Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 July 1

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:Attacks by Aum Shinrikyo. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:24, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Case by Aum Shinrikyo to Category:Attacks by Aum Shinrikyo

Nominator's rationale: These are all attacks Fulmard (talk) 20:05, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- One article is called a murder, but it is still an attack. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:53, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• No objection to renaming, though the category may also be merged to its parents as it only contains three articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:15, 8 July 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.

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. – Fayenatic London 19:29, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Esteghlal F.C. captains (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Being a captain is not a unique concept; Is it right to have such a category? Maometto97 (talk) 14:20, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 19:06, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as non-notable or identifying. GiantSnowman 19:07, 3 July 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.

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 18:53, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Songs about aviation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Similar categories "songs about" have been deleted due to their trivialness. In some cases the songs do not mention aviation or are not about aviation and its just because the lyrics mention the word airplane etc. Either way, its trivial and not clearcut. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 12:47, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: “Songs about aviation” is one of the larger subcategories of “Songs about transport”. Hugo999 (talk) 23:11, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• We might delete the entire "songs about" tree because reliable sources seldom discuss the content of the lyrics. But as long as we keep the tree, this Category:Songs about aviation does not seem too bad. It is usually more than just dropping a word as we often had in previously nominated "songs about" categories, and it is a non-trivial topic. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:40, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The whole ‘songs about’ category tree is a mess and rendered pointless by very few song articles discussing the subject matter. Taking an obvious ‘about aviation’ I looked at Lindbergh (The Eagle of the U.S.A.) where the total information is, “It chronicles Charles Lindbergh's famous pioneer solo-flight across the Atlantic Ocean in the Spirit of St. Louis. The song was an overnight hit being released immediately on the heels of Lindbergh's safe landing.” There is no encyclopedic information to be gained by adding the song to the category. Then we have a further problem with the ‘songs about’ category, This one song is also in Category:Cultural depictions of Charles Lindbergh, Category:Songs about aviation, Category:Songs about aviators, Category:Songs based on actual events and Category:Songs about explorers. Notwithstanding that it is in parent & child cats, surely Cultural depictions of Charles Lindbergh is sufficient? --Richhoncho (talk) 08:14, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a songs about x category that is not helpful or justified. Just because songs in some way mention flying does not make them a unified group.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:05, 19 July 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.

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Women city councillors to Category:Women local politicians

Nominator's rationale: Rename in line with new parent Category:Local politicians. The former parent "City councillors" was merged at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 May 29#Category:City councillors, but this sub-cat was not specifically addressed in that discussion, and could not also be merged to Category:Local political office-holders by country as it contains mainly articles rather than sub-cats. – Fayenatic London 09:11, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support in principle, per parent category. Maybe I am overthinking it but, in the previous discussion, couldn't that category also have been renamed simply to Category:Local politicians by country instead of to Category:Local political office-holders by country? Marcocapelle (talk) 12:06, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The target category had not been tagged or nominated, and its sub-cats were all of the form "Local political office-holders", so no, I don't believe it would have been appropriate to rename that target after that discussion alone.
  • By the way, thanks for cleaning up that hierarchy afterwards. – Fayenatic London 19:11, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support , they are not all city councillors, however widely we use that term. Rathfelder (talk) 21:06, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support This category is set up to include lots of people in similar positions even if the positions have different names.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:06, 19 July 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.

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:55, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose Merging Category:Central hall plan architecture and Category:Central passage plan architecture & Propose Renaming to Category:Central-passage houses

• Propose Merging Category:Central hall plan architecture in Tennessee and Category:Central passage plan architecture in Tennessee & Propose Renaming to Category:Central-passage houses in Tennessee

Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT and WP:C2D, consistency with main article's name

A central-passage house is a housing style popular in the southern United States and it's definitely defining. But both of the these category trees describe the same thing and neither follows the main article's naming convention. While the proposed new name sounds more narrow, there is no actual change in scope since every article here is a house (or historic house museum). - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:22, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, all articles are about houses. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:06, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -- to match the current name of the main article. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:51, 7 July 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.

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 – Fayenatic London 19:32, 10 July 2022 (UTC) merge to Category:Pages which use a template in place of a magic word. – Fayenatic London 20:02, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Pages which use = as a template (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category should be deleted because {{=}} is now a magic word, so the category should always be empty. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:57, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The category should be empty, but it exists to identify cases where the template is still being called (e.g. via {{=|parameter}}). Delete, looks like Category:Pages which use a template in place of a magic word is being used instead. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 02:55, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. "Category:Pages which use a template in place of a magic word" already handles this. Gonnym (talk) 21:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge into Category:Pages which use a template in place of a magic word This category is still theoretically "in use" – invalid markup like {{=|arg}} will categorise pages into it. However, this sort of markup a) gives a warning on save, so it's unlikely that people will use it by mistake; and b) also places pages into Category:Pages which use a template in place of a magic word, so there will still be some way to track the incorrect markup even if this category is deleted. Category:Pages which use a template in place of a magic word is usually empty or almost empty, so there's very little benefit by splitting it into subcategories based on which specific magic word is being misused; we may as well merge it into the main category. --ais523 22:13, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
• Note to closing admin Note that actually merging or deleting this category is nontrivial; it isn't being populated by a template, but rather directly by the MediaWiki software. This means that it can't be outright deleted, only merged or renamed (no matter what we do, the MediaWiki software will place pages which contain syntax like {{=|arg}} into a category). In order to merge or rename this sort of automatically populated category, you need to create a specific MediaWiki:-space page to let the software know which category you're merging it into; in this specific case, it will need to be MediaWiki:Template-equals-category (and the content of that page should be the name of the category to merge into, without the Category: prefix); note that at the time of writing the page in question is currently nonexistent despite being a blue link (MediaWiki: space is weird, and the link is blue to let you know that the page does something rather than has been created). Once the category has been merged at the software level, it will be safe to delete the old category description page at Category:Pages which use = as a template.

  Because a close of this CfD as "merge" requires editing MediaWiki:-space pages, I thought it might require an interface administrator to close, but after checking, I think regular admin powers might be enough (the MediaWiki: page in question isn't sensitive enough to trigger the higher level of protection). However, it's probably best for someone who's familiar with how MediaWiki: space works to do the closing. --ais523 22:13, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

 Note:Category:Pages which use a template in place of a magic word is already populated by the template. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:23, 2 July 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.