Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 July 22

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< July 21 July 23 >

July 22[edit]

Category:Fictional characters who go barefoot[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 04:36, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unneeded category. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk, FAQ, contribs 20:34, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Disclaimer: I saw this post on Discord. The category is non-defining; no sources will refer to these characters as having "barefoot" as one of their essential qualities. — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 21:03, 22 July 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:Novels by Steven Seagal[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 04:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Only one article in the category. And this one entry doesn't require a category like Category:Steven Seagal albums where although there are two entries, it has as a variety to a degree. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
From my count I found 165 categories including this one that have one entry like this. However, this one doesn't really have reason to stay as Seagal is not really a writer by trade.
But then should it be upmerged to a non-meaningful category like Category:Steven Seagal or create a "Works by" category and put the albums category there, too? StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 20:34, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's best for the novel to be categorized under Steven Seagal's main category. Because if it were to be a works by category then it would useless since works by is usually a container category. There aren't many articles that would require one. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:54, 22 July 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:Myrath[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 July 30#Category:Myrath

Category:Fictional American people by religion[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) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:13, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Other categories for Fictional characters by religion were deleted per Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_June_13#Fictional_characters_by_religion. The subcat of this one can be kept as part of "by ethnicity". – Fayenatic London 16:24, 22 July 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:Sports in Citrus Heights, California[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: double merge (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:14, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge to Category:Sports in Sacramento County, California. Per WP:SMALLCAT; category contains only 2 articles and the team based in the city went defunct after one season. User:Namiba 14:39, 22 July 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:People with Alzheimer's disease[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 13:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NOT, WP:COP and WP:NONDEFINING (WP:TRIVIALCAT, WP:PERFCAT)
According to the Alzheimer's disease article, the condition is typically fatal in 3-9 years so we're really categorizing living people who haven't died of Alzheimer's disease yet or people who died in the mean time of something else which the category header makes clear:
"For people who have or who had Alzheimer's disease. If their death is directly related to Alzheimer's, add the person to Category:Deaths from Alzheimer's disease. If a person with Alzheimer's died from something unrelated to Alzheimer's, add them here."
The bigger problem is that this awful disease usually occurs later in life and these biographies are notable because of unrelated accomplishments earlier in life. For instance, actor Omar Sharif, footballer Brian Pilkington, and Patriarch of Constantinople Mesrob II Mutafyan have only passing references to the disease. Wikipedia is not for tracking every non-fatal medical condition of notable people. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:03, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: Since Category:Deaths from Alzheimer's disease is under the nominated category, I thought deaths subcat should be retained and kept under the topic tree, not that loose biographies be placed directly into Category:Alzheimer's disease. I meant this as a cleanup note since that doesn't require CFD action that was not tagged but is now; whether you agree with the suggestion or not, let me know if there is a clearer way to communicate it. - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:02, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The word "retaining" makes it much clearer indeed. I thought you meant reparenting certain individual articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:04, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both cats as they are. If the subject of a bio has been diagnosed with the condition, it's relevant to their life & hence their article. Jim Michael (talk) 06:08, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both categories as they are. Although, the subject’s cause of death is an external factor. The factor itself is usually brought on by Alzheimer’s disease. I also don’t see this discussion occurring in regards to Parkinson’s disease. 20SS00 (talk) 10:25, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Having Alzheimer's disease is not defining. Rathfelder (talk) 23:04, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Like most "deaths from" and other disease-related categories, this is non-defining as Wikipedia defines the term. As to the argument that "it's relevant," that's not how it works here. "...defining characteristic is one that reliable, secondary sources commonly and consistently define, in prose, the subject as having. For example: "Subject is an adjective noun ..." or "Subject, an adjective noun, ...". If such examples are common, each of adjective and noun may be deemed to be "defining" for subject. if the characteristic would not be appropriate to mention in the lead portion of an article, it is probably not defining;"--User:Namiba 14:43, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:NONDEFINING and WP:COPDEF. I say delete Deaths from Alzheimer's disease as well. The fact that there are many other categories for verifiable but non-defining and/or trivial medical conditions or manners of death that haven't yet been deleted does not make this one any more defining. The fastidious hyper- and over-categorization by trivia-fascinated Wikipedians needs to be stymied. We shouldn't categorize things just because a category can be imagined. --Animalparty! (talk) 03:19, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is jugely non-defining. A very large percentage of people who develop Alzheimer's will have been notable long before they developed it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both categories as they are for the same reason as I stated above. Also, this discussion has been going on now for nearly a month and a half and I hardly see any consensus or decisions whatsoever being reached. I think it’s just best to leave the categories as they are. 20SS00 (talk) 15:16, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You aren't allowed to vote twice.--User:Namiba 15:27, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I agree with Jim Michael. This a defining aspect of one's biography, and should be easily verified. In general we need more categories for medical conditions and causes of death. I would support recreating some categories deleted for absurd reasons. Dimadick (talk) 21:44, 6 August 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:Films directed by T. Guru Prasad[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: soft delete (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:19, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. It has only film, and the article T Guru Prasad does not exist anymore. -- Ab207 (talk) 13:53, 22 July 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:Songs with lyrics by Jack Lawrence[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 without objection to create Category:Songs written by Jack Lawrence as a subcategory (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Jack Lawrence was sole songwriter on many of the entries, ie he wrote songs, not parts of songs. Richhoncho (talk) 15:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I've checked the 13 entries and a lot of them are: not song but lyrics only by Jack Lawrence. The nominator has made a careless job to forget to check himself. --Just N. (talk) 08:19, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 20:05, 22 June 2021 (UTC) [reply]
  • Support renaming per Category:Songs by songwriter; songs in this category are solely ones written by Lawrence (I'm not entirely aware what the difference is, but I'm sure it exists for a reason). I assume that whoever made the category saw the parent category, Category:Songs by lyricist, and (incorrectly) followed that scheme. Sean Stephens (talk) 00:50, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Justus Nussbaum: and @LaundryPizza03:. Firstly I did not do a 'careless job' checking what contributions Jack Lawrence made, I made it quite clear in the nomination.
Lawrence is a songwriter, he can contribute words, music or both together. The whole reason I did not wish to split the category is that Lawrence contributed to these songs, and where known, the articles state what his contribution was (as Justin as demonstrated) otherwise we are left with Category:Songs written by JL, Category:Songs with lyrics by JL, Category:Songs with music by JL and Category:Songs that JL contributed to, but WP is not aware of what!.
And for those who wish to split, are you intending to propose that all categories should be split according to contribution to specific songs. You guys are going to be working on the Lennon-McCartney & Jagger-Richard categories until the end of time . You have got some serious work to do – and not a living soul will benefit.
Keeping all the JL compositions together is logical, helpful and easier for the user. Why create problems?--Richhoncho (talk) 17:02, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Sorry to say it again. If anyone huddles together compositions and lyrics authoring that is to be named as *careless*! Which is what the nominator repeatedly has done and even defended as the right thing to do. No, is is not "Keeping all the JL compositions together" as in actual fact a lot of the entries are not at all JL's compositions. What is so difficult to understand or to accept about my veto *Keep to the facts!* ? --Just N. (talk) 10:55, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:45, 22 July 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:Law clerks of Judge Learned Hand[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 July 30#Category:Law clerks of Judge Learned Hand

