Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 September 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< September 25 September 27 >

September 26[edit]

Category:Film country list navigational boxes[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: split. MER-C 17:32, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There are 69 templates in this category. Only two are navigational boxes: Template:Film lists by country and Template:Indian film list. The other 67 templates are sidebar templates. —⁠andrybak (talk) 22:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Andrybak: is it worth keeping the current category for those two exceptions (if others might be added), or should they be merged into the sole parent Category:Film country navigational boxes? – Fayenatic London 20:21, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Fayenatic london, yes. I think it's worth keeping the current category for those two exceptions and possible future additions. —⁠andrybak (talk) 10:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • in that case, split rather than rename. – Fayenatic London 14:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I support split as well. I don't remember seeing such a !vote in a CFD before. Learned something new today. —⁠andrybak (talk) 16:51, 30 September 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:County highways in DeKalb County, Illinois[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) 10:19, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Since the parent category was renamed as appropriate, these categories (which I mentioned should also be renamed, but were not done) should be renamed. Morriswa (Charlotte Allison) (talk) 21:37, 26 September 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.

State supreme court justice categories[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename all Timrollpickering (talk) 10:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming:

Nominator's rationale: Per the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 September 17#Category:New Jersey Supreme Court justices, I propose renaming all of these to "Justice of the..." construction, which I would assert is the more natural uniform construction to avoid awkward names like the current Category:Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia justices and Category:Supreme Court of Georgia (U.S. state) justices. I note that this formulation has already long been in use for all chief justice categories in Category:State supreme court chief justices in the United States by state (e.g. Category:Chief Justices of the Supreme Court of Alabama). BD2412 T 20:36, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Good Olfactory, Marcocapelle, and Place Clichy: BD2412 T 20:52, 26 September 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:Astronomy image articles[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 October 24#Category:Astronomy image articles

Category:Arabic writing system[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/delete which is effectively the same here (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 09:10, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I think this is a duplicate of Category:Arabic script. Mike Peel (talk) 19:18, 26 September 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.

Maya (dis)establishments in Guatemala[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) 10:22, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:OVERLAPCAT, it is not meaningful to have two parallel trees, by modern country and by ancient civilization. Note that the articles are in Category:Maya sites in Guatemala anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:04, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - reduce anachronism and unify cats.GreyShark (dibra) 20:35, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- This resolves an issue I highlighted on the CfD for the 7th century BC items. However I would question the merits of est/disest trees as there is not enough content for most of these. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:31, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair point, but let's solve one problem at a time. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:49, 27 September 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:Aviation accidents and incidents with a sole survivor[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) 16:05, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not defining characteristic of a aviation accident. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:48, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, trivial characteristic, the list is sufficient. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:59, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: one survivor does not define an aviation accident. ww2censor (talk) 21:36, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: - essentially coincidental WP:TRIVIA. - Ahunt (talk) 00:56, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete some people are notable as being the sole survivors of aircraft accidents, the accidents themselves are notable for having a sole survivor. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:39, 30 September 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.

