Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 June 29

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 28 June 30 >

June 29[edit]

Category:Political history of the Soviet Union[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 August 2#Category:Political history of the Soviet Union

Category:Political history of Yugoslavia[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:Politics of Yugoslavia. Anarchyte (talk) 04:13, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: For former countries we do not need the separate category for political history. BlackBony (talk) 20:28, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, everything in these categories is history so there is no point in having two separate categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:17, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:41, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. and Marcocapelle. -Vipz (talk) 17:34, 10 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:Political history of Czechoslovakia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 August 2#Category:Political history of Czechoslovakia

Category:Political history of Austria-Hungary[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:Politics of Austria-Hungary. (non-admin closure) JBchrch talk 13:39, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: For former countries we do not need the separate category for political history. BlackBony (talk) 20:23, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, everything in these categories is history so there is no point in having two separate categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:18, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:42, 2 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:Alpha-lactones[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. ✗plicit 13:14, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Since these are spelt "α-Lactone", "β-Lactone" at the start of a sentence, I believe this should also be done here. (Articles such as alpha-Propiolactone format it like "alpha-Propiolactone".) 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose, as this is about capitals at the start of a sentence, the "A" in Alpha should probably suffice. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rename as Α-Lactones, Β-Lactones, Γ-Lactones, Δ-Lactones, Ε-Lactones, using Greek letters, as is done with some of the content. I am not sure there is enough content for Α-Lactones and Β-Lactones to merit separate categories, so that these should perhaps be merged to parents. I would have no objection to using α β γ δ and ε, rather than the capitals. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • If this is technically possible in Wikipedia (which I do not know) then this sounds like a reasonable solution. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Not in the actual title, but you can modify how it is displayed with {{lowercase title}}. Currently, this will not be respected by the category navigation, however (there might be a task for this somewhere on Phabricator). 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:32, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Then the alternative solution should wait until that is fixed. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:40, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:34, 29 June 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.

Fictional locations of Disney[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. There was no consensus on a possible merge, which could be the topic of a new, separate discussion. (non-admin closure) JBchrch talk 09:50, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Most of these articles in these categories are either redirects, things that share the name of fictional locations, or locations that originate in non-Disney media. (Oinkers42) (talk) 05:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At minimum I'd support a merge. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 18:42, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not merge, merging would only be useful in case of a SMALLCAT nomination which is not applicable here. Either delete per SHAREDNAME or keep. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:02, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Disney has produced a large number of adaptations from novels, plays, etc. It makes sense to group the locations of such adaptations together, as they are settings for films. Though I would agree removing articles which do not actually cover fictional locations. Dimadick (talk) 03:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:34, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is cleaner and I support the rename, if kept. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:59, 13 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:Sports competitions in Novosibirsk[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:Sport in Novosibirsk. (non-admin closure) JBchrch talk 14:10, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only one article in the category. Two more articles might be added but then it is still small. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:33, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge for Now With no objection to recreating if it ever gets up to 5 articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:48, 1 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:Medieval Tunisian people[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 both. As a technical matter, since Category:People of Ifriqiya was created in the meantime, Category:Medieval Tunisian people is merged thereto. (non-admin closure) JBchrch talk 12:31, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: That was the country from 1048−1574 Rathfelder (talk) 13:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rename Clearly ahistorical. Not opposed to a broader reworking as proposed by Hugo999 but that would involve a larger nomination. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:50, 1 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:Aftermath of the Russo-Ukrainian War[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 parents Category:Russo-Ukrainian War and Category:2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine respectively. – Fayenatic London 06:31, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The Russo-Ukrainian War (and it's latest phase, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine) is ongoing. Charles Essie (talk) 17:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why not just rename them as suggested as above? Charles Essie (talk) 21:31, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename The war has had a worldwide impact on supply chains and inflation, but we have not yet seen its aftermath. Dimadick (talk) 02:34, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to parent categories, "impact" is not a clearly separate characteristic. The articles are simply about the war. (Or if they are not, like 2022 Peruvian protests, they should be purged.) Marcocapelle (talk) 08:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How's that? What makes this any different from Category:Consequences of the Syrian civil war or Category:Consequences of the War in Iraq (2013–2017) for example? Should I maybe have suggested "consequences" instead of "impact"? Charles Essie (talk) 03:07, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • These categories have the same issue indeed, though parts of those might be moved to Aftermath. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:32, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The Syrian Civil War is ongoing. There's no aftermath. Charles Essie (talk) 19:41, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:29, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge to parent cats until war is over. If there is not a consensus for that, then rename as proposed. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:51, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to parent categories: when the war in ongoing, it's illogical to speak of a post war situation. Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:44, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge -- Until the war is over, it is too soon to talk of what happens after it WP:CRYSTAL! Peterkingiron (talk) 18:14, 3 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:Power Rangers stubs[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. – Fayenatic London 22:09, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: When I first found this category, it had about 20 articles in it. Because most were either a.) not stubs or b.) not directly related to MMPR, this left the article with four articles. Of those, two are at prod and the other two are also in other relevant stub categories. tl;dr: WP:OCAT#SMALL. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @TenPoundHammer: shouldn't it be merged to either one of its stubs parent categories, or both? Marcocapelle (talk) 08:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    One article is at AFD and the other two are in other stub categories, so I see no reason to do so. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:51, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:28, 29 June 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:Films featuring Andy Panda[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 per nom, in line with the other discussions. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:41, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Featuting" is not defining. ★Trekker (talk) 08:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The proposed title does not define the scope. Dimadick (talk) 08:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle but it would be recommendable if someone would check every article manually, to see if the film is really "about" this topic. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:24, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Close this discussion in line with all similar discussions on yesterday's log page. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:37, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:26, 29 June 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:Films featuring breakdancing[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 August 2#Category:Films featuring breakdancing

