Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 April 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< April 14
April 16 >

April 15[edit]

Category:Extinct volcanoes of Oregon[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:56, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category currently holding just one article. While there are some other Oregon volcanoes sitting in the parent category, meaning that this is technically populatable, it's less clear that this would actually be useful -- there are no other "extinct volcanoes of [U.S. state]" subcategories for any other state, and with just 56 articles (plus the one here for 57 total) the parent category isn't large enough to require diffusion by state at all. (The article is already in the Category:Volcanoes of Oregon tree, so no upmerging in that direction is needed.) Bearcat (talk) 19:37, 15 April 2023 (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:Constituent country[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:56, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I don't believe this is an official or widely used term for any of these inclusions, I can't think what the inclusion criteria would be and this has proved a controversial designation in Wikipedia in the past. I don't believe there would be consensus that it is meaningfully a thing. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:39, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, the term is not employed at https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/constituent-parts-of-the-uk-and-membership-of-the-european-union Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:19, 15 April 2023 (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:Winners in the Survivor franchise[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/Delete - There is No Consensus to delete both. Feel free to start a new separate nom at editorial discretion. - jc37 01:31, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of the existing Category:Survivor (franchise) winners and Category:Survivor (American TV series) winners. George Ho (talk) 12:41, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Listify?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:20, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus thus far is in favor of deletion, but there remain unaddressed objections to that outcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nom's comment - You know what? By default, let's delete/merge just the category I nominated as a duplicate and say "no consensus" to the one that Marcocapelle nominated. What it's supposed to be a simple and short plan turned into draggy, convoluted mess that we're now in, especially by allowing other issues about reality TV genre in this project to seep through this discussion. --George Ho (talk) 03:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment on Expanded Nom The target category was tagged after the original nomination and I'm firmly against deleting both. Reality contestants typically get 30 minutes of fame and are notable for little else. That contrasts with professional actors with one role after another that would cause category clutter if not for WP:PERFCAT. - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:22, 23 April 2023 (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:Palestinian terrorism[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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:19, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Propose renaming this page in line with its main article Palestinian political violence and away from the contentious labelling of dozens of militant groups and sub-categories about militant groups from different periods over the past century that are just as easily be described as resistant groups, insurgents etc. instead of the value-laden and here obviously distinct POV categorization. The separate Category:Terrorism in Israel exists for itemized acts of political violence that are consistently described as 'terrorist' in nature in reliable sources. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:53, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please see previous discussions:
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 January 17#Category:Palestinian terrorism
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 November 4#Category:Palestinian terrorism
I will go along with whatever consensus emerges. I do not concern myself much with Wikipedia categorization nowadays. I find other editing to be much more fruitful. --Timeshifter (talk) 12:07, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:C2D, if it weren't a sensitive topic the nomination could have been processed via speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:59, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I don't see what has changed since the last discussion in 2020. The main arguments (change of scope to include other kinds of violence, consistency, RS referring to this as terrorism) still stand. Alaexis¿question? 09:29, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Violence is more general, whereas terrorism is more specific. Numerous sources call it terrorism, there is no need for euphemism. A spade is a spade, and blowing up buses or deliberately shooting highschool students is terrorism, not just "violence" (such as attacking military targets). Call it like it is. Also, let's avoid double standards. See for example Category:Zionist terrorism (if we change one, we have to change both per consistency, balance and NPOV).Dovidroth (talk) 09:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Call what terrorism? This is sweeping category containing 11 sub-categories and dozens more articles. While the contents certainly all patently pertain to political violence, 'terrorism' per se is a contentious label and POV characterization of certain acts of political violence, and, per MOS:TERRORIST, should obviously not be applied in such a generalist and sweeping manner. Hence why Palestinian political violence is at the title it is at, and, as noted above, the category should follow this, per WP:C2D. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:04, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dovidroth: Why not simply support this AND support changing Category:Zionist terrorism to Category:Zionist political violence, since yes, by the same principle (and WP:C2D), that should also be the category for Zionist political violence. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:11, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I favor changing other category names to follow the main article name, including this one, Category:Zionist terrorism and Category:Birmingham, West Midlands. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Nothing has changed from the previous discussion in 2020. Repeating it over and over is pointless. Palestinian terrorism is the most accurate term and being used in professional literature and research. I oppose the attempt to obscure this, which I perceive as political bias. It is important to understand that Palestinian terrorism is often directed against illegitimate targets. Example of a small part of them: Munich massacre, Avivim school bus bombing , Fogel Family Massacre, 2014 kidnapping and murder of Israeli teenagers, Dolphinarium discotheque massacre and Shaar HaNegev school bus attack). This is not just "political violence". ℬ𝒜ℛ (talk) 15:36, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. According to Wiktionary "terrorism" is The use of unlawful violence against people or property to achieve political objectives, so calling it "political violence" is just whitewashing. Much of the Palestinian terrorism is committed by, or credit for it is taken by, groups that are on "terrorist watch lists" or else is the result of "state sponsored terrorism". It walks like a duck and quacks like a duck; calling it "amphibious poultry" is just trying to pretend that it's not a duck when it is. Eliyahu S Talk 17:39, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Maybe I would be in favour, only though if Category:Zionist terrorism was changed as well to Category:Israel political violence, but if they are both different from each other, than it's an NPOV violation. אקסינו (talk) 22:11, 5 March 2023 (UTC)user has fewer than 500 edits to participate per WP:A/I/PIA[reply]
  • Oppose, the proposal is not neutral. Call a spade a spade, plus most of the sourcing on Palestinian terrorsim calls them terrorism. Researcher (Hebrew: חוקרת) (talk) 07:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - C2D is pretty clear on this point, it should be consistent with the main article title. Our article title is Palestinian political violence. It isnt even a NPOV issue, it is a basic categorization name issue. It should honestly be speedy, and all the above oppose votes that do not reconcile with out actual policy on category names and instead appeal to emotion or subjective opinion should be given the weight they deserve. As in none. And for that matter, the Category:Zionist terrorism name should be added to this nom, that article is also titled Zionist political violence. nableezy - 18:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per C2D, objections appear to be POV. Selfstudier (talk) 14:58, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:37, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Suppport per nom. I'd also support renaming Category:Zionist terrorism and the other categories with the same issue as well.--User:Namiba 19:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - not all Palestinian violence aimed at causing terror in people's hearts in political in nature. It's often religious (usually Islam vs. Judaism, but sometimes other, see Christian emigration), sometimes economics (mobster style acts that happen to be between Jews and Arabs) and to my assesment often both political and religious at the same time (mainly by Hamas or Islamic Jihad type affiliates). DGtal (talk) 10:25, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @DGtal: The only mention of Palestine at Christian emigration pertains to Ottoman times, so not relevant. This is a political violence cat, hence the main page. Religious examples are in theory here: Category:Islamic terrorism in Israel. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:59, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I participated in the last 2 CFDs. As I said before I am not wedded to either position. I just want even-handedness concerning Palestinians and Israelis. See: Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias. The US gets away with many uses and supports of terrorism over its history. Wikipedia's reliable sources are getting better at not letting that happen unnoticed. So what we decide here matters cause it is still going on: U.S. Splits on Prosecuting Russia for Ukraine War Crimes. By Alice Speri, March 15, 2023. In The Intercept. Subtitled: "The shadow of U.S. war crimes in Iraq hangs over the Pentagon’s refusal to support probes into Russian atrocities in Ukraine." --Timeshifter (talk) 14:14, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename or split — too many articles are not specifically terrorism, or are already covered under other categories.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There don't seem to be any objections that WP:C2D applies.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:29, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural relist, as the nominated category was not tagged.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:10, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rename per nom, as has been long established, one person's "terrorist" is another person's "freedom fighter" or "defence force". Wikipedia shouldn't be picking sides. Sionk (talk) 23:50, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as many editors above pointed out, there is a difference between terrorism and political violence. This category is specifically designed to hold articles on Palestinian terrorism. - Darwinek (talk) 14:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the numerous attacks, largely against civilians, and the groups included in the category are widely considered terrorist, which should be reflected in the category title. Thismess (talk) 19:42, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it is, it should be reflected in the article title. But the article title is at "political violence". Marcocapelle (talk) 06:30, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In that case it would be much easier and more appropriate to instead create a new parent category called Category:Palestinian political violence, since all the articles in the current Category:Palestinian terrorism are well-established as sorting under terrorism. Thismess (talk) 19:17, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Btw it doesn't seem to have been noticed that there already exists a category called Category:Political violence in the State of Palestine, in which the article Palestinian political violence is the main article. Thismess (talk) 19:58, 22 May 2023 (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:Crimes by month[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: Dual merge/delete Timrollpickering (talk) 20:22, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
158 categories
Nominator's rationale: As noted by Marcocapelle (talk · contribs) at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_25#Category:1919_crimes_by_month, most of these monthly categories are WP:SMALLCAT with most having only 1–3 pages each. They actually recommended upmerging these categories up to the end of the 20th century, but I'm not confident yet about the ones in the 1990s. The astute viewer may notice that a little under half the months in the 1970s and 1980s are missing; in particular, there are no monthly categories at all in 1984. One of the categories even has 2 redundant sub-levels for a single redirect to Palm Bay, Florida. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:54, 15 April 2023 (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:IIFA awards[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:58, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: this seems to be exactly the same topic so let's merge both categories Robby (talk) 16:40, 15 April 2023 (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:Military buildings and structures[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 and merge.