Years in the Kingdom of Jerusalem[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 Timrollpickering (talk) 16:07, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge/delete per WP:SMALLCAT, the Kingdom of Jerusalem has too little content to have it diffused by year; by decade is fine though. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:53, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:32, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but second target only. The Asia tree appears to have no other content than the articles in the subject categories and could usefully be deleted. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:34, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are actually two articles in the subject categories which are not in the Asia categories yet, so I would rather leave it as dual merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:51, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - this is not as obvious as it looks. The question is not whether those categories are too specific to be by year, but whether they would or would not be populated sufficiently. The Kingdom of Jerusalem is well documented, so I'm tending to think that we may well have enough events to classify by year, but i'm not sure. However, one also has to take into account that the Kingdom of Jerusalem is only one of the Crusader Kingdoms in the Levant, while others - county of Tripoli, Principality of Antioch and County of Edessa do not yet have a category tree of their own. Perhaps we should consider a parent category tree "n-year in the Crusader states" for all those and then this could well have an annual resolution.GreyShark (dibra) 20:23, 28 September 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:Sportspeople from chernihiv[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) 16:08, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Proper name - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Egghead06 (talk • contribs)
  • Support, obvious capitalization, the nomination could have been listed for speedy rename. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:58, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: not sure if diffusing by city has any value for Ukrainian sportspeople. Also support fixing the capitalization if kept. Place Clichy (talk) 07:27, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Why should Ukrainian sportspeople be treated differently from Polish or Russian sportspeople? Rathfelder (talk) 22:49, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Questions about the merits of categories for sportspeople by home city can clearly be raised for any country. The only reason I can imagine to have these categories is diffusion of an overcrowded People from <City> category, however 1°) in practice these categories can be filled with people for which the link with that city is not defining or unproven (such as having played in a club there for some time) and 2°) this does not seem to be the motivation for Chernihiv as the People from category is not even a parent of the sportspeople category. Place Clichy (talk) 00:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Speediable. Grutness...wha? 03:43, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Looks as an error. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 02:58, 29 September 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:Male Sahabah[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:Companions of the Prophet per the above renaming Timrollpickering (talk) 16:10, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, we do not have a men's subcategory whenever there is a women's subcategory, and this is not a case where being a man is defining. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:46, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree although not an occupation, it is a reason for their notability. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:40, 30 September 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:Sahabah favored by Shias[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:13, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, based on the articles that I read it does not seem to be a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:02, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It is known that certain companions (sahaba) of the prophet are viewed from an unfavourable perspective in Shia Islam. This is a key theological issue with respect to the differences between Sunni and Shia Islam; see for instance the Shia view of Umar vs. Sunni view of Umar, or the Shia view of Aisha. Likewise, other companions/figures are more central to Shia Islam, as evident in the Shia view of Ali versus the Sunni view of Ali. AFAIK, it's a pretty clear defining characteristic and cannot be any further obvious. Mar4d (talk) 13:03, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • With some exceptions (of course Ali is such an exception), hardly any of the articles highlights that these people are favored by Shias, so I am not sure on what basis you conclude that this is a pretty clear defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:45, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:46, 26 September 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:Hasan ibn Ali[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 November 5#Category:Hasan ibn Ali