Category:Films featuring puppetry[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 August 2#Category:Films featuring puppetry

Category:New York (state) state courts[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 August 2#Category:New York (state) state courts

Category:Songs about crying[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. – Fayenatic London 22:16, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not a defining trait. Most of them just have "cry" in the title and aren't exactly about it. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 05:01, 29 June 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:Free panorama software[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:Free photo stitching software. (non-admin closure) JBchrch talk 20:11, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, currently two articles in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:50, 29 June 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:Political comic strips[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:Comics about politics and purge entries that are not significantly about politics. This is without prejudice to re-creation if there are sufficient entries for a useful subcat. – Fayenatic London 16:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Or Category:Political comics and move from Category:Comic strips by genre to Category:Comics by genre. This is the only element of small Category:Comic strips by genre that does not have an equivalent in the larger Category:Comics by genre. Additionally, while it contains comic strips, it also contains many regular comic books that are not just comic strips. Since all comic strips are comics but not all comics are comic strip, unless we want to split the category and manually check each entry, changing the focus to be wider (and representative of what's in the category already) seems simpler. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Piotrus, you say: "while it contains comic strips, it also contains many regular comic books that are not just comic strips". Can you provide one or two examples so we can better understand this nomination? gidonb (talk) 10:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: Refresher ping for the above. gidonb (talk) 01:42, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Gidonb Problematic entries (sample): 1) comics American Flagg!, Armageddon (underground comic), Aya of Yop City, others: 25 Images of a Man's Passion. That's just up to letter A, and we have half of the entries that don't mention the word srip within them, and seem to be regular comics. At least one more is both (Adventures of TinTin, started as strips, later became mostly known as stand-alone comics - which is arguably true for many works). Btw, see also discussion above. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:10, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: This really helps! Thank you! gidonb (talk) 13:24, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:45, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:35, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:45, 29 June 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:Gandhians[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) Qwerfjkltalk 18:45, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, most people in the category are only loosely associated with Gandhi. Also delete partly per overlap with Category:Indian independence activists and partly as an opinion category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:25, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:24, 29 June 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:Television stations in the Champaign–Springfield–Decatur market[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: upmerge to Category:Television stations in Illinois. ✗plicit 13:13, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with main article's name; don't want to use the Nielsen market name Mvcg66b3r (talk) 22:14, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:23, 29 June 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:Delisted digital-only 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: keep (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 03:17, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The title of this category unnecessarily excludes some relevant subjects of interest to this topic. While it is called "Delisted digital-only games," not all past video games that have been delisted from sale on digital stores were "digital-only." As an example, Deadpool is a game widely noted to have been delisted from digital storefronts multiple times, and remains so, and is as a consequence more difficult to find and play. However it was released physically initially for seventh and again for eight generation console systems, which technically precludes its inclusion even though it cannot be bought and played unless one seeks out a secondhand copy of its long-since discontinued physical runs. As a second example, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World: The Game, a game initially released only digitally, was notably delisted, but has since been relisted and also received a limited physical run- again, technically disqualifying it from inclusion per the name of this category. Both are prominent examples of "delisted games" which technically are not included per the name of this category (although I added them anyways in deliberate disregard of these technicalities, as their past and present delistings have been of general note to the gaming press).
Having been once released physically means little for the potential availability of a game no longer available on digital storefronts, as extant physical copies of video games inevitably dwindle in quantity and increase in price on the secondhand market, only degrading their wider availability with time. Further, video games are now often digital first, physical second, somewhat negating "digital-only" as a defining trait of a game. With digital sales having become the dominant means of acquiring games, discontinuing a game's digital release has significant impact on its ability to find an audience, regardless of its physical release status or lack thereof. I therefore suggest that, given these facts, it is better for this category to have a more inclusive name. Joyce-stick (talk) 02:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 04:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC) [reply]
  • Oppose — Legally, the distinction is fairly important, as a digital-only work delisted from sale is legally unavailable to the general public, whereas a work also released physically is still legally available due to the First Sale doctrine. The legal ambiguity of ownership of digital goods and the difficulty of preservation of digital-only works is a notable topic covered by many reliable sources, so the distinction is encyclopedically relevant.
Also, the relisting and later limited physical release of the Scott Pilgrim game you brought up as an example would not negate its inclusion in the category, as the original Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions are still delisted and legally unavailable.
I would not, however, be opposed to the seperate creation of the category you propose, with the current one as a subcategory of it. Ding Chavez (talk) 13:23, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:22, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Per Ding Chavez. I would also oppose the creation of the latter category, as it would be an example of WP:NONDEF. Being delisted from digital sale is not defining for a game unless it literally makes the game unobtainable from that point on. (Although there is a hazy line where physical versions cost so much that a delisted game effectively becomes unplayable in a legal manner to most over time). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:17, 2 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_June_29&oldid=1109731536"