Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ganmatthew (talk | contribs) at 16:01, 9 November 2024 (→Category:Wikipedian Roblox developers: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< November 8
November 10 >

November 9

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:Wikipedian Roblox developers

Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:USERCAT for lacking any discernible collaborative function - WP:OC/U#narrow. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't contest if other editors find the categorization too niche, but I would like to argue that its meant to better organize editors who have a technical background with Roblox as a platform and engine, especially as there are multiple Roblox games listed in the Roblox category and the List of Roblox games page on Wikipedia. Ganmatthew (talk • contribs) 16:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:People from Plum Springs, Kentucky

Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 14:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Serious games

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining/overlapping SMasonGarrison 12:39, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Artists who acted in films and television shows

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between occupations SMasonGarrison 12:36, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong names of assessment categories for the Philippine music task force

I recently tried organizing the Philippine music task force of Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines by fixing the talk page banner, adding an article alert system, and assessment categories. After creating all the categories, there were no articles showing up in any of the quality assessment categories. And after reading the banner documentation, I figured that the 

 |TF_2_ASSESSMENT_CAT = Philippine music task force articles

parameter in the talk page banner may be at fault. I'd like to request for these quality assessment categories be moved to its respective names, accordingly, since the importance assessment categories with the similar naming structure as to the parameter works just fine. It's my first time having to do such, and unfortunately it went to no good. Thank you very much and I apologies for the hassle dealt. – Relayed (t • c) 11:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Demon superheroes

Nominator's rationale: The combination of demon and superhero does not appear to be defining, at least without evidence that it is. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Superheroes who are adopted

Nominator's rationale: Unencyclopedic cross-categorization, while it might be a common trope it is still not defining that one is BOTH a superhero and adopted. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Superhero schoolteachers

Nominator's rationale: Not defining - made by blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. SMasonGarrison 12:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional males by franchise

Nominator's rationale: Few to none of the things in here qualify as a franchise, making this category misleading. Made by a blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters from the Solar System

Nominator's rationale: The title of this category, as written, can encompass most fictional characters ever created. It clearly means "fictional extraterrestrials from within the Solar System", but I'm not sure it passes WP:NONDEF compared to often-used beings like Martians and Venusians, for which there are subcategories. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional extraterrestrial robots

Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:NONDEF as, while they are a character type that appears from time to time, there does not seem to be something defining about the combination of extraterrestrial and robot in particular. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Thulinverken vehicles

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Articles with Justapedia origins

Nominator's rationale: Apart from being a 99.99% WP mirror - for our purposes, Justapedia is merely another crowdsourced platform that should not be used as a source for anything, so there should be no "articles with Justapedia origins". Pointless category. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Languages written in Latin script

Nominator's rationale: This category, as one that is a decade old, is not even implemented correctly; currently, it is more dependent on subcategories than pages in the category itself, but even then some languages like Indonesian or Filipino aren't even included there. However this trait should not be defining because Latin is the most common writing system. This category still does contain some languages that aren't written in the Latin script by standard, such as Hassaniya Arabic or Meitei, but I don't think trait is defining either. Other categories under Category:Languages by script may be kept, or maybe they'll be deleted as if writing systems as a whole are not defining. You decide. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 05:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the problem for including per-language subcategories as members rather than pages? In fact there should not even be any "page" (i.e. Galeries on Commons). Galeries are not relevant very for languages that have many aspects.
That category is relevant especially for languages that are commonly written with several scripts, and there's a need to subcategories per script (Latin being one of them), and then properly index the contents written in each script (so not all per-language categories need to be members, as most languages have a default script and there's still no need to distinguish them; but that's not even treu for English which is multiscript, even if Latin is its default).
This category should just be fed (very slowly) according to the IANA or CLDR databases and their related use in BCP 47 where categorizing per script is needed: if we categorize English written in Deseret, and list English as a member of "Language written in Deseret script", then we still need to list it also as member of "Languages written in Deseret script". As well we cannot assume a single script in many languages (not even Arabic! Which is also written in the Latin script in some wellknown Arabic variants, and for which case we have distinctive contents in Commons, that we do not want to mix with other Arabic-Arabic contents where we'll have difficulties to locales Arabic-Latin contents, jsut like we'll have difficutlies to locate English-Deserrt contents if they are all mixed deeply within English-Latin contents.)
Even if the Latin script is the most widely used one in the world, we don't want to place any image in that Category:Languages written in Latin script. All that is designed is to have subcategoeies members (and notably languages that are known to be written in mutliple scripts). We don't need per-language galeries as members (even if there are a few ones, these galeries should just be members of their own category to be listed as members). So that category should only contain subcategories, not galeries, not files for images/logos/symbols/audio/video that all should be placed in relevant subcategories of the per-language category (and possibly of the language-script combination category). Commons is not a videogame to play with for your convenience in Antarctica, it is for educational purpose.
Your statement also about "Hassaniya Arabic" is wrong: it is also written in the Latin script (as a standard in a wellknown country where it replaces the Arabic script in frequent cases). The same remark applies to Meitei (as written in Assam where the Latin script more common than the Meitei Mayek script for that language, even if it is not recognized officially, just because the language itself is still not recognized locally in order to promote the Bengali-Assamese script). It is a clear sign that you make this deleteion requrest based on false unchecked assumptions about how languages are written. And this is perfectly why such category by script is useful: it helps collecting facts that are countering such false assumptions, and make these facts more visible and easier to locate. This category will then grow very slowly but surely as needed as we get medias about them and categorize them properly to avoid them being lost in the mass where your assumption takes its root. Commons is especially useful when it collects medias that are otherwise difficult to find and study.
The fact that this categotry is "old" is not relevantat all as a criteria for deletion. The fact it has few members and thuis count progresses very slowly is aldo not relevant at all (this is per design), and this does not hurt at all but improves the indexing of Commons, to distinguish contents per language-script and locate them correctly (by helping finding language-script combinations when they are more rare and precious). verdy_p (talk) 07:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional Shorinji Kempo practitioners