Nominator's rationale: Also its subcategories to be merged accordingly Estopedist1 (talk) 15:27, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, apparently military buildings and structures by country are all under military installations and these three categories are the only exceptions. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:17, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural comment @Estopedist1: you need to list the two subcategories explicitly and tag those category pages. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:17, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I added subcats as well--Estopedist1 (talk) 06:04, 16 April 2023 (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:Emigrants from the Kingdom of Hungary to the Kingdom of Bohemia[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:02, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, moving within the Habsburg monarchy is not really emigration. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:53, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - it's also WP:SMALLCAT (1 article) and not defining. The category system is not intended to keep track of every move a person makes. I'm not sure how the brief article Vavrinec Benedikt of Nedožery manages to be in so many categories; possibly the place of birth is being used, which is not defining (WP:COP-PLACE). It is certainly not obvious from the article that he emigrated from the Kingdom of Hungary as Hungary is not mentioned. Oculi (talk) 18:07, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • He is in Czech and Slovak and Hungarian categories, that is the main reason. What currently is called Slovakia was part of the Habsburg part of the Kingdom of Hungary at the time. He moved from Habsburg 'Slovakia' to Habsburg Bohemia, but he was also a Slovak language activist. We might remove him from Hungarian categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:36, 15 April 2023 (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:Austro-Hungarian people by location[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:People from Austria-Hungary. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:02, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:48, 15 April 2023 (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:Logothetti[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:03, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, only two articles in this family category. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:37, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The 2 articles already link to each other so this cat doesn't add navigational value. - RevelationDirect (talk) 23:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per name. not enough content for this family. Place Clichy (talk) 07:27, 20 April 2023 (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:Austrian knights[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 April 23#Category:Austrian knights

Fires in Asia by year[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 Timrollpickering (talk) 20:25, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, mostly 1- or 2-article categories in the 19th and 20th century. Especially in the later years a merge to disasters is often redundant when the article is already in a disasters by country subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:18, 15 April 2023 (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:Australian people of Asian descent by occupation[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:04, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEGRS: triple intersection of occupation and nationality and descent is not defining.
Suggested by Place Clichy.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:58, 15 April 2023 (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:Swiss colonels[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 April 23#Category:Swiss colonels

Category:Australian people by occupation and ethnic or national origin[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:12, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEGRS: triple intersection of occupation and nationality and origin is not defining. Also WP:COP-HERITAGE provides for descent or diaspora, not "origin". The subcategories are descent based, not origin based.
Suggested by Place Clichy.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:00, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, trivial intersections between occupation and ancestors' nationality. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:40, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, trivial intersections between occupation and ancestors' nationality. Place Clichy (talk) 09:41, 15 April 2023 (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:Former town councils in the Republic of Ireland[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 April 23#Category:Former town councils in the Republic of Ireland

Category:Lords of Zeta[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:Princes of Zeta. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:14, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C parent Category:Principality of Zeta. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 02:24, 15 April 2023 (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:Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists politicians[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 11#Category:Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists politicians

Category:Biblical rulers by century[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 and delete. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:12, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Most of these are WP:SMALLCATs, but more importantly: the Hebrew Bible is notoriously unreliable and contradictory as a source for dating events (including reigns of people), especially before 750 BCE. The very historicity of many of these characters can often not be confirmed, and is sometimes rejected as literary invention by many modern scholars. By placing them in categories with pretty firm centuries, we are suggesting that their reign/lifespan can be quite accurately known through the Bible, which is very misleading. (For example, even if Moses and Joshua existed as historical people, it's extremely hard to tell when they lived. It's more probably in the 13th century BCE than in the 15th, where they are put now. That's a huge mismatch of 200 years for two people who may have never even walked the earth). In many cases, any reign/lifespan of any monarch mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, especially when calculated with means of extrabiblical sources, pretty much amounts to WP:NONDEFINING. In other cases, historical people are much-better known through extrabiblical sources so as to make their mention in the Hebrew Bible virtually irrelevant. (E.g. why does someone like Category:Cyrus the Great need to be in Category:6th-century BC biblical rulers?) If we are interested in said monarchs as historical people, then the correct route of categorising them is through Category:Pharaohs by century (as opposed to Category:Pharaohs in the Bible, because the historicity of some pharaohs mentioned in the Hebrew Bible like Shishak cannot be independently confirmed), etc.
