Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 June 3

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

June 3

Category:Founder of Sufi Order

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 Timrollpickering (talk) 16:05, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: One article with no possibility of expansion Editor2020 (talk) 21:29, 3 June 2020 (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:User hy-wst

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/Rename Timrollpickering (talk) 10:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OVERLAPCAT. In this case, both "hy-wst" and "hyw" are being used to refer to Western Armenian. The ISO 639-3 code for the language is "hyw", and it would make more sense for these user categories to be named in line with the standard. 1857a (talk) 21:18, 3 June 2020 (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.

Video game franchises disestablished

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 Timrollpickering (talk) 23:26, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting the following categories:

The parent category was recently deleted in this discussion, but the whole tree was not nominated along with it. The argument from that discussion—that the term "disestablished" makes zero sense when it comes to video game franchises—still applies here. bibliomaniac15 18:23, 3 June 2020 (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:Members of the Foolish Club

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. bibliomaniac15 18:36, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Categorization by trivial characteristic. Almost all are already in ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:American Football League owners. User:Namiba 13:38, 3 June 2020 (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:Asian-American movement activists

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 the first, delete the rest. – Fayenatic London 15:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match the larger ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:American activists by ethnic or national origin. While they were initially formed to include only those involved in the Asian American movement, I think it makes more sense to include the larger community. User:Namiba 12:03, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In activism, descent and ethnicity often play a major role. As you may know, I've nominated dozens of descent categories for deletion. Generally, journalists do not practice journalism differently because of their ethnicity. However, in the case of activists, many of whom are mobilizing and advocating on behalf of their ethnic group, it is a meaningful characteristic.--User:Namiba 19:25, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both the nom and the alt merge. For most of the discussions in this vein, descent and occupation hasn't been a meaningful intersection. Not so with activism, because the activism in this case is directly related to issues involving race and ethnicity. My worry is that something like "American activists of Chinese descent" isn't actually synonymous with "Chinese-American movement activists." To me the former sounds like it could be Chinese Americans who are activists about any given issue, while the second is actually specifically about activism about Chinese American issues. bibliomaniac15 19:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Each diaspora has a unique history in the United States. Per WP:OCEGRS, the activists from each diaspora are "combinations which are themselves "recognized as a distinct and unique cultural topic in its own right." Taking the Filipinos as an example, we see this from the University of Washington, this book published in the Netherlands just this year, or this article published by the Smithsonian. Asians, who hail from a continent including billions of people and dozens of nations, cannot simply be lumped together, nor can their diaspora communities. I agree that the Asian-American movement is in itself a unique topic, but activists from Asian countries have been involved in every major social movement of the last 150 years in the United States. Perhaps ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Activists for Asian-American rights could be created for ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Asian-American movement activists as well as the diaspora categories suggested in the original post.--User:Namiba 16:19, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
More examples of the uniqueness of each diaspora group: China: [1], [2], [3]--16:23, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
I am not following. One of the examples given in WP:OCEGRS of a proper intersection is African-American musicians. How is ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:American activists of Filipino descent (or ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Filipino-American activists) any less valid? There is a distinct history of both with both academic and popular histories written about them. Being Filipino had a direct relationship with their activism as much as being African American had on their music.--User:Namiba 17:58, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The guidelines require that categories of this nature are 1) a recognized combination in its own right. (This has been proven) 2) a "substantial and encyclopedic head article" could be written (this is evident, given the plethora of independent sources covering the subject in detail). 3) "people should only be categorized by ethnicity or religion if this has significant bearing on their career." Given that these activists were campaigning on behalf of their own diaspora, this is clearly the case. There is no policy-based reason to oppose these categories.--User:Namiba 21:16, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Namiba: The difference to be made is between people who are engaged in community activism, and people who simultaneously are e.g. of Filipino-American heritage and are activists in a completely unrelated field (e.g. climate change or healthcare). Out of the first set, you will sometimes find activists of unrelated cultural backgrounds: I have for instance seen quite a few spouses very active in diaspora communities in which they did not grow up themselves, and it has been well documented that many White people actively participated in the African American civil rights movement of the 1950s-60s. This type of activism is worthy of categorization, but only if it is in itself what the person is notable for, not just where they are from. The way the categories are currently used, and the target names you suggest, only attract categorization of the merely coincidental intersections of unrelated characteristics. Place Clichy (talk) 22:46, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that, when activism tied to one's ethnicity or diaspora community is directly related to one's notability, there should be a category for it. There are activists like Bambu who are organizing Filipinos in the 21st century but are unrelated to the historical Asian-American movement. Under your scenario, he would not be included in any such category and yet it is obviously defining.--User:Namiba 10:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Article Bambu (rapper) says that he was a member (secretary-general, actually) of an organization called Kabataang Makabayan. That may perhaps be defining. Evoking themes related to Filipino diaspora experience in rap songs is maybe less defining. Also, you seem to take it for granted (or at least entertain the confusion) that one's activism and one's ethnicity or diaspora are necessarily connected. What is someone of Filipino ancestry becomes notable for their climate activism? Both current and proposed names for these categories would imho generate confusion that they can be categorized as Filipino whatever activist, while this intersection would mean nothing. Place Clichy (talk) 11:52, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I dislike activists categories because our definition of activist includes those who are inactive and those who take opposite sides in the debate. I also dislike "descent" categories because they leave us unable to cogently and objectively identify how much descent someone must be (100%, 50%, one drop rule) to be notably of that descent, and how far back can it go, what sources say someone is of that much descent and that recently, and ultimately what do people with that much and that recent descent do differently than those with a little more or less or a little more or less recent? see WP:OCEGRS. However, the two concepts conflated by the nominator are distinct: not all Category:American activists of Japanese descent (however defined) have things to do with the "Japanese-American movement"; they may be climate change activists, consumer activists, 2nd amendment activists, or whatever that have nothing to do with any Japanese-American movement. Same is true for the other named categories. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:04, 4 June 2020 (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:Amusement rides based on works by Bill Finger