Category:Localities in Salem, Tamil Nadu[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. ✗plicit 14:48, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category was speedily renamed from "Localities in Salem", which was ambiguous, but is still too vague to be useful, and contains a mixture of places in the city Category:Salem, Tamil Nadu and places in Category:Salem district. Other cities have either "Neighbourhoods in" or "Neighbourhoods and suburbs of", see Category:Neighbourhoods in Tamil Nadu. – Fayenatic London 09:37, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ―Qwerfjkltalk 11:20, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split Before I clicked on this, I assumed it was a parent category but it's just mixing things that are separate in other more specific categories. This does not make navigational sense as a non-diffusing category. - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split per nom. The city and the district must have seperate categories. -- Ab207 (talk) 13:55, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this change -- Some years ago we stopped having categories for towns, cities and villages, due to the difficulties of defining boundaries: I live in a village of over 6000 people in a county where there are market towns of 2000 people. Instead merge subject and all targets to Category:Populated places in Salem, Tamil Nadu. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:54, 24 July 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:LafargeHolcim[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) 12:41, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: LafargeHolcim has been renamed to Holcim Group on 8 July 2021. Ridwan97 (talk) 05:01, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: I spent a good 5 minutes going in circles looking at edit histories. A related page (Talk:Holcim) was notified of the RM and then, after the RM was closed, the redirect was accidentally pointed to that same talk page instead of to Talk:Holcim Group. All fixed now! - RevelationDirect (talk) 09:52, 7 August 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:Han dynasty people related to the Three Kingdoms[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 August 26#Category:Han dynasty people related to the Three Kingdoms

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_July_22&oldid=1073192956"