Category:African American Benevolent Associations[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:African-American organizations. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:09, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT and we do not have an established category tree for 'benevolent associations'. The three articles in the category are about African American abolitionist organizations which already are in Category:American abolitionist organizations. If the category would be kept, then rename to Category:African American benevolent associations to remove the capitals. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:16, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Doubtful -- At least two of the articles seem to be about mutual support organisations for freed black people, not primarily civil rights organisations. That is the nature of a benevolent society. No doubt the members would be abolitionist in their policy, but was that their prime objective? Peterkingiron (talk) 17:00, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:46, 26 September 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:Places of Pokhara[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: split merge into Category:Neighbourhoods in Pokhara, Category:Pokhara and Category:Road junctions in Nepal. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:40, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not certain whether this should be deleted, or improved - another category created by enthusiastic new editor, with no parent category such as Category:Pokhara. PamD 07:50, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:46, 26 September 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:Ward of Pokhara[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:Wards of Pokhara. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 1: Title should be "Wards ...", but 2: None of the articles in the category appear to be wards - all are described as being "located in" various wards. Category has been created, with no parent categories, by enthusiastic but very new editor who does not appear to understand how categories work. PamD 07:21, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note for closer - the editor seems to have used the uncreated Category:Ward in Pokhara ("in" not "on") for 8 articles that appear to be about actual formal wards. I don't know anything about Pokhara and so don't have strong views in general about this, but chowks seem to be loosely-defined "neighbourhoods", whereas wards are the formal subdivisions. The article lists 33 wards in a city of ~400k, so an article for each ward seems just about justifiable, but I'd tend to nuke any of the neighbourhoods/chowks that don't correspond to a formal ward.Le Deluge (talk) 13:57, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The formal wards of Pokhara are numbered rather than named. The articles are about neighbourhoods in the wards. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:46, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Marcocapelle: Presumably those are just working names as a result of the administrative reorganisation following federalisation in 2015 - even entire provinces are still called things like Province No. 5, although some of them like Gandaki Pradesh (formerly Province No. 4) have been renamed. But the names in Category:Ward in Pokhara seem to correspond to the ward names matched against ward numbers in the list at Pokhara#Location, so I assume they are at the very least pencilled in to replace the numbers? Le Deluge (talk) 18:31, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I have just created Category:Ward in Pokhara as a {{category redirect}} to Category:Ward of Pokhara. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:21, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral (for now). This is a bit of a mess. The editor(s) who created these categories don't seem to understand the category system. The contributors at CFD are asking the pertinent questions, but none of the contributors so far (including me) seem to know much about Nepal (let alone Pokhara); we are gleaning what we can, but it's fragmentary. It's even very clear whether or not some of the substub articles in these categories are actually wards, and I am also unsure about the reliability of the unsourced list of wards at Pokhara#Location: to what extent are the names synonymous with the numbers?
Everyone involved is clearly acting in good faith, but I am wary of any decision in any direction being made on the basis of such hazy knowledge. I see that the nominator has already commented at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Nepal about some categorisation ...and I think that this discussion would benefit from a relisting and a call for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Nepal. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:39, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:46, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support rename, with the current content that makes sense. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:18, 2 October 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:WikiProject Essays articles[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:WikiProject Wikipedia essays pages.
Nominator's rationale: These are project pages, not encyclopaedia articles. Adam9007 (talk) 03:09, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:46, 26 September 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:Rankin/Bass Productions television series[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: do not rename. MER-C 17:33, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rankin/Bass Productions, Inc. was later renamed "Rankin/Bass Animated Entertainment". EuantheEditor (talk) 21:21, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:46, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The main article Rankin/Bass Animated Entertainment was recently renamed, without discussion and no sources for the "new" name. It should be restored to the better known name, and the category should stay as it is. Dimadick (talk) 07:25, 27 September 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:Pagans of the Crusades[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) 16:11, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, this is unrelated to the better known crusades in the Middle East where the term "pagans" is never used. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:50, 26 September 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:Aesop's Fables shorts[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) 16:11, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Article Aesop's Fables (film series) should be main article. ★Trekker (talk) 08:09, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. This is a film series, not a collection of unrelated adaptation of the stories. Dimadick (talk) 08:56, 26 September 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:Negro[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:00, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SHAREDNAME
The explicit purpose of this category is to group articles with the word Negro in them according to the header: "Articles relating to the term Negro, a term historically used to denote persons considered to be of Negroid heritage." I can't imagine any reader wanting a direct navigational path between Negro league baseball, Negro Head Road (North Carolina) and N.W.A. There's no need for a merger because those examples are already better categorized in Category:African-American sports history, Category:History of racism in North Carolina, and Category:African-American musical groups, respectively, as all are all the other articles here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:22, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Not defining - and in any case, what would we do with articles for items with Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese names, where the word simply means "black"? Do we add in Montenegro or Rio Negro? Grutness...wha? 04:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, this is an obvious case of WP:SHAREDNAME. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:42, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete as WP:SHAREDNAME for unrelated things, mostly about negative protrayals and references to Black people. Unless the ones about the term Negro itself and related terms like nigger are okay. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:10, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The category is about the term and its historical uses, not about racism specific to any location or to a single sport. Dimadick (talk) 08:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to something that makes it clear that this is a category falling under Category:Terminology, and purge everything unrelated to the lexicographic examination of the term and related terms. BD2412 T 22:15, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am very skeptical about that. Which articles in this category, beside Negro, would you then keep? Marcocapelle (talk) 13:30, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Generally those articles that are either about the term identified in the title, or which contain a substantial etymology of their title term (such as Negrito). BD2412 T 15:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It has a substantial section on etymology, though. BD2412 T 18:22, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • If this is the best example of another article that would stay in the category then I am even more convinced that the category should be deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:05, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but purge -- Negro is the Spanish word for black. It is appropriate as a parent to Negro league baseball, Free negro etc, along with currently disparaged words like nigger/nigga, which are likewise derived from the Latin niger (black). This is not merely a case of sharedname, but I think it should be limited to uses from the segregation era and purged of anything later - into equivalent African American categories. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:49, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this will never be anything but a collecting ground for articles better classified in the existing structures. Yes, "negro" is Spanish for the color black, but then Negros (island) and Rio Negro and such would merit inclusion as being named so by the Spanish - but what is being categorized here is how the term (and those also derived from Spanish or Latin) is used in relation to people and the contextualization of that usage. We don't do that with other terminology. E.g,. we have no Category:Caucasian (interesting how white people are supposedly originating there?), Category:Latino, Category:Latina (a dab category of Latin language etc, not ethnicity), Category:Latinx (also interesting that people from south of the border of the US are termed based on a region of Italy, but the people from that region aren't), etc. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:52, 30 September 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_September_26&oldid=1008986394"