Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/Today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

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_July_5


July 5[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS[edit]

Category:Zero-level elevation points[edit]

Nominator's rationale: As per Category_talk:Zero-level_elevation_points#Scope. fgnievinski (talk) 03:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Athletes by location in Greece[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge; only one category. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:52, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Category:Athletes by location in Greece, I've populated it so the nomination is no longer valid. Should do the same for the rest. --Habst (talk) 14:33, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Habst, if you can populate the rest as well, I will withdraw the nomination. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we populate the rest?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:48, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Historic buildings and structures in Ireland[edit]

Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING (WP:SUBJECTIVECAT)
In addition to being subjective, these categories really haven't been used. The only loose articles are in the parent category which has two buildings and two former buildings (1, 2, 3, 4). I added more categories to all 4 to make it easier for readers to find them and the existing Irish and UK heritage register categories are a more defining and neutral way of grouping articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sportspeople and century categories[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Per a number of previous CfDs (e.g. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_12#20th/21st-century_sportspeople), organizing sportspersons by century is seen as not helpful. At the end of that discussion, someone proposed that more of these categories should be subsequently nominated, but I don't believe that has happened, so I am doing so now. I am bundling a number of categories together and I think the dynamics of them are generally all the same, but note that I have excluded Category:20th-century sailors, which seems to have naval officers mixed into it; the bizarre subcategories of Category:20th-century English cricketers, which seems to merit its own nomination; and some of these ethnic/national categories like Category:Czechoslovak sportspeople who only existed in the 20th-century, but I don't think these should be deleted, as they are clearly part of a different scheme. There are also similar schemes for chess and Go, which I've left alone as they are more extensive and not actually sports, so it introduces noise about including them in any sports-related category. From what I see, this will not leave any orphan categories or something that cannot be logically navigated from another scheme and for what it's worth, I created at least one of these and think they should all go. Lastly, I of course have no prejudice against listifying some of these, but I'll leave that up to anyone who feels particularly motivated to do it. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 01:02, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per request, I am pinging anyone I've seen participating in previous discussions, including some that were deletes on some of the above categories and someone saw fit to recreate, such as Category:20th-century cricketers which was recreated by User:Smasongarrison without any apparent consensus to un-delete, but said user can tell us below if there was and I've missed it. Please inform us why you recreated this deleted material. Any omissions are accidents, except in the case of deceased users (RIP). ―Justin (koavf)TCM 01:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fayenatic london, BrownHairedGirl, Good Olfactory, Autarch, Debresser, Explicit, Johnbod, Oculi, Mayumashu, Alansohn, Neonblak, Bradjamesbrown, Black Falcon, Davshul, Djsasso, Resolute, Ravenswing, RGTraynor, Pparazorback, RandySavageFTW, PeeJay, PeeJay2K3, DoubleBlue, Necrothesp, David Eppstein, Lugnuts, Grutness, Peterkingiron, Icarusgeek, Hugo999, Omnis Scientia, Deltaspace42, Marcocapelle, Joseph2302, Qwerfjkl, ForsythiaJo, Bearcat, and Place Clichy:Justin (koavf)TCM 01:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per request, here are some relevant CfDs re: sportspersons and by-century categories. Any omissions are purely ignorance on my part. Other users please do inform me if there are relevant CfDs on this topic that I've missed. As I noted above, there is a broad consensus against these in most, if not all, cases, and some users have seen fit to recreate categories where there was an explicit consensus to delete them.
Justin (koavf)TCM 01:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The 19th century categories aren't modern, and have numerous recent CFDs in support of keeping them Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 25#Category:19th-century tennis players, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_January_10#Category:19th-century_referees_and_umpires. You also omitted several more recent CFDs, including this one I pointed out Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 29#Category:20th-century sportspeople by nationality. The goal of these categories is to keep the many century category clear. Please tag the participants from those CFDs.Mason (talk) 01:16, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So keep what? All of them? Just the 19th-century ones? The triple intersections of century, nationality, and sport such as Category:20th-century English cricketers? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 01:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't misgender me. For the record, I remade the parent category for cricketers because the nationality subcategories existed, and had existed for quiet sometime. Mason (talk) 01:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have amended the above, so pardon me for the gender-neutral pronoun usage. Maybe I was unclear: you saw that there was consensus to delete the category and yet you recreated it. Was there some consensus to recreate it that I didn't know about or did you just personally decide that even though you knew there was consensus to delete it, you would recreate it anyway without any consensus to do so? Please also actually answer the questions I asked so I know what your !vote is. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 01:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. From what little I can recall, my rationale in creating this category was that baseball was a very different game in the 19th century and it was very useful to have a separate category for a relatively small subset of baseball players. Gamaliel (talk) 03:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, are you !voting to keep all or just 19th-century baseball ones? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 08:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Certainly delete 20th-century and 21st-century categories, we should do that for many other occupations too. The vast majority of biographies is about 20th-century and 21st-century people so the century characteristic does not discriminate at all. I am somewhat hesitant about the 19th-century categories because they may be a vital part of history of sports. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:38, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. Occupation categories by century are completely pointless and should all be deleted. -- Necrothesp (talk) 07:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ardit Sadiku[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Redudant category layer. There's not even a epon page for this category. Ardit Sadiku Mason (talk) 00:20, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:20th-century Nepalese film directors[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Modern occupations aren't diffused by century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_March_2#Film_directors_by_century Mason (talk) 00:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]