Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 March 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 25 March 27 >

March 26[edit]

Category:Pages that contain profanity[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 per WP:SNOW (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 11:32, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Useless unencyclopedic category that violates WP:NOTCENSORED Dronebogus (talk) 22:06, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As well as Wikipedia:No disclaimers Dronebogus (talk) 22:15, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Though once the template is deleted, this can be speedy G8. Gonnym (talk) 23:38, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Nonsense category which is empty too. WP:C1 applies. No Great Shaker (talk) 08:35, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment CSD C1 doesn't apply to categories under discussion at WP:CFD, it states that right in the tag. Unfortunately, empty categories get brought here and also categories are emptied while they are under discussion here. But once a discussion has started at CFD, empty categories can't be speedied for quick deletion under CSD C1 criteria, unlike at other XfD areas. Liz Read! Talk! 16:36, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. Inter&anthro (talk) 20:44, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as an unneeded maintenance category, NOTCENSORED.--Mvqr (talk) 12:20, 30 March 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.

Researchers by nationality[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 all. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 09:18, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Incredibly vague and needless intermediate container categories that could conceivably include every single article in Category:Scholars and academics by nationality and others. We rightly lack Category:Workers which would be equally vague and broad. A category like this is likely to be WP:NONDEFINING: researchers in any given field are generally and more appropriately described as medical or policy or history researchers, etc., and for categorization purposes should be placed in relevant subtype(s) of scientist, scholar, journalist, etc. --Animalparty! (talk) 20:12, 26 March 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:People from Komarovychi, Staryi Sambir Raion[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 merge (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:04, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is only one article in the category. In addition, recently after the reform, Staryi Sambir Raion was merged to Sambir Raion. The village, which does not have an article, is now in Sambir Raion. I therefore propose to upmerge to Category:People from Sambir Raion. Ymblanter (talk) 19:15, 26 March 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:Itabaiana Coritiba Foot Ball Clube managers[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) 06:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Matching article name. BRDude70 (talk) 17:49, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The club itself is minor and notability is not conferred by membership so it is debatable if it will have many notable managers. There is presently a single entry so SMALLCAT applies. No Great Shaker (talk) 08:42, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 21:13, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - agree that only one entry means category is not needed. GiantSnowman 21:14, 28 March 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:Judges of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany[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:Justices of the Federal Constitutional Court. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The German Federal Constitutional Court itself uses "justices" and not "judges" (as for example seen here: [[1]]). I think it would be sensible to do the same. The addendum "of Germany" is not necessary in my opinion as to my knowledge no other court worldwide uses "Federal Constitutional Court" as its name. WatkynBassett (talk) 17:25, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy remove "of Germany" from the category name per WP:C2D (it is unambiguous). I have no opinion on judges versus justices. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:13, 27 March 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:FCF Co, Ltd.[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) Qwerfjkltalk 17:52, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only two articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:39, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak oppose, there are a number of subsidiaries which will probably be notable on their own but this category can always be re-created when they have pages. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 12:16, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per SMALLCAT. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:11, 26 March 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:Songs about Jews and Judaism[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 09:23, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only one article. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:15, 26 March 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.

Commercial seafood[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 20#Commercial seafood

Category:People who memorized the Quran[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. Any user can boldly add articles from the category to the article; the pages are as follows:
Pages in category
(non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:58, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category should be listified, i.e. all people who with reliable sources (RS) can be confirmed to be correctly identified as huffaz should be added to the List of people who memorized the Quran, and the category itself deleted. The reason for this is because the category is repeatedly (ab)used to inappropriately label people without having the RS to back up this claim. A great many of the people in this category are not (clearly) identified as a hafiz(a) (person who has memorised the Quran) in their biographies (including BLPs), or the claim there lacks RS to back it up. Claiming someone to be or have been a hafiz(a) awards them a certain status of piety, and without evidence it could serve as mere WP:PROMO of the person in question, which is not allowed. Note that merely being a 'reciter' of the Quran does not count; remember that the definition of hafiz(a) is 'someone who has completely memorised the Quran,' not someone who sometimes recites parts of it; this already has its own category Category:Quran reciters. In many cases, this definition is not met by the information in the biographies either. The List of people who memorized the Quran itself, as well as Hafiz (Quran), have also repeatedly suffered from this problem, with many editors (often infrequent, inexperienced and IP addresses) adding names to both articles without RS, often even people without a biography and unlikely to get a biography. I've been trying to tackle this issue in both articles intermittently for several years, but it keeps coming back. The latest discovery I made is that editors have been creating a whole new list in Hafiz (Quran)#Notable people based on the biographies in this dubious category, without any RS, and the biographies themselves often also having no RS. It is simply impractical to sustain such a category when it becomes very easy to add a biography to it without RS, while it may take months or years for a critical editor to come along and doubt whether this categorisation was justified, and before you know it, someone else will use it somewhere else, presenting it as if it were a fact, simply because the biography of said person is so categorised. Listifying this collection of purported huffaz and demanding that every single claim of complete memorisation of the Quran is supported by RS is the best way to keep a central verifiable/falsifiable overview of which people have actually accomplished this feat, excluding all the ones about whom the burden of proof has not been met with RS. The abused category will no longer be able to inappropriately label people, the biographies (especially the BLPs) will be checked and henceforth we will go by RS-supported consensus instead of baseless claims, hearsay and miscategorisation. A list of such a grouping of people has essentially all the advantages a category doesn't have, and none of the disadvantages, and so listification is the best solution. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:18, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • If not kept, merge to Category:Quran reciters. If kept, purge and possibly rename to Category:Huffaz (Quran). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:31, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Listify and delete -- This is no doubt an achievement, but not necessarily a notable one, particularly as it may well be difficult to verify claims. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:08, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The nom raises some good points. I would add that memorizing sacred texts is a practice in many religions and—as far as I know—people don't become famous or notable for it; as such, it is non-defining. JBchrch talk 18:29, 30 April 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_March_26&oldid=1138412588"