Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 December 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 27 December 29 >

December 28[edit]

Category:20th-century women contestants[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: Renamed per nom. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 11:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: This was created as a sub-cat of Category:Beauty pageant contestants. If "women" is needed, then "20th-century women beauty pageant contestants"? – Fayenatic London 20:57, 28 December 2021 (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:Oberliga (ice hockey) seasons[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 January 5#Category:Oberliga (ice hockey) seasons

Category:Islamic psychology[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:Psychology in medieval Islam. ✗plicit 01:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: merge in the spirit of WP:C2F: the category only contains the main article. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:50, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:34, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - now contains over a dozen articles and a subcategory. Grutness...wha? 00:51, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 20:09, 28 December 2021 (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:Lemkivshchyna[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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 02:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: The Lemkivshchyna article was recently renamed to Lemko Region, as Lemkivshchyna is not commonly used in English or the native language of the area. See the discussion here: Talk:Lemko Region#Requested move 15 December 2021. --YoungstownToast (talk) 20:08, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: This meets WP:C2D. 21:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
--💬KaerbaqianRen 19:03, 3 January 2022 (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.

Far future video games[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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 02:46, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 December 9#Category:Television series set in 2089 * Pppery * it has begun... 18:44, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

American women opera singers by century[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. – Fayenatic London 09:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:24, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OCEGRS says: "people should only be categorized by ethnicity or religion if this has significant bearing on their career." Are you trying to say that African Americans suffer no discrimination in the world of opera? Or that this has not changed over time? Can you produce some evidence? Bigwig7 (talk) 09:40, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • WP:OCEGRS also says "should only be created where that combination is itself recognized as a distinct and unique cultural topic in its own right. If a substantial and encyclopedic head article (not just a list) cannot be written for such a category, then the category should not be created." Marcocapelle (talk) 03:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Bigwig7, your argument would make sense if this proposal was to end having Category:African-American women opera singers. However this proposal in no way advocates ending that category. What it does advocate ending is the clealry ERGS rule breaking creation of last-rung categories that split African-Americans out in a way that excludes them from being in a non-ethnicity specific category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:10, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • This case is an intersection of ethnicity, gender, sub-sepciality and time. The proposal is leaving in place the category that intersects gender, sub-speciality and ethnicity, and just removing the added by time break out. You have to be able to justify all the points of the intersection as uniquely notable to keep this category, and then give a persuasive reason why we should in this case clearly avoid the last ring rule. One way to satify the later would be to create Category:20th-century American operative sopranos or something like that, but to the present no one has felt a need to create categories that intersect century and opera voice range, that would solve the last rung rule, but I am not sure it would be a justified creation of a useful category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:10, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • Classifying singers by vocal range doesnt really work - voices change with age. But surely the argument against multiple intersections is that they usually generate very small categories, which is not the case here. Rathfelder (talk) 19:27, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
            • The case here is that it explicitly violates ERGS rules and creates a situation where there people are being placed in a by ethnicity category, but not in the regular not by ethnicity category, which is an explict violation of the ERGS rules. This is a highly problematic situation which in this case would probably cause some to argue that Wikipedia's very structure is implying and supporting marginalization. Similar arguments have been made in the past related to other categories that do this, and the ERGS rules exist as they are to stop any such marginalization.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:21, 26 January 2022 (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:Germany–Syria military relations[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:Germany–Syria relations and Category:Bilateral military relations of Germany. – Fayenatic London 09:28, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: only content is a subcategory (t · c) buidhe 08:41, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:23, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment This is a difficult case. The actual Syrian government in Damascus (Mr. Assad) is not fully accepted by the German gov. So eventual military cooperations relate to the past only. Really unclear and complicated. --Just N. (talk) 20:07, 4 January 2022 (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:Psychological trauma interventions[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:Psychotherapy. – Fayenatic London 08:59, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: upmerge, very small sibling of Category:Psychotherapy with two articles that are slightly broader than just about psychotherapy. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:50, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I replaced the target by a more specific category. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:16, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could you explain why you say they're broader than psychotherapy? As far as I can tell, they both suit it. I will also note that trauma is not a mental disorder. I absolutely agree that a category of 2 is absurd though. --Xurizuri (talk) 13:01, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 05:36, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:22, 28 December 2021 (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:Psychiatric instruments[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. – Fayenatic London 18:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: upmerge, overlapping scope, these are mental disorders diagnostic procedures that may be used by both psychiatrists and clinical psychologists. If this merge goes ahead, I will also nominate the subcategories for renaming. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Bluerasberry and Xurizuri: pinging participants to this earlier related discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:29, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • God it would be smart if I checked back on conversations more than once. Mental disorder assessments as a set category would've worked (where assessment is a countable noun, e.g. DASS is an assessment for depression). Ah well, diagnostic procedures is also appropriately descriptive.
      Anyway, yes please merge. They're the same thing. --Xurizuri (talk) 09:40, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 05:40, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:21, 28 December 2021 (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:Political power[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. – Fayenatic London 20:58, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Unneeded as there is already a category called Power (social and political) Jamzze (talk) 20:07, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See also this related discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:56, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 05:32, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Either keep or upmerge -- Deletion is the wrong option. It and one parent share a main article, so that merger may be the better option. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:58, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:21, 28 December 2021 (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.

Works about horticulture and gardening[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, rename, and merge as nominated. ✗plicit 01:27, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 December 5#Category:Horticulture and gardening. – Fayenatic London 15:08, 28 December 2021 (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:Republic of China National Assembly elections[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:Taiwanese National Assembly elections. – Fayenatic London 15:42, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: rename to align with the articles in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:32, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:44, 28 December 2021 (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:Health clubs by country[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 January 5#Category:Category:Health clubs by country

Category:KMFDM album covers[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. – Fayenatic London 15:39, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also propose merging these categories to the same target category as well:

Nominator's rationale: I don't see a need to diffuse the categorization of image files for album covers for a music act. No established scheme. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 02:16, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • merge per nom. Seems like a good idea. these categories are not usefull.--Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 12:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep For usability and survey purposes it is absolutely useful to keep this extra category. It is a big one with eight covers not at all a smallcat. Wikipedia is bound for the usability of it's users! -Just N. (talk) 20:28, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
They are image files not articles so I'm not sure what benefit there is to users to diffuse such content. Even covers of singles have long been categorized under album covers for all artists. Diffusion of Category:KMFDM albums makes some sense, sure, and the covers are easily identified from those articles. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:51, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge by lack of an established scheme. The categories can be restored once there is consensus to build such a scheme. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:17, 5 January 2022 (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/2021_December_28&oldid=1076032098"