Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/Today

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

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

Deletion tools
Policy (log)
Articles (howto · log)
Templates (howto · log)
Categories (howto · log)
Mergers
Page moves
Speedy
All speedy templates
Unfree files
Transwiki (howto · log)
All transwiki templates

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/2024_September_27


September 27

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:Novomoskovsk Raion

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Due to the name of the main article of the category: Samar Raion. Yuriy Kvach (talk) 07:11, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Novomoskovsk, Ukraine

[edit]
Nominator's rationale:Due to the name of the main article of the category: Samar, Ukraine. Yuriy Kvach (talk) 06:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Centuries in Landskrona‎

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, most articles don't belong in a history category but rather in e.g. a buildings and structures category. The articles that do belong in a history category are so few that they can easily put together in a single category. For reference: only 5 of the biggest world cities have their own 15th century category next to Landskrona. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Geography of the Republic of Artsakh

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, single-article category which does not help navigation. Former countries do not necessarily have a geography subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:35, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:College sports teams by university

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redudant category layer Mason (talk) 12:37, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Mason's proposed solution?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:49, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Palestinian celebrities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is vague and non-defining Mason (talk) 03:01, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Grand Theft Auto mods

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Out all 4 of pages in this category, only 2 of these are individual mods: Multi Theft Auto and FiveM (FiveM is a redirect by the way). "Hot Coffee" is just a name for a minigame, it isn't its own mod and Grand Theft Auto modding is just for the modding in general. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:45, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean keep. Smallcat is no longer a policy. Four seems like enough to keep a category. And Hot Coffee requires a mod to access. Mason (talk) 02:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Game jam video games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Having been initially created as part of a game jam is not defining for these games. While it can be an interesting factoid that shows how game jams help inspire developers, my guess is that most players of Celeste, Inscryption, etc. don't know or care that it originated in a game jam, and it certainly isn't mentioned prominently in the gaming media. That makes this category fail WP:NONDEF. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Just because some players may not know the game originated from a game jam doesn't invalidate that there is recognization of what game jams produce in the industry as a whole, so this is a defining category. Also, "not mentioned prominently in gaming media" can be disproven with sources, [1], [2], [3] etc. --Masem (t) 03:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't read the first two sources but the third is surely irrelevant for this discussion. It proves notability of the topic, but it does not prove that it is defining for e.g. Amnesia Fortnight 2012. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What I meant is that it is not typically mentioned when the gaming press talks about a particular game. Of course, game jams are notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If it's needed to show how games created through game jams are recognized post release as such games, it becomes a matter of picking examples, and this will depend on the impact of the game and relationship to coverage.
    A well known game is Inscryption and those sources are plenty eg [4], [5], [6]. Or Goat Simulator, [7], [8], [9].
    The idea is comparable to how a projects originates such as in Category:Crowdfunded video games and even to a degree of Category:Indie games (though here this has no question of being defining). The implication that players may not care about these is short sighted since these are a significant vector of new games into the industry and the industry recognizes the importance of game jams. — Masem (t) 19:17, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:50, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Closed military installations

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I can see no useful distinction between "closed" and "former". – Fayenatic London 07:56, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag all of the "former" categories. Discussion on direction of renaming/merging would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The nominator is absolutely right about distinction between the two terms. However, semantically speaking "closed" implies a certain process that makes a particular object "former". Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 21:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Will there be a change like instead of "Former country" to "Closed country" in order to make everything uniform? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 21:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aleksandr Grigoryev: Absolutely not!
I commend HouseBlaster for making a full nomination for the reverse merge option. However, I cannot think of any examples where Buckshot06's concerns would lead to pages being miscategorised or categories being unhelpfully misinterpreted. I therefore think that there is insufficient reason to use "Closed" as an exception to the predominant use of "Former" in this hierarchy.
However, there is another widespread alternative: "Defunct", which is used for 21 of 59 sub-cats in Category:Former buildings and structures by type. Personally, I would prefer to use "Former" throughout, but some editors have expressed a clear preference for "Defunct" in certain cases, and I would not object to it. Would other participants prefer to use that word for military installations? – Fayenatic London 19:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still more agreement needed to form consensus on direction of merging, but there is consensus we need to do something.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:49, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lutilodix

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: https://doi.org/10.1071/IS22049 NotAGenious (talk) 14:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is this source proposing a revision or establishing a revision? That is not very clear. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    From the abstract, Furthermore, we confirm the previous treatment of Lutilodix, Parcolena and Dolapex as junior synonyms of Fanulena. I don't see why this matters, though, as it's just a move to the correct name. The pages in the category have been moved already, too. NotAGenious (talk) 05:01, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:46, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hyperinflations

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Duel merge. There are only two pages in here that, which isn't helpful for navigation. If not merged, the category should be renamed to Hyperinflation to reflect the topic category Hyperinflation Mason (talk) 12:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Two questions. Is the category populated enough to be kept? If so, should it be renamed as suggested by Marcocapelle?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely populated enough. HB, I was the one who suggested it be renamed if kept. Mason (talk) 02:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Olympic Games swimming controversies

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I think we should purge and selectively merge this category because olympic swimming controversies are vague, and we don't really have enough content in Swimming controversies that are non-olympic to justify diffusing Mason (talk) 12:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Furry stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub category with little prospect of expansion to the required size. As always, stub categories are not free for just any user to create on a whim for any topic of personal interest -- there have to be at least 60 articles to file in a stub category before it can be created, and for that very reason stub categories have to be proposed to Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting for discussion before they can be created. But this was never proposed for discussion, and there's only one article here with no prospect of finding 59 others quickly: the mainspace category Category:Furry fandom doesn't even contain 60 articles total across it and all of its subcategories combined, and what it does contain isn't all (or even mostly) stubs.
The template isn't as much of a problem -- the minimum bar for a stub template isn't 60 articles, as templates can file articles into higher-level stub categories in the meantime even if they don't yet have enough articles to get their own dedicated category. So I'm fine with keeping it if somebody can think of an appropriate higher-level category that it can be moved to -- but as a stub template does have to file its entries somewhere, it also has to be deleted if a replacement stub category can't be found. Bearcat (talk) 15:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag the template. If there are no further comments in a week, we are all set for deleting both.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:18, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Comics retailers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: split, we do not usually mix biographies and companies. This is a kind of undoing of the result of this 2008 discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Comics retailers in Canada.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Response to jc37's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Selena y Los Dinos

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Eponymous parent category here is unnecessary just for a members subcat, especially since Category:Selena exists. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 04:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that is enough to warrant an eponymous category for the group. Plus, the Selena category serves the same purpose and is more all encompassing. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 07:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Two subcategories and Selena y Los Dinos in this category as of relisting. Is this enough for it to be kept?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:39, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment. More participation would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/Today&oldid=931652817"