Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/Today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion policies for the official rules of this page, and how to do cleanup.

Deletion of a category may mean that the articles and images in it are directly put in its parent category, or that another subdivision of the parent category is made. If they are already members of more suitable categories, it may also mean that they become a member of one category less.

How to use this page

[edit]
  1. Know if the category you are looking at needs deleting (or to be created). If it is a "red link" and has no articles or subcategories, then it is already deleted (more likely, it was never really created in the first place), and does not need to be listed here.
  2. Read and understand Wikipedia:Categorization before using this page. Nominate categories that violate policies here, or are misspelled, mis-capitalized, redundant/need to be merged, not NPOV, small without potential for growth, or are generally bad ideas. (See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Manual of Style.)
  3. Please read the Wikipedia:Categorization of people policy if nominating or voting on a people-related category.
  4. Unless the category to be deleted is non-controversial – vandalism or a duplicate, for example – please do not depopulate the category (remove the tags from articles) before the community has made a decision.
  5. Add {{cfd}} to the category page for deletion. (If you are recommending that the category be renamed, you may also add a note giving the suggested new name.) This will add a message to it, and also put the page you are nominating into Category:Categories for deletion. It's important to do this to help alert people who are watching or browsing the category.
    1. Alternately, use the rename template like this: {{cfr|newname}}
    2. If you are concerned with a stub category, make sure to inform the WikiProject Stub sorting
  6. Add new deletion candidates under the appropriate day near the top of this page.
    1. Alternatively, if the category is a candidate for speedy renaming (see Wikipedia:Category renaming), add it to the speedy category at the bottom.
  7. Make sure you add a colon (:) in the link to the category being listed, like [[:Category:Foo]]. This makes the category link a hard link which can be seen on the page (and avoids putting this page into the category you are nominating).
  8. Sign any listing or vote you make by typing ~~~~ after your text.
  9. Link both categories to delete and categories to merge into. Failure to do this will delay consideration of your suggestion.

Special notes

[edit]

Some categories may be listed in Category:Categories for deletion but accidently not listed here.

Discussion for Today

[edit]
This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025_January_6


January 6

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Disasters in South America

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These are the only pre-1800 by-year categories for South America. Given what's known about the history of the continent prior to 1800, I doubt these can ever be filled to a satisfactory level. Several of the post-1800 categories are equally small, but they can hypothetically be filled a little further given time. Grutness...wha? 07:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Leaders of Islamic terror groups

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Term "Islamic" terror not used by most RSs online and is near-absent in academia. Label would be contestable for most articles in category per WP:LABEL. "Islamist militant groups" is much more prominent term in WP:RSs used to refer to same entities. --OrebroVi (talk) 06:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian federal parliamentary election results by riding

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These are template categories and should be named as such. RedBlueGreen93 06:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Works set on Mars

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Same rationale as for the Moon category below (see also Wikipedia_talk:Categories_for_discussion#Works/Fiction_by_setting_(space)). Per my analysis below, this might be restored in the near future once humans land on Mars and we can have non-fiction works documenting this set on Mars. Arguably, if there are notable works (documentaries) about robot (probles) exploration on Mars, this category could be argued to have merit now, but right now it does not have any relevant entries. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Works set on the Moon

[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: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: See my comment at Wikipedia_talk:Categories_for_discussion#Works/Fiction_by_setting_(space). While there are broader issues to consider for the parent trees, this and another category about Mars I'll list seem to be pure duplicates in need of merger. Merging works to fiction is based solely on the fact that the remaining categories with that scope are in 'fiction', not 'works' tree (ex. we have Category:Fiction set on Jupiter and for most other planets, but no Category:Works set on Jupiter etc.), with no comment about whether this is good (see broader issues, discuss at WT:CAT talk linked above). PS. Actually, having spent an hour thinking more about this and writing an analysis in the linked talk page, I'd like to withdraw this proposal. Logic being: humans have landed on the Moon; there may be non-fiction accounts of astronaut activity set on the Moon but would not be fiction. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:50, 6 January 2025 (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:Child murder during the Russian invasion of Ukraine

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: borderline cdc. Siblings in Category:Children killed in wars are all Children killed in FOO war SMasonGarrison 04:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Colonial and Chief Secretaries / colonial and chief secretaries categories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per MOS:JOBTITLES, we do not capitalize plural forms. These were opposed at speedy, so I am starting a full discussion. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of speedy discussion