Nominator's rationale: Too small to be necessary, made by a blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional sambo practitioners

Nominator's rationale: Too small to be necessary. Made by a blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Melee weapons

Nominator's rationale: Given melee weapon was deleted, this category in itself is facing a crisis. I suggest a merge for any applicable articles, as it is no longer a viable means to categorize things. This also includes any subcategories reading "melee weapons" to be merged into their respective nation subcategory. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Seneca clans

Nominator's rationale: Clans are shared between Iroquois nations (for example, a Mohawk Wolf Clan member, an Oneida Wolf Clan member, and a Seneca Wolf Clan member are all considered part of the same clan, see here and here), and these categories are currently very small with only one of them having more than 3 entries, so populating them with clan members from the other Iroquois nations would be beneficial. 69.159.15.16 (talk) 03:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support; however, would Category:Beaver clan of the Haudenosaunee, etc., be preferable to use?. Yuchitown (talk) 14:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional taijutsuka

Nominator's rationale: Pointlessly specific category that I'd be surprised isn't original research for all involved. Made by disruptive account. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English Olympic medallists

Nominator's rationale: As per the recent deletion of Category:Californian Olympic medalists based on the fact that California and England and Scotland and Wales do not field Olympic teams, this category should be deleted. This came up in the discussion on California by editor @Marcocapelle:. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Scottish Olympic competitors etc. Those should probably be nominated too, but in the meantime it is a valid location for all the medalists. Crowsus (talk) 11:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tiziano Ferro redirects

Nominator's rationale: There are no album or song redirect schemes such as there is for television episodes (e.g. Category:Episode redirects to lists). StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 23:29, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then there are tens of thousands of these redirects in Category:Redirects from songs that really should be further organized in some way, for maintenance purposes if nothing else. I have been working with the songs, albums and redirects of this artist and have found it helpful to organize the dozens of related redirects. I don't see the need for deletion, and actually I'm encouraged to create a scheme.— TAnthonyTalk 23:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But assuming this idea will horrify the music redirect community, I can accept a consolidation to Category:Tiziano Ferro redirects.— TAnthonyTalk 23:50, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Find it helpful for what? What are you looking for by categorizing variations on the title of L'amore è una cosa semplice created as redirects? Any actual redirects (not misspellings, miscapitalizations, etc.) for albums or songs that are listed in the discography or track listing can be merged to the parent albums/songs category. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 06:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I admit I do not understand what Marcocapelle means by a "maintenance process" – what would you like to see in order to support keeping/merging the categories? If you support keeping/merging the category, is that something that can happen?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rutulian film people

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layers SMasonGarrison 02:33, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Bearcat's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with merging to the highest level. SMasonGarrison 12:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Restaurants in Hoboken, New Jersey

Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:03, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Five entries (one of which is a redirect) as of relisting. Is that enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Administrator recall

Nominator's rationale: The usual issue with ambiguously-named non-content categories. I would have sent it to speedy but wasn't sure if this was an uncontroversial "established naming convention" under criterion C2B. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 01:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is already discussion about this at Wikipedia_talk:Administrator_recall#Categories and we have consensus for these changes. We did not necessarily need a formal proposal for this. Anyone should be free to move them directly Soni (talk) 07:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pre-1876 life peers

Nominator's rationale: Opposed at speedy. This rename aligns with the subcategories and is generally more clear. Pinging people from CFDS: @Ravenpuff, Fayenatic london, and Stephan Leeds. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:00, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of speedy discussion


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_9&oldid=1256364753"