Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 October 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 18 October 20 >

October 19[edit]

Category:Artists by record label[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 October 27#Category:Artists by record label

Category:Television award winners[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. (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 10:26, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Ambiguous name. Category as it is now could potentially hold every single TV work or person who has won any type of award, notable or not. ★Trekker (talk) 19:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Current title is ambiguous. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:34, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - it is a name which describes the contents perfectly. (A recipient of a non-notable award would not be categorised by it anyway, so the objection is spurious.) Oculi (talk) 11:40, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • How categories are supposed to be used often does not register to inexperienced editors, hence why we tend to use as clear titles as possible to avoid bad categorization.★Trekker (talk) 12:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, the proposed name seems less clear than the current name. If it should become "by" something then certainly by award, not by recipient. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Problem is that the category's content doesn't reflect that name.★Trekker (talk) 21:26, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • It does for the larger part, most subcategories are of the different awards. Marcocapelle (talk) 00:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Oculi. Current name describes the contents perfectly. --Just N. (talk) 16:55, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- This should be a container for awards. Individual winners should not be in: they should be in categories for the award. However many of the subcats offend against OCAWARD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterkingiron (talk • contribs)
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:Award-winning works[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. (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 10:27, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is far too broad and non-defining a name. ★Trekker (talk) 19:41, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Why should we rename it like that. The current name fits perfectly and is the common wording everyone uses. -- Just N. (talk) 16:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unnecessary! No convincing reasons given. --Just N. (talk) 17:02, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've given a perfectly good reason. Also, why are you commenting twice?★Trekker (talk) 21:24, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Now the category has a clearer and more concise name, I see no reason to rename--Yasnodark (talk) 12:55, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- This is (and should be) a container and the name describes it well. Purge of articles. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:29, 24 October 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:Award-winning 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: merge. I will redirect the nominated category to discourage its re-creation. – Fayenatic London 17:33, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category already exists had is less confusing to its scope. ★Trekker (talk) 19:38, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom for clarity of purpose. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:36, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge -- they are duplicates. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:30, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, this is a downmerge which means the target needs to be manually reparented after the merger. Btw I could just as well support an upmerge (i.e. reverse merge). Marcocapelle (talk) 00:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reverse merge to fir with the naming pattern. (for example Award-winning book, Award winning film) --Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 10:37, 27 October 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:Award-winning films[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. I will redirect the old name to avoid its being re-created. – Fayenatic London 17:31, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Award-winning films" is a too broad and non-defining a characteristic, its child category "List of films by award". It should be clear that this is only a container category. ★Trekker (talk) 19:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom, although Category:Films by award would suffice. No Great Shaker (talk) 19:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I think there are some categories for nominated works as well, so "by award" might a parent category to "by award won" and "by award nomination". (But honestly I'm not even 100% sure what the point of categorizing works by awards is.)★Trekker (talk) 19:47, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
TBH, ★Trekker, I have absolutely no time at all for awards and would delete the lot if I possibly could. You are right that there is a distinction between won and nominated so I take your point there, hence the strikethrough. Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:32, 19 October 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:Go tournament navigational boxes (multiple subcats)[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. – Fayenatic London 17:27, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Renaming subcats of Category:Go tournament navigational boxes for clarity. I am author (C2E). Coastside (talk) 18:34, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support first three per nom. The fourth should be upmerged to its parent category as it contains only one page. Marcocapelle (talk) 01:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom.--Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 22:35, 27 October 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:Termination of employment for refusing a COVID vaccine[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) 01:09, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING. 1857a (talk) 18:02, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, @1857a, I'm open to how to figure this out. What would be a better category? If a person has been fired for refusing a COVID vaccine, isn't that defining? —valereee (talk) 18:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Their employment as football coaches, etc. defines them. How that employment terminated is subject-matter for a sub-section or paragraph or sentence in the article, not a category. This category seems to me to be a breach of WP:NOTNEWS in that it reflects situations that are currently newsworthy but will have no long-term notability. No Great Shaker (talk) 19:25, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not defining. People get fired for all sorts of reasons. This one is merely a hot button issue. Nohomersryan (talk) 21:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not defining. If it were, we would need categories for every other possible cause of termination of employment.--Srleffler (talk) 02:57, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 17:25, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Insufficiently defining: it might be listified. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:32, 24 October 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:I Am a Singer (South Korean TV series) contestants[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 October 27#Category:I Am a Singer (South Korean TV series) contestants

Category:Poe family[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) 12:30, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: arguably, Category:Poe family (United States) are better known. In any case, some disambiguation is preferable. Grutness...wha? 08:05, 19 October 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:Optical connectors[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) 01:21, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: At first glance, this category seemed to be totally redundant with Category:Optical signal connectors, which is itself redundant with Category:Fiber-optic connectors. The former was created by the same user on the same day as the subject of this CfD, though. Given its inclusion in Category:Joining and the inclusion of things like Light tube, which are not "optical connectors" as the term is usually used, I'm guessing the user meant to create a category for things that join or connect things through light. If we need such a category, I suggest renaming it to something like Category:Optical connections. It is not clear to me that we need a category for this, though, so deletion is also an option.
Most of Category:Joining deals with methods for creating mechanical attachment between things. I'm not sure broadening the category to include all means of "joining" anything to anything else is wise. Srleffler (talk) 20:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 05:28, 19 October 2021 (UTC) [reply]
Since the above hasn't generated any discussion, I propose that we simply delete this category as redundant.--Srleffler (talk) 20:14, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Empty manually to ensure contents are suitably categorised, then delete as a Small Category. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:35, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The contents are already categorized suitably without this category. The category is new, and idiosyncratic. Simply deleting it won't impact correct categorization of the contents.--Srleffler (talk) 20:57, 24 October 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_October_19&oldid=1055577790"