Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 July 4

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

July 4[edit]

Category:Musicals by Meredith Wilson[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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 05:25, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Misspelling in category name (should be Willson instead of Wilson). Trivialist (talk) 23:08, 4 July 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:Stade Bordelais (rugby) players[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) Qwerfjkltalk 17:29, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I originally created a WP:SPEEDY move for this but it was opposed. The corresponding page for the rugby union team is Stade Bordelais so I don't see why there should be disambiguation here per category naming rules. The football team certainly isn't the primary topic here. At worst this should be moved to Category:Stade Bordelais (rugby union) players anyway as this is the preferred disambiguation for rugby union only related topics. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 20:03, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse (as creator) thanks, I wasn't sure so went for the opposite of the existing '(football)' cat, but I have since seen that the standard practice for other clubs with multiple sections (or 2 separate clubs with the same name) is to have no disambiguation for the rugby players when it is the more popular: examples include Stade Montois, Béziers Hérault off the top of my head from adding them to articles recently. I realise I wasn't following that rule myself with Bordelais, but wasn't sure if the rugby section was well enough known either due to its heydey being about a century ago and now merged into another club - however with RugbyFan having brought it up, I agree that it is more important than the football team which has never played higher than regional level as far as I know, so suffix should be removed. Crowsus (talk) 20:13, 4 July 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:GlaxoSmithKline[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) Qwerfjkltalk 17:30, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: On 16 May 2022, GlaxoSmithKline shortened its legal name to GSK plc, and the article was moved accordingly; page was kept at that title after RM discussion closed as no consensus. WP:CFDS was opposed. UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:48, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I disagree that the article was moved accordingly. It is correct that a requested move at Talk:GSK plc was closed as no consensus, but my interpretation is that the move to GSK plc neither had nor would get consensus. "PLC" is a legal abbreviation which is not typically used in sources about the company. I am unaware of any Wikipedia rule or precedent that advises to use legal names to disambiguate company names. I would support a rename to GSK or GSK (company). "GSK plc" is not a WP:COMMONNAME that appears in cited sources. Bluerasberry (talk) 00:34, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I still wish there were a simpler way to note titles, but I am persuaded that the current process is understandable and I can think of no improvement to it. Bluerasberry (talk) 14:41, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tangential discussion of article title
  • @UnitedStatesian: "This is not the place to re-open a RM discussion for the article" What do you think is a good way forward? Do we want another move discussion on the article main page? Those plc articles are an article titling precedent of which I am not aware, but I still have doubts that "plc" is part of any common name and see things as Marcocapelle described above. Of course I would accept a move discussion that found consensus. My argument is not any deeper than "plc" not being a common name or a well understood part of a name, and I would say this during another move discussion. Alternatively, other ideas? Bluerasberry (talk) 12:45, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bluerasberry I think the plc precedents (and many similar naturally disambiguated ones for just about every other corporate form, e.g. Apple Inc., Itera ASA, Heineken N.V., KOP Limited, etc., etc.) mean that you would need to open a broader discussion, such as at the village pump, that would apply consistently to these hundreds of articles. Or an approach I have used many times in the past is just move on to a different area of Wikipedia that would benefit from your good work. Best, UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@UnitedStatesian: Wise! I think I will take that last suggestion. This issue has a process that is working and reasonable. Bluerasberry (talk) 14:41, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bluerasberry I commend your choice, and look forward to when we work together down the road. Best, UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:38, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- WP does not like abbreviations, but in this case the current name is an abbreviation for a former name. Plc is an abbreviation for public limited company and serves to distinguish from GSK, which is a disambiguation page for this and other uses. I note we have GSK (company), but it is a redirect to the main article. Note the company is in the course of undertaking a major demerger, so that the categories will all need to be split in a few days hence. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:09, 7 July 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.

Union and Confederate politicians[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) Qwerfjkltalk 17:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The page Union leads to a disambiguation page so it is better to be more precise. If I missed any similarly named pages, feel free to add them. User:Namiba 18:43, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Gonnym (talk) 16:07, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support all as category creator of "X state governors" cats. My naming was hurriedly chosen and I appreciate nominator addressing this. BusterD (talk) 19:56, 12 July 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:Murliganj[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 delete. – Fayenatic London 20:13, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:Overcategorization and specifically WP:SMALLCAT, this category contains a single article about a small town with fewer than 30k population - category has little or no potential for growth. Storchy (talk) 15:28, 4 July 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:Swedish male record producers[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) Qwerfjkltalk 17:32, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Typical WP:Categorization/Ethnicity,_gender,_religion_and_sexuality#Gender fail - there's currently 117 articles in this category versus 9 in the equivalent female category, and there's no "specific relation" to gender in this occupation like there is for sport for example. Le Deluge (talk) 12:49, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Le Deluge: It's not finished yet. Anyway see Category:Swedish male musicians, Category:Swedish men by occupation, Category:Male musicians by nationality etc. WP:Categorization/Ethnicity,_gender,_religion_and_sexuality#Gender seem to be fail - if tere is category for woman there should be also category for man and there is no thing such as "gender has a specific relation to the topic" - how? Category:Female heads of government - if there is no category for the males then it's ridicolous. It's like woman are worse or better. Eurohunter (talk) 15:34, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Eurohunter: The default under WP:EGRS is that there should not be categories by gender. But there are exceptions. One kind is those sports where there are separate competitions for male and female (so there's categories for eg male/female footballers, but not for ice dancers). There are separate acting awards for male/females, and historically for singers (hence the male/female musician parent category) but that's now starting to change (eg Grammy Awards#2012_category_restructuring and Brit Awards#Categories) and never applied to "behind the scenes" categories like production. So music producers fail on that count.
The other main kind of exceptions to the non-gendered category rule is in those cases where it is notably rare for one gender to do something - like Category:female astronauts or Category:female heads of government. In those cases WP:EGRS allows a gendered category for the rare gender but not for the common one, as it's just not a particularly useful distinction to make if say 90% of them are one gender. Regardless of whether you have "finished", it is clearly not rare for record producers to be male, so you can't claim the rarity exemption.
So you appear to have no reason to claim an exemption to the rule that we don't have gendered categories. You should also note that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is no argument, and in general you should avoid WP:OVERCATEGORISATION, there's nothing wrong with a category containing 100s of articles. Le Deluge (talk) 16:58, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and thanks to nominator for the elaborate explanation of the guideline. Note in addition that "if there is category for woman there should be also category for man" is incorrect. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. GreenComputer (talk) 15:47, 19 July 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:Shark Tale[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) 05:37, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT after removal of the redirects. (Oinkers42) (talk) 00:32, 4 July 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/2022_July_4&oldid=1102159937"