March 27
Category:Twin sportspeople
- 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: no consensus. –
Fayenatic
London 05:49, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Twin sportspeople to Category:Twin people
- Nominator's rationale: Per WP:COP#N, we are instructed that categories should be made for "standard biographical details: year of birth, year of death and nationality [as well as] the reason(s) for the person's notability; i.e., the characteristics the person is best known for.not everything a celebrity does after becoming famous warrants categorization." This is a non-notable intersection birth and profession. In some cases, including in music or modeling, being a twin is notable. However, in sports, it is unrelated or wholly peripheral to the topic's notability. TM 20:18, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Not so sure about it being trivial for sports. For example, it's defining for Steve and Mark Waugh, who both played international cricket for Australia, and are refered to as "the Waugh twins". Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 08:37, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Or indeed the Bryan brothers. Or Gary Neville and Phil Neville. Oculi ( talk) 10:07, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge, WP:DEFINING mentions "commonly and consistently" which does not seem to be the case here. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:16, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. This feature is often defining for sportspeople. An example that to mind, hockey players Daniel and Henrik Sedin are consistently referred as twins or the Sedin Twins in e.g. Sedin, Vancouver Canucks, the first lines of their bio articles. They were named co-recipients of individual player awards, and they were even the subject of an elaborate scheme to make sure that they could be selected by the same team during the NHL draft. In this case, and many other cases, being twins had a clearly defining impact on their sports career and their notability. However, the category would not be used for people who just happened to be twins and were never in sports together. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep, defining characteristics for sportspeople. 94.178.234.44 ( talk) 12:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Sportspeople from Myanmar
- 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 and redirect. – Fayenatic London 05:44, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: The category structure for sportspeople is by country and city, and not by the top-level of country. For example, there are no categories for Category:Sportspeople from Germany or Category:Sportspeople from France. Where the city is known, there is the Category:Sportspeople by city in Myanmar. However, these are Burmese sportspeople who don't have the info of where they are from within the country. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:21, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge into the subcategories of the correctly named Category:Burmese sportspeople (see also Category:German sportspeople and Category:French sportspeople). Grutness... wha? 01:56, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per Grutness. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:11, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Oculi ( talk) 09:13, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge or rename We need to clarify what Burmese means. There is a category named "Burmese sportspeople stub". Myanmar used to be called Burma. And that was ethnic appropriation from the more powerful Burmese. There is over 100 ethnic groups in Myanmar with Burmese being one of them. I dont know how to propose the name change or correction but the correct name should included Myanmar.Burmese, Katchin, Kayin, Mon, etc are the all ethnicities. The "Burmese sports people category is reflecting people for many other ethnicity. I propose to RENAME the Burmese sports people category to Myanmese sportspeople. Although many are from various ethnicities, all of them are
Myanmese, but not all are Burmese. To correct one user, this category is not correctly named:
Category:Burmese sportspeople. Many of these athletes are not from the Burmese etchnicity, but they are in fact from Myanmar, therefore Myanmese. Please look at the disambiguation page
Burmese people, the category confuses the
Bamar people also known as Burmese "Bama". Delete Sportspeople from Myanmar and rename Burmese sportspeople for Myanmese sportspeople.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Lethweimaster (
talk •
contribs)
- That would need a far wider discussion than is possible on this process page. I suggest taking this up primarily with Wikipedia:WikiProject Myanmar and proceeding from there. Grutness... wha? 04:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- This has been discussed several times already. Burmese is used here unambiguously as the demonym for Myanmar, a usage which is indicated in the Myanmar article infobox. The ethnic group is at Category:Bamar people. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Merge to equivalent Burma categories. We had a mong discussion over this and decided that the country should be called Burma in WP. Leave a cat-redirect to prevent inadvertent repopulation.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- @
Peterkingiron: did you mean a
Hmong discussion?
Place Clichy (
talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- @
Peterkingiron: did you mean a
Hmong discussion?
- Delete per Grutness. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:35, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete and leave a redirect to Category:Burmese sportspeople. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Periodic continued fractions
- 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 Timrollpickering ( Talk) 15:11, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: An irrational number has a periodic continued fraction if and only if it is quadratic. The inclusion of cubic numbers such as the plastic constant is incorrect. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 18:15, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support, even where it does fit it is not a very defining characteristic. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:19, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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 Fort Smith, Arkansas, by occupation
- 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) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:02, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Small container category with only 2 sub-categories that is unlikely to grow. TM 15:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge' per nominator. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge -- Minimum for a category is generally five; also to a state or other occupational category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:07, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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 Pine Bluff, Arkansas, by occupation
- 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) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:03, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Small container category (2 sub-categories) that is unlikely to grow. TM 15:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge' per nominator. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge -- Minimum for a category is generally five; also to a state or other occupational category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:07, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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 Braintree, Massachusetts, by occupation
- 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) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:03, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Small container category (2 sub-categories) that is unlikely to grow. TM 15:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge' per nominator. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge -- Minimum for a category is generally five; also to a state or other occupational category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:08, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Conservative synagogues in Alabama
- 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: dual merge. – Fayenatic London 21:56, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge to Category:Synagogues in Alabama. Small category (2 articles) that is unlikely to grow. TM 14:56, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per OCAT as part of wider scheme (16 state sub-cats in Category:Conservative synagogues in the United States). Johnbod ( talk) 14:09, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per Johnbod. Debresser ( talk) 18:39, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Dual merge per RevelationDirect in the nomination below. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:20, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Dual Merge 11 of those 16 state categories under Category:Conservative synagogues in the United States have 4 or fewer articles and I don't see how having a whole tree of mostly anemic categories aids navigation. (It should also be upmerged to Category:Synagogues in Alabama though.)
- Dual merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Conservative synagogues in Vermont
- 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: dual merge. