Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 22

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
< May 21
May 23 >

May 22

Category:First-person video games

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. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unlike the other category I nominated for deletion (Video games using procedural generation) this category sincerely deserves to go. Firstly, it's not much defining trait for all video games as a whole (more defining for shooters and some adventure games). Secondly, it does not include every single title that is first-person (such as Subnatica or Baldi's Basics isn't there). In conclusion, this category just doesn't work and more importantly does not list every single First-Person Game. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 23:18, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If it doesn't include every single first-person video game, that means you should Populate the category, not Delete it. It has a main article, it has subcategories, and all of these appear to be WP:DEFINING. Go ahead and put Subnatica and Baldi's Basics in the category, that seems a good idea. Good day. NLeeuw (talk) 04:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose No valid reason to delete. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:01, 30 May 2024 (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:People from Imperial China by religion

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. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 22:28, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:15, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom Mason (talk) 12:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Category:Taoists from Imperial China tree has these, for example:
Other examples include:
I'm change my vote to soft keep, however, I am skeptical that @Yinweiaiqing will further populate the categories. I've made repeated requests for them to do so for other categories on their talk page. Please, Yinweiaiqing do go back through your created categories because you have made A LOT of categories that are still underpopulated. Mason (talk) 20:04, 31 May 2024 (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:Companies based in Williston

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single-entry microcategory for a small town. Categories like this do not automatically need to exist for every place that has one company based there, and should wait until there are five or six companies to file in it. For added bonus, the article filed here was left duplicate-filed in both the Category:Companies based in North Dakota and Category:Williston, North Dakota parents alongside this, so no upmerging is even needed because it's already in both of the potential upmerge targets. Bearcat (talk) 17:51, 22 May 2024 (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:Manufacturing companies based in West Fargo, North Dakota

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 30#Category:Manufacturing companies based in West Fargo, North Dakota

Category:Natural death while driving

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category for a non-defining characteristic. We certainly have some categories for the cause of people's deaths, but we do not have any scheme of categorizing people for tangential circumstances around their deaths, such as what otherwise unrelated thing they happened to be doing at the time. So if driving a car wasn't the cause of their death (e.g. in a car accident), then the relationship between death and driving is not a category-worthy characteristic.
It's also not at all applicable to one of the two people filed here — Grace Kelly survived both the initial brain hemorrhage and her car going over a cliff, and died only the next day of a second cerebral hemorrhage that she suffered in the hospital after having been diagnosed with a good chance of surviving the first one. So she clearly didn't die while driving, and the category wouldn't belong on her even if it were defining for anybody else. (To be fair, I will grant that most people probably "remember" her death as being caused by the car accident itself, rather than all the nuances, but "correcting popular misconceptions" is not what categories are for.) Bearcat (talk) 17:07, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete per nom. Well-argued, I completely agree with the rationale here. We could create all sorts of interesting categories like Natural death while watching television, Natural death while reading the newspaper in the dentist's waiting room or Natural death while walking the dog around the block, but this is all WP:NONDEFINING. NLeeuw (talk) 18:26, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Delete per nom. Agree with Nwleeuw that Bearcat makes a really good case. Mason (talk) 23:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Gjs238 (talk) 00:33, 27 May 2024 (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:South Park episodes featuring video game consoles

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category for a non-defining characteristic. We do not have any scheme of "[Series] episodes featuring [minor plot point]" categories for this to be a part of, and the episodes are not defined by having video game consoles in them as plot points. Bearcat (talk) 17:01, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Mason (talk) 12:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as this is a non-defining characteristic. Let'srun (talk) 03:05, 26 May 2024 (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:Chicago and North Western Railroad municipalities

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single-entry category for a non-defining characteristic. Wikipedia does not have any established scheme of categorizing populated places for the railway lines that happen to pass through them, and one small village of just 1,500 people does not need special treatment over and above all the other towns and cities in the world that are located on railway lines but not categorized for that. Bearcat (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2024 (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:Macedonian people

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 * Pppery * it has begun... 22:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per MOS:MAC categories should avoid adjectival use altogether. The use of neutral formulations such as "of North Macedonia", "in North Macedonia," etc. is preferred. Although most nationality categories are named 'Fooinan people', there are already several exceptions: Category:People from Georgia (country), Category:People from Northern Ireland, Category:People from the State of Palestine, as well as almost all subcategories in Category:People by former country and about half of those in Category:People by dependent territory. Aldij (talk) 16:37, 22 May 2024 (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:UK MPs 2019–present

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 as already done * Pppery * it has begun... 22:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A general election has just been announced and Parliament will be dissolved by the end of the week. --Ferien (talk) 16:18, 22 May 2024 (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.

Canadian families by ancestry‎

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Standard for Category:Families by ancestry tree. Aldij (talk) 16:00, 22 May 2024 (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.


Russian families by ancestry‎

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Standard for Category:Families by ancestry tree. Aldij (talk) 15:56, 22 May 2024 (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.

Template:Turkmenistan-women-footy-bio-stub

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary stub template. Wikipedia does not have any standard practice of segregating male and female footballers with separate stub templates or categories -- stub is a temporary maintenance state of the article, not a core characteristic of the subject, so the stub category system does not always need to be as precisely trait-sorted as main permanent content categories are. (See e.g. actors and actresses, who are gender-sorted in main content categories but share one common stub category rather than being gender-sorted in that tree.) So we just tag women and men with the same "Country-footy-bio-stub" tag, and I can't find any other country where male and female footballers have separate stub tags or categories from each other.
Yet this was newly created within the past week, for just one person whose article wasn't even a stub in the first place and thus wouldn't even have needed the already-existing {{Turkmenistan-footy-bio-stub}} anyway, and tried to file her in a redlinked stub category that doesn't exist to have people filed in it but could not have been created for less than 60 people either — so the only alternative would have been to replace it with the same category that the other template is already using, thus vitiating any reason why two separate templates would have been needed even if the article had been a stub. Bearcat (talk) 15:28, 22 May 2024 (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:European families of Irish ancestry

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is no need for separate categories for European nationalities. Aldij (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2024 (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:Indian royals in British Indian Army

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 30#Category:Indian royals in British Indian Army

Category:Asian families by ancestry

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Matching actual content, subcategories contain only families of Asian ancestry, but not exclusively from Asian countries. Aldij (talk) 09:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename, per actual content, as reflected in the names of the subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:15, 22 May 2024 (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:European families by ancestry

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Matching actual content, subcategories contain only families of European ancestry, but not exclusively from European countries. Aldij (talk) 09:54, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename, per actual content, as reflected in the names of the subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:16, 22 May 2024 (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:Canne de combat competitions

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 both to Category:Stick-fighting. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only two pages in the full Canne de combat tree, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 05:03, 22 May 2024 (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.


Lenape

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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale For the purposes of consistency and concision, move to simply "Lenape". Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 04:10, 22 May 2024 (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:French mixed martial artists of Black African descent

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge. There's no other althetic category like this in Black French sportspeople. I don't think that this category passes EGRS. If kept, this category needs to be renamed to either Black French mixed martial artists or French mixed martial artists of African descent, to be consistent with other descent categories. Mason (talk) 02:51, 22 May 2024 (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.

Involving former countries or by former country involved

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) 13:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Option A: X involving former countries
Option B: X by former country involved
Intro: This is a preliminary discussion. This issue traces back to 8 years ago, when Wars involving former countries in March 2016 and Battles by former country in December 2016 were created, apparently independent of each other. I've recently initiated a push for adding the word "involved" to the latter type of catnames to avoid confusion with "battles *in* Fooland" (see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 4#Category:Battles by country and WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN). There are 2 options to resolve this inconsistency:
Option A rationale: This has my strong preference, as it is shorter and unambiguous. E.g. "Sieges by former country involved" might suggest it means a country that was formerly involved in a siege. Imagine how Fooian and Barian soldiers were besieging city X, but then the Barian army decided to give up and go home, while the Fooians maintained the siege. An editor might think: "Ah, that's a siege formerly involving Bar!", even if Bar is a country that still exists today rather than a former country. That's the kind of confusion we should prevent. A disadvantage is that we'll get a slightly odd tree where "involving former countries" will become children of "by country involved", as is already the case with Category:Wars involving former countries). And it might be silly to rename the parents to something like Category:Wars involving countries, as the vast majority of wars involves countries rather than non-state actors (rebel groups, mercenaries etc.). But that slight inconsistency doesn't weigh up to the clarity and brevity of "former countries". We can decide that this is an important naming convention to be followed (thus falling under WP:C2B in future cases).
Option B rationale: This is the alternative, sticking to the "by country involved" formula that is currently being adopted for cats involving countries that still exist today. (I actually initiated that process myself some days ago before realising it might pose problems for former countries). The main advantage is consistency through the entire tree, something that can fall under WP:C2C in future cases. However, the disadvantages outlined above about it being longer and especially being ambiguous about "countries formerly involved" lead me to conclude this option should not be our preference. I can pretty much guarantee that with ongoing wars, editors are going to miscategorise countries that still exist today as having pulled out of the ongoing war as a "former country involved" (a good reason why that category in particular is already named "wars involving former countries" instead, preventing exactly this kind of confusion from happening, even if the creator might not have had that conscious intention when picking a catname). But I'm putting it up for consideration by the community, because it is a serious alternative.
PS: I haven't tagged any categories yet. I prefer to have this preliminary discussion first before tagging the relevant categories with a proposed new name, otherwise I would have to be tagging all of them both ways, and that's not very helpful for everyone's understanding. When this discussion has a clear result for A or B, I'll tag the relevant categories accordingly and ping all participants for a follow-up to confirm. NLeeuw (talk) 02:57, 22 May 2024 (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:Sexual-related controversies in film

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: Purge and rename * Pppery * it has begun... 22:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Purge of articles about individual films per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country and other such discussions on that day's page. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:18, 22 May 2024 (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:Sex scandals in French cinema

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) 02:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I would say that this needs to be purged of individual films (and people, who are for some reason in this category) à la Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country, but that would leave this as a single-member category (containing Roman Polanski sexual abuse case). Delete, and manually add Roman Polanski sexual abuse case to Category:Sexual-related controversies in film. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:13, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. I initially read this as "Sex scandals in French cinemas." But that's a very different scope. I'm kind of disappointed now... NLeeuw (talk) 02:36, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:57, 22 May 2024 (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/2024_May_22&oldid=1226637005"