There is no problem in upmerging all these cats. If overcrowding might ever become a problem, then let's split monarchs by books, not by (highly contestable) centuries. Compare Category:Torah monarchs, reserved for monarchs mentioned in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 04:01, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename from "rulers" to "kings" and purge everyone who was not a king. This will naturally resolve the smallcat and imprecision issues of the earliest centuries without the need to merge all subcategories. Also re-parent the subcategories from rulers by century categories to monarchs by century categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:27, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Why "king"? The parent cat has "monarchs" in it. More importanly, I disagree that it will solve the imprecision issues. It also leaves the historicity issue completely untouched. These categories should be about how these monarchs appear in the Hebrew Bible. That's why there is a Category:Pharaohs in the Bible, and (I just discovered) an article Cyrus the Great in the Bible. This is why Ahasuerus should be in there, but Xerxes I shouldn't; why Shishak is in, but Shoshenq I is out. We cannot just take the biblical accounts of these monarchs as historical at face value, and place them into historical categories. Besides (why didn't I mention that before?) there is massive WP:OVERLAPCAT with Category:Kings of ancient Israel and Category:Kings of ancient Judah, the appropriate cats for potentially historical monarchs. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:06, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no issue of WP:OVERLAPCAT, it is merely a matter of hierarchy. For example Category:8th-century BC biblical rulers consists of Category:8th-century BC Kings of Israel and Category:8th-century BC Kings of Judah. Those are "kings" categories too. By limiting it to kings, Moses, Joshua and the judges will be purged and by that we will lose the earliest centuries categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:27, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Because the monarchs mentioned in the Hebrew Bible are primarily the kings of ancient Israel and Judah, any "biblical ruler" category will inevitably largely overlap with a kings of Israel/Judah category. WP:OVERLAPCAT: If two or more categories have a large overlap (...) it is generally better to merge the subjects to a single category, and create lists to detail the multiple instances. That already exists in the form of Kings of Israel and Judah. Subdividing them by century has led to many WP:SMALLCATs instead of making navigation easier. Upmerging them could solve that.
    Maybe what I'm objecting to here is also WP:NARROWCAT? In general, intersection categories should only be created when both parent categories are very large and similar intersections can be made for related categories. To me, the intersection between "king of Israel/Judah" and "century X" is very narrow, and usually creates SMALLCATS anyway. The intersection between "biblical ruler" and "century X" is even narrower, especially when the century is difficult to establish because of how unreliable the Hebrew Bible is for dating events, and the character in question may not even have been historical. If a cat like "biblical ruler" is to have any function at all, it is to organise information found only in the Hebrew Bible itself, and not data from extrabiblical sources in order to interpret it. The very chronology of counting in "centuries BC(E)" is not a concept found in the Hebrew Bible itself (obviously; Jesus wasn't born yet). These are just two very different exercises. To take Cyrus the Great again as an example: Category:Cyrus the Great is in Category:6th-century BC Kings of the Achaemenid Empire, and that's fine. But Cyrus the Great in the Bible is in its subcat Category:Cultural depictions of Cyrus the Great, along with Cyrus The Great (screenplay), Civilization VI and so on. That's where his being mentioned in the Bible is relevant, not in which century he lived. We're not gonna create Category:6th-century BC ''Civilization VI'' monarchs either just because we can; it's just not that relevant for Cyrus as a person, and needlessly centres the importance of Civilization VI as a game depicting Cyrus. Cyrus is known through many other sources that are more reliable than the Hebrew Bible, and thus using it to date him also doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:23, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Upmerging the Kings of Israel and Kings of Judah categories by century requires a completely different nomination. In its current state there is hierarchy in the category tree, no overlap. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:05, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let's start all over again. The issue I have with the nomination is primarily with the 11th- to 15th-century BC categories, because they do not contain monarchs. My alternative proposal aimed to address that. I have no issue with e.g. Cyrus. I also have no issue with changing "biblical" to "of the Hebrew Bible" (though that implies the 2nd century BC subcat should be deleted). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:29, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok. I think we just shouldn't create subcategories by century for monarchs mentioned in the Hebrew Bible. I want them all in one big category without any century whatsoever. That's Category:Monarchs of the Hebrew Bible. I agree with excluding non-monarchs, and excluding monarchs not mentioned in the Hebrew Bible. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:44, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you. This means we agree on deletion of C2 and C11-15 and on merging C5-C10 as nominated. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:16, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, thanks for that clarification! (Sorry, sometimes I may get lost in the details of arguing my case for or against something. ;) I'll try to be more concise.) I agree with you and will update the nom. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    PS: As you may have noticed, I'm relatively new to CfD/CfR/CfM procedures; it's only in the past few weeks that I've become really active now that I'm starting to understand how to nominate quickly and efficiently, which arguments to use, and how to better organise the cats that we've got. I brought this whole mess onto myself by nominating such a huge cat as Category:Rulers. It's only because you and William have been so willing to help with taking all the steps in that process that I'm learning how to do this better. I want to do my part to bring a proper end to the process I began. I'd like to thank you for the cooperation so far. :) Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:14, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Concise would be appreciated.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 08:22, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm trying. Learning about abbreviations like WP:C2D helps a lot! Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:21, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:44, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete/Merge per nom. I don't think we should be splitting any subcat of Category:Hebrew Bible people by date. See also Dating the Bible and Biblical literalist chronology. This is at times a contentious topic, for example: New Chronology (Rohl). And List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources complicates matters further. These should be lists, at best, where references can be provided - something that cannot be done in categories. - jc37 08:41, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Completely agree. And to a certain extent I'm not opposed to listification, but only if such lists have added value and do not already exist. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:44, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the items tagged for merger. None are monarchs of the Hebrew Bible, because they did not rule the Bible: they are rulers mentioned in the Bible; and I do not think it is necessary to specify Hebrew Bible, as the term Bible is not used for the holy books of other religions. The books of Kings and Chronicles are consistent in giving dates of succession and death and these are not affected by Rohl's New Chronology. Saul and David have no clear precise dates, but the period is clear. Before that it will be better to a single category for the Judges and for earlier leaders. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:20, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    DUPLICATE !vote.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 05:34, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    They are already categorised by date - Category:8th-century BC Kings of Syria, for example. The issue here is that these categories' inclusion criteria is specifically monarchs who appear in the Bible. And all of the other things you mention need explanation - and that means lists, not categories. - jc37 22:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Renaming monarchs of the Hebrew Bible to monarchs in the Hebrew Bible is actually a good idea. I propose we do that after this nomination has been completed so as to not complicate the process. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Balance so far: 4 users in favour of Delete C2 and C11-15 & merge C5-C10 to Category:Monarchs of the Hebrew Bible as nominated (Marcocapelle, William Allen Simpson, jc37, myself); 1 in favour of Manual double merge, put non-monarchs in Category:Hebrew Bible judges (Fayenatic London); 1 user Oppose Deletion of C2-C10, Merge C11-15 to Category:Hebrew Bible judges (Peterkingiron). The nomination has clear support, and I think that during the nomination, as well as several related CfRs, the renaming of Category:Judges of ancient Israel/biblical judges to Hebrew Bible judges/Category:Hebrew Bible judges and populating the latter have already addressed/solved the concerns (rightly) voiced by Fayenatic and Peterkingiron. Per Peterkingiron and myself, I recommend a CfR be done for monarchs of the Hebrew Bible to monarchs in the Hebrew Bible after the current nomination is completed. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: While I still support Delete/Merge, I'm not opposed to someone also manually categorising pages to Category:Hebrew Bible judges at editorial discretion. I don't think that they're mutually exclusive. - jc37 01:59, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment After 2 months, is this discussion ever going to get closed? I only ask because one of these categories is empty and shows up on the Empty Categories every night for the past 8 weeks now. Just wondering what is holding up the closure here. At this point, any decision, even a non-decision, would be good. Liz Read! Talk! 03:27, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Liz My "Balance so far" comment was intented to summarise the current state of affairs. The nom has clear support. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Liz is it possible to close this? The nom has clear support, and we haven't had any more comments, except jc37 confirming their position (in support of the nom). Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:12, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @LaundryPizza03: is it possible to close this? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:18, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Instead of pinging specific editors, perhaps listing this at WP:CR might be a way forward. - jc37 15:52, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh I didn't know that existed, thanks! Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:55, 8 June 2023 (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/2023_April_15&oldid=1159649996"