Members of the Australian House of Representatives by term

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Not a defining category and these categories result in career politicians having far too many cats that indicate essentially the same thing. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:08, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Traumnovelle: Are you proposing the deletion of all its subcategories as well? If so, they should be tagged. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:11, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. It seemed easier to list the parent than listing 50 categories. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They might not all need to be listed here, but they should all have the {{subst:cfd}} template placed on them. I used User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/massXFD to quickly tag all the subcategories. jlwoodwa (talk) 06:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure that applies to categories. Jevansen (talk) 01:59, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jevansen: Even if I didn't miss it (which I of course did), there are still times where the principles are functionally the same, and in this case this is so. ミラP@Miraclepine 03:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's an extreme example. It's like using the categorisation of Elizabeth II as an reason to delete Category:Heads of state by country and its sub-categories; or the categorisation of Barack Obama as an reason to delete Category:American people by descent and its sub-categories. The large majority of legislators aren't included in more than a handful of legislators by term categories. We shouldn't be destroying a sensible and useful categorisation structure based on extreme examples.--Obi2canibe (talk) 16:35, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I nominated this because 8 categories were added to a politician I had watchlisted, which is just over categorisation. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:35, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 16:12, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Obi2canibe: Yeah, concur with Traumnovelle the by-state categories should cover it, and the {{Automatic category TOC}} even far more so. ミラP@Miraclepine 03:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:33, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British Honduras women activists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Can we repurpose this category into the ungendered parent category? I don't see a possibility of British Honduras women activists being sufficiently populated, but maybe British Honduras activists could? Right now there's only Vivian Seay in it. SMasonGarrison 18:21, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More participation needed to form consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Flash television shows

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Better title for the category, to match with its subcategories. 2803:C600:8101:80DD:BC28:5B0:38B5:F109 (talk) 14:26, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs clearer consensus on rename target, but there is definitely consensus to rename somewhere.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indigenous leaders of the Americas

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, consistent with Category:Indigenous leaders in Canada and Category:Indigenous leaders in South America and more correct grammar. "Of" may suggest that they were leaders of the entirety of the Americas, which was not the case. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Thanks for doing the legwork. I'm neutral on "of" versus "in", but I do think it's worth noting that the norm is "Category:Indigenous people of the Americas", and that the rest of the categories in Category:Indigenous people of the Americas by occupation, resemble category:Indigenous musicians of the Americas. SMasonGarrison 21:21, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on The Bushranger's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Peggy Jay family

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: procedural nominaton, this was opposed at speedy because there was no speedy criterion applicable. Nom's rationale was: "To better summarise the contents as the family is wider than just direct relatives of Peggy Jay." I have no opinion about the proposal myself. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Mike Selinker's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Morozov family (merchants)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Everybody with the last name Morozov on Wikipedia is in this category and listed on Morozovs. There are apparently more on the Russian Wikipedia, but that shouldn't guide us here. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are two different and unrelated Morozov families. One is a boyar family, the other is a merchant family. They should not be merged into one. Otherwise, it may cause unnecessary confusion. Aronlee90 (talk) 05:33, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Assassination of George Tiller

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant. This category represents a single topic that's covered in the article Murder of George Tiller, and the pages in this category are already linked from that article. Brian Kendig (talk) 01:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:20th-century deputy heads of government of Liechtenstein

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge for now. There's no need to diffuse the parent category to this degree. SMasonGarrison 00:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: I disagree. Government ministers are a very notable role within Liechtenstein and should have their own century categories. There is also enough people with this role (page created or not) to warrant it's existence. Deputy heads of government, while technically a government minister, is also an entirely different role. TheBritinator (talk) 00:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did I say anything about notability? I said that there's no need to diffuse this category by century. We don't keep categories around just because the pages might exist. SMasonGarrison 00:33, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I disagree. There is more than enough people to warrant it being split by century. It being split this way also makes for much simpler navigation. TheBritinator (talk) 00:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, I based my decision making for these categories similar to that of Category:20th-century vice presidents of the United States, for example. Why is this acceptable while mine is not? They serve the same purpose. TheBritinator (talk) 01:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]