Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 March 3

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
< March 2 March 4 >

March 3

Category:1786 events of the French Revolution

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 per nom and to ALT3 Category:Causes of the French Revolution.
Yes, I am WP:INVOLVED. However, this discussion is 33 days overdue for closure, and consensus is clear, so I think that Wikipedia is better served by closing it. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:39, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, anachronistic categories, the French Revolution started in 1789. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:36, 3 March 2018 (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:Equivalent units

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. – Fayenatic London 22:29, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We don't normally categorize things by how they are named. Note: this category currently contains just one article so is unnecessary. If not deleted then it should be renamed to something that aligns with the category text. DexDor (talk) 18:38, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, possibly rename: This is a new cat - give me some time :) It is only by doing an incidental search on "equivalent" that I managed to find all of these in the first place. Originally, I did put them into Category:Units of measurement, but only when I realized there where so many, did I create the subcat. I just moved them in now after seeing this merge proposal, so you can get the idea. Perhaps it should be renamed to Category:Measures of "Equivalence" - suggestions welcomed. Note that I have not finished my original search and believe that many more are to come. These are all poorly known non-international measures that would pollute the parent category that has well known measures. Dpleibovitz (talk) 19:11, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So you created this category and put one article in it (presumably to prevent it from being CSDed for being empty) - then went on creating other unconventional/bizarre categories; that's (IMO) close to being WP:DISRUPTIVE. We don't categorize things like this based on whether they are well known or not. DexDor (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, e.g. oil is sold in a unit called "oil barrel" which doesn't belong in this category, but similar units that have the word "equivalent" do. Similarly, if one of the articles was renamed to "kiloton" then it would have to be removed from the category. DexDor (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Categories based on the coincidence of the same word are utterly pointless.Rathfelder (talk) 19:50, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, possibly rename: this is not simply a matter of WP:SHAREDNAME. The nominator was distracted by the fact the category was initially populated only with pages whose names include the word "equivalent", but a little scrutiny reveals it to be a lot more than that.
    This is a set of measurement units whose shared WP:DEFINING characteristic is that they quantify one thing not other by its intrinsic characteristics, in at least two broad types for I use descriptive labels:
  1. conversion units which equate measurements of two different things, e.g.
  2. utility comparators or adjusted units, which modify an intrinsic characteristic by its utility for a given purpose
I don't claim that my spur-of-the moment labels are workable, or that the cat's current title is sound. But there is clearly a lot more to this than shared name. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:08, 12 April 2018 (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:Places on the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail

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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:42, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Being on this trail is non-defining for places such as Nogales, Arizona, Interstate 8, Ventura Freeway and El Escorpión Park.
Note: This is the only "Places on ..." category in enwp.  See many previous discussions for places-on-trail categories e.g. this one.  Note: The eponymous article is already in Category:National Historic Trails of the United States etc so no upmerge is necessary. For info: The creator of the places category is now blocked. DexDor (talk) 15:35, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've created Draft:Places on the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail from the places in the categories. DexDor (talk) 16:06, 17 March 2018 (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:Carniolan society

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:Slovene dialects. It seems we agree that this is the best outcome. I'll leave the subcategorization to experts. Tone 08:39, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per actual content. Alternatively it might be split, instead of merged, in Category:Lower Carniolan dialect group and Category:Upper Carniolan dialect group as subcategories of Category:Slovene dialects but that would result in quite tiny categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:39, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- I know nothing of the subject, but all the content relates to dialects, so that the category should be called XX dialects, not society. What the right structure should be is beyond me. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:37, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed, the categorization does not make sense. It should be called Carniolan dialects as a subcat of Slovene dialects. --Tone 22:15, 4 March 2018 (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:16th-century animal births

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: relisted at WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 April 13#Category:16th-century_animal_births. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:09, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only 4 articles each in the whole 16th and 17th century, no need to diffuse them. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:49, 3 March 2018 (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:Bollywood content lists

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. (Yes, I am WP:INVOLVED, but this has been open 5 weeks and consensus is clear). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:38, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per convention for list categories, and because half its items are people not content. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:07, 3 March 2018 (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/2018_March_3&oldid=901122102"