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_July_7


July 7[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS[edit]

Category:Urban projects in Ethiopia[edit]

Nominator's rationale: No such category tree. Merge to Category:Urban planning in Ethiopia Gjs238 (talk) 20:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Brainwashing theory proponents[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Whatever the difference is supposed to be between these two categories is beyond me. As far as I can tell, both categories are about people notable for writing works promoting the legitimacy of the sociological concept of brainwashing/mind control (which are more or less the same thing). This just seems like a slightly less neutral version of the other category made by a banned sock. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bedouin businesspeople[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Not necessary to subcategorize the target category this way. Also contains only 2 articles. Gjs238 (talk) 17:41, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video games based on Fantastic Four films[edit]

Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT, it only contains two articles. Should also be merged into Category:Video games based on Marvel Comics films and Category:20th Century Studios video games. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:39, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Clone High characters[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Only one article. Unopposed to a split if more come in the future. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:S.L. Benfica (table tennis)[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge No evidence that it can be expanded. Most other subcategories are similarly small and should also be merged. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:24, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding small siblings.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 20:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on GiantSnowman's proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 14:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mosques by decade 620s-970s[edit]

Nominator's rationale: merge, sparsely populated category tree, many decade categories do not exist at all, not the least because exact dates are often unknown. It will become a lot easier to navigate between mosques articles when they are moved to century level. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiProject Colonialism participants[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonialism was redirected and is no longer a project or task force. Gonnym (talk) 09:57, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiProject Dacia participants[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia:WikiProject Dacia was redirected and is no longer a project or task force. Gonnym (talk) 09:50, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Counts of Geneva[edit]

Nominator's rationale: delete, the category consists of two very different sets of medieval ruling counts of Geneva, who are already in Category:House of Geneva and for early modern members of the House of Savoy for whom this was merely an empty title. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:22, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I don't believe the above summary to be quite right. Several members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county and they are not going to be recorded in 'house of Geneva'. There is also the house of Thoire that controlled the county briefly in the late medieval period who presently lack articles but would be members of the category if they didn't. Moreover even after the city of Geneva slipped from their grasp (they maintained control of other parts of the county such as Annecy) the county remained prominent among their titulary (several of the sons of the dukes of Nemours were called the prince de Genevois until the death of their fathers) and is featured in the leading sentences of many of the articles. sovietblobfish (talk) 08:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I do agree some form of re-allocation needs to happen from Jacques on down. Especially given the county was raised to a duchy by the duke of Savoy in 1564. Perhaps they should be migrated to a category called something like 'Prince de Genevois' or 'Prince of the Genevois'. sovietblobfish (talk) 08:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Of course members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county because it was part of the Savoyard state and the rulers of the latter were the ones enjoying practical control. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      At times yes, however the county (-1564 duchy) was under the authority of the cadet branch Savoie-Nemours for the majority of the 16th century and parts of the 17th century, and they were primarily French princes.
      Irrespective of whether they or the dukes of Savoy enjoyed practical control, this surely challenges the notion that it was an 'empty title' and it is therefore meaningful to keep it. sovietblobfish (talk) 12:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pioneers of Israel[edit]

Nominator's rationale: This seems like it could plausibly renamed, refocused, or deleted. Obviously it's a coherent group, but is it an encyclopedic one as it stands? Remsense诉 03:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Read the Encyclopedia of the Founders and Builders of Israel by David Tidhar. This category is a gold mine of information. It will help numerous people interested in studying the development of the state of Israel. These are the pioneers. Dag21902190 (talk) 03:19, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of the issue is that "pioneer" is generally a term of adulation. I think at a bare minimum, the name of the category needs to be changed in order to conform with our policy concerning neutral point of view. Remsense诉 03:22, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dag21902190 Another issue is you seem to be treating this category page like it's an article, which is not correct. Remsense诉 04:09, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categories are meant to have a summary explaining what is in the category. Dag21902190 (talk) 04:13, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, a one-sentence summary usually. Remsense诉 04:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pioneer has a definition, and just like the pioneers of America, these are the pioneers of Israel. It is not a term of adulation. It is a fact. Dag21902190 (talk) 04:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you cleanly define it in one sentence for me? Categories are meant to be fairly self-evident: if you need to write an article to fully flesh out your definition, it might not be a good category. It seems like you want to write a list article, which would need to stand up to our policies about verifiability, notability and neutral point of view. Your present prose does not, it is very much adulatory.Remsense诉 04:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
“Pioneers” are people who are among the first to explore or settle what becomes a new country or area. For example, a colonist/colonizer. Just because you interpret the term as adulation, doesn’t make it adulation. Best regards. I deleted the additional summary because of what you said. Dag21902190 (talk) 04:36, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you interpret the term as adulation, doesn’t make it adulation

Unfortunately that tends to be how language works, as we're talking about the connotations of language.
I don't quite understand your definition in any case, as none of the people in the category were among the first to explore or settle what is now Israel. Remsense诉 09:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know what a colonizer is? What do we call the first Europeans to settle and develop America? Were they the first people to explore or settle America? Obviously they weren’t. You cannot take a long-used term, and pretend it can’t be applied to the very thing it defines. I hate to break it to you, but you sound like an anti-Israel shill. I understand if English isn’t your first language, but just because you interpret the word “pioneer” as adulation, doesn’t mean it should be changed. Dag21902190 (talk) 13:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

“Pioneers” are people who are among the first to explore or settle what becomes a new country or area.

None of the people in the category were among the first to explore or settle what is now Israel. Your definition doesn't work, is my point.

just because you interpret the word “pioneer” as adulation, doesn’t mean it should be changed.

Correct: it should be changed because it's not just me. As a verb, pioneer absolutely has distinctly positive connotations; some related, more neutral verbs are colonize, settle, construct, and establish. The interplanetary space probe was named Pioneer 6 and not Colonizer 6 or Establisher 6 for a reason, I'm afraid. Remsense诉 20:57, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It’s very clear that you don’t want the word pioneer being used because you don’t view the early settlers in a positive light. I will maintain, despite your attempt to bring in the naming of a satellite, that pioneer is the correct word to be used. American pioneers weren’t the first to settle America, yet they are defined as pioneers. All you have to do is search up the definition of pioneer on Google, and the first two examples of synonyms are “colonist” and “colonizer”. Your interpretation of the English language does not, and should not, mean you can redefine a word, because you view it as adulation. Dag21902190 (talk) 21:07, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American pioneers weren’t the first to settle America, yet they are defined as pioneers

There's been plenty of ink spilled about how "pioneer" is also wrong in an American context for exactly the same reason. Academic use sharply declined as a result.
I also shouldn't have to ask you not to accuse me of behaving in bad faith without a lick of evidence, as I've given you no reason to assume my motives are anything but what I've already said they are: Wikipedia has content policies. Remsense诉 20:27, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Aaron Aaronsohn is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  2. Sarah Aaronsohn is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  3. Baruch Agadati is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  4. Gershon Agron is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  5. Israel Aharoni is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  6. Abba Ahimeir is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  7. Akiva Aryeh Weiss is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  8. Yigal Allon is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  9. Binyamin Amirà is in Category:Immigrants to Ottoman Palestine
  10. Divsha Amirà is in Category:Immigrants to Ottoman Palestine
  11. Zalman Aran is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  12. Meir Argov is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  13. Haim Ariav is in Category:Immigrants to Ottoman Palestine
  14. Yitzhak Arieli is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  15. Haim Arlosoroff is in Category:Jewish National Council members
  16. Ami Assaf is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  17. Daniel Auster is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  18. Genia Averbuch is in Category:Immigrants to Ottoman Palestine
  • Comment Can the scope be simply defined first, before we consider if the category should be retitled, merged, or deleted? I think an issue with the term "pioneer" here is that it can be unclear and may be applied to many individuals that aren't intended. Kingsif (talk) 11:54, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Everyone here needs to take a deep breath. This is Wikipedia. Accusing people of anti-XYZ bias or destroying hard work is unproductive and does nothing to strengthen your point. With that out of the way, there is clear consensus that this category needs to change. Whether that change is in the form of deletion or not is to be determined (hence relisting), but if it is kept we need a defined scoped and potentially a better name.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 05:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I think in theory this is a valuable category, and I applaud @Dag21902190's work. Clearly there exists a distinction between pioneers/settlers and immigrants. Pioneers refers to the very early years of Israel's development, though there must be discussion to the exact line to be drawn. As for the name 'Pioneers': it is clear that this category is referring to the pioneers of the modern state of Israel, not the land of Israel, though perhaps that should be clarified in the summary. I believe the word pioneer is inappropriate because pioneer is commonly used in reference to the first people to develop a land agriculturally and in a civilization oriented manner (e.g. in contrast to the Native Americans). The land of Israel had been civilized and farmed for quite literally thousands of years. On the flip side, colonizers is usually thought of to have a negative connotation, and a simple category is not the place for asserting Israeli settlers' moral standing. I believe settlers would be a fair and neutral word to use. I also believe the word colonizers should be struck from the summary. JoeJShmo💌 09:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Call them pioneers or call them settlers, it remains unclear who else than Jews from Ottoman Palestine and Jews from Mandatory Palestine would fit here. It remains a matter of strong overlap. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:56, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What you fail to recognise is the benefit of creating more-specific categories. There is clearly something to gain by breaking up the immigration into the different Aliyot. It makes research more easy, and more makingful. It also puts these notable figures into the context of their immigration. Different Aliyot had different success levels, which I am sure impacted the development of these people. Regardless, it just seems to be an attempt to delete something specific, in order to overgeneralise and keep them hidden in a broad list of thousands of people. I’m trying to make it easier for people to do research on the topic. Dag21902190 (talk) 14:33, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is not the nomination about the different Aliyot. We have that discussion somewhere else. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      My apologies, I got confused since you have multiple fronts opened against me. That itself is testament to your targeting.
      Thanks, Joe Shmo. I hope there are other people with your clarity of mind. I know there are, but they must not be able to see this discussion. Dag21902190 (talk) 16:19, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:12th-century Almohad caliphs[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Recommended by Nederlandse Leeuw (talk · contribs) in Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_June_11#Category:Government_of_the_Almohad_Caliphate:

Category:12th-century Almohad caliphs‎ (4 P) and Category:13th-century Almohad caliphs‎ (10 P) are probably best upmerged to Category:Almohad caliphs, and to Category:12th-century caliphs + Category:12th-century monarchs in Africa & Category:13th-century caliphs + Category:13th-century monarchs in Africa, respectively. A subdivision by century for a dynasty that lasted just under one century and a half tends not to aid navigation very much. But I suggest that for a follow-up.

–LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 12:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:06, 29 June 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) 01:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Triple merge. The important thing is that the Almohad caliph category includes these 14 entries and no others, and dividing that category further by 2 centuries doesn't seem necessary. JoeJShmo💌 10:12, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Green Party of England and Wales donors[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Donating to a political party is rarely if ever defining. There is only one article in the category. (t · c) buidhe 01:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:18th century in Mozambique[edit]

Nominator's rationale: downmerge, redundant category layer, there isn't any content here that doesn't fall under Portuguese Mozambique. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with it, but can we leave this as a redirect to resolve the template from breaking? Mason (talk) 00:05, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting pending Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 3#16th to 19th century in (Portuguese) Mozambique.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:38, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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