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 Timrollpickering (talk) 23:26, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Trivial, non-defining, under-populated (it has one entry, another category), etc. Calton | Talk 10:50, 3 June 2020 (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:Mario (franchise)

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. – Fayenatic London 10:28, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These were recently moved via the Speedy page on the grounds of ambiguity, since e.g. Mario is about the character and Mario (franchise) is the lead article for the category. However, this is unnecessary, since both articles are close to the point of the category – it's not as if one was for e.g. a city by that name. If these categories are left, then the various sub-cats may be put up for speedy renaming to include "(franchise)", which IMHO would be awkward, unnecessary and long-winded.
The case of Captain Scarlet is similar. The long name could be seen as the original as opposed to the sequel series, but this is not the intention. – Fayenatic London 08:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There are several million categories, whose prime purpose is navigation (see lead of WP:CAT). That navigation process is assisted by consistency, as is maintenance.
We maintain consistency by a few simple rules which (the speedy criteria at WP:CFDS), which allows this maintenance to be done without too much bureaucracy. I know that Fayenatic means well, but if we start micro-scrutinising edge cases then we will divert scarce energies into issues of marginal benefit to readers or editors … and also make it harder to identify anomalies.
I found these categories as result of the list-making process for WP:BHGbot 6, when @Oculi raised the issue of Eponymous categories which don't include their eponymous article. My first pass on a small sample found over 300 such categories, most of which are cases where the category is named after a disambiguation page; I have much longer list to process now, which I expect will yield a few thousand more. I have begun cleaning that up by nominating the categories for speedy renaming, with ~about 20 categories renamed so far. If that process is going to diverted into finding exceptions to WP:C2D which will become permanent fixtures on the cleanup list, then I will abandon the task. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's the approach I would favor. This is an article space conversation. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2020 (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:Middle-earth eras

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. In practice, this looks more like what Hog Farm has proposed, dispersing them to better categories. bibliomaniac15 18:32, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A category for a single article, and several redirects to the same article. This is a WP:SMALLCAT that can't be expanded beyond the singular article. The redirects in the category are what's left of articles from a more lax time in Wikipedia's history. Long since then, all the suitable content (and then some) has been merged to the main article. The current merged article has existed in this overall state for years, and there is no foreseeable way to expand those sections into multiple viable articles. Nor should we highlight these non-viable article titles (though suitable search terms) when there's no way to reliably expand them -- no suitable references that meet the notability guideline for third parties sources, or encyclopedic information that meets the standard of WP:NOTPLOT. I'm not used to category for deletion procedure, but hoping for a good faith discussion about this, and hopefully not a technical process issue. Shooterwalker (talk) 05:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Only one actual article and a load of redirects. Rathfelder (talk) 19:24, 3 June 2020 (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:Spanish-language YouTubers

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. bibliomaniac15 17:19, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per the two others in ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:YouTube channels by language, also increasing the scope a bit. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 04:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 03:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Spanish-language YouTubers is redundant (there should be a category for YouTubers of Colombian descent, Spanish descent, etc. when applicable). Once the category is renamed, any articles that are about individuals rather than about channels should be removed from the category. There are enough channels where this category warrants existence. Soulbust (talk) 08:32, 3 June 2020 (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:Technical YouTubers

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. There doesn't seem to be any disagreement about renaming away from the current name, although a future discussion may better clarify the best name for the category. bibliomaniac15 17:23, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I'm proposing this rename because there is a distinction between YouTubers who make "technical" content (i.e. something more "technician"–like, or instructional, or of a repairing nature), and "technology" content (like Linus Tech Tips or Marques Brownlee, who review technology products, etc.). However, I recognize there is enough overlap that would make a splitting of the category redundant/superfluous. So I strongly suggest this cat be renamed to "Tech YouTubers" as to not conflate the two, and to encompass all YouTubers who make content about technology. Soulbust (talk) 02:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reply, I will leave that up to anyone who adds to this discussion, but I will say it certainly makes it less clunky sounding. For what it's worth, I found plenty of sources referring to YouTubers and channels in this genre as "Tech" YouTubers and "Technology" channels. Those sources include mainstream institutions, publications, and outlets.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]
I think those sources definitely make it clear that "Tech YouTuber" is the common name for this occupation. A Google News search of "Tech YouTuber" yields over 1,800 results,[9] whereas a search for "Technical YouTuber" yields only 4.[10] A "Technology YouTuber", by the way yields 200+ results.[11] Soulbust (talk) 12:35, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Technical? I thought Tech was short for Technology. Either way, Tech is the most common colloquial term. -Shivertimbers433 (talk) 20:31, 26 June 2020 (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.

References

  1. ^ Meredith Somers (November 4, 2019). "A tech YouTuber's guide to building a brand". MIT Sloan School of Management.
  2. ^ Ryan Duffy (June 4, 2020). "CES 2021 Will Happen in Las Vegas". Morning Brew.
  3. ^ Alexa Weber Morales (November 6, 2019). "Want A Non-Traditional Developer Career? Become A Tech YouTuber". Forbes.
  4. ^ Louisa Griffin (June 5, 2020). "YouTuber Marques Brownlee urges fans to 'actively work against racism' as he speaks out on Black Lives Matter movement". Metro.
  5. ^ Adam Lashinsky; Aaron Pressman (June 4, 2020). "The digital transformation is no joke". Fortune.
  6. ^ Amanda Perelli (May 28, 2020). "Eminem joins a secretive text-message startup, sponsored content rates drop, and a new media kit library". Business Insider.
  7. ^ Tron Griffin (May 18, 2020). "11 Most annoying things YouTubers do". ChicagoNow.
  8. ^ Jay Peters (May 1, 2020). "Boosted was developing two bikes and a super-powered electric skateboard". The Verge.
  9. ^ "Google News search – Tech YouTuber". google.com.
  10. ^ "Google News search – Technical YouTuber". google.com.
  11. ^ "Google News search – Technology YouTuber". google.com.

Category:American multi-camera sitcoms

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) DannyS712 (talk) 00:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining and rarely self-defining. A similar category was recently deleted. Fuddle (talk) 01:15, 3 June 2020 (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:Laureates of the prix du Brigadier

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) DannyS712 (talk) 00:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)
The Prix du Brigadier is given out by the Association de la Régie théâtrale (Theatre Board Association) as a French theater award that seems fairly obscure since much of the online coverage is Wikipedia and blogs, at least on an English search. The editors of these biography articles don't seem to think it is very defining either: of the 37 articles in the category, 5 mention the award in passing (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) and 32 omit it entirely from the text. The contents are already listified here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:12, 3 June 2020 (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:Joseph Jefferson Award winners

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) DannyS712 (talk) 00:15, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:PERFCAT and WP:OCAWARD)
The Jeff Award is a local Chicago award for theatre stars. The main probably is that only 5 of the articles are about Chicagoland based people--1, 2, 3, 4, 5--for which the award might be defining. (It's hard to tell though; those articles could use some editor attention.) The rest of the awards were given to Broadway, Hollywood, West End or other actors who are already stars that came to Chicago to do one particular show which is definitely not defining. The contents are already listified here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. (Alternatively, if kept, rename to Catgeory:Jeff Award winners to match the main article.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:12, 3 June 2020 (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/2020_June_3&oldid=969296297"