription issue. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, the Belgae, who lived in all the Low Countries, & northern France virtually down to Paris, are mentioned by Caesar, but "Belgium" is entirely a 19th-century idea (the more precise classicist term Batavia having been already taken by the Dutch). I'm not sure what your point is anyway. Johnbod (talk) 00:13, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggestion: create Category:Operas set in ancient history and Category:Operas set in the Middle Ages and use those for cases when the modern country did not exist yet. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Marcocapelle, such chronological categories are probably a good idea regardless of the outcome here. But they don't offset the benefits of geogrpahical categorisation. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Just to be clear on that, I meant it as a suggestion for in case the category is deleted as anachronistic. It would at least keep the operas about Alexander together. In this case I do not have a strong opinion about the anachronism argument itself. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Geographical categorisation is fine if it doesn't jar with anachronistic political entities that are unrelated to the story told. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Michael Bednarek, like other anachrophobes, you seem to be fixated only the on political aspect. But the basis of a country is geographical, and that geographical basis is directly relevant to the story told. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:33, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • Avoiding anachronisms cannot be classified as a phobia; it's part of understanding history. In this case, the solution is simple: unless an opera is set in present-day Pakistan, or if reputable sources describe them as connected to Pakistan, this category is clearly non-defining for the works currently so categorized and should be removed. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
            • As has now been pointed out several times, this just not how this category scheme (and many, many others) works. How would this work for German and Italian operas, or for example those set in Colonial America, as Ballo in Maschera was for a long time? Johnbod (talk) 12:28, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - the category system cannot possibly cope with every change of border. Moreover 'Operas set in Ceylon' should be renamed: cf Category:Novels set in Myanmar, which contains Orwell's Burmese Days. Oculi (talk) 09:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- We are discussing 4 operas about Alexander the Great in India and one about a King of Lahore, who was associating with a Hindu priestess; additionally we have mention of the Pearl Fishers (by its Italian title) and Ceylon. Most of this (if not all) is about European fantasies of an exotic "India". I wonder whether Category:Operas set in ancient India might not be a more appropriate target? Peterkingiron (talk) 16:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See Bhg above - in any case Le roi de Lahore is set in medieval times. Johnbod (talk) 00:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep We categorize by modern countries and boundaries, not centuries-old formations. Dimadick (talk) 20:57, 4 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_4&oldid=1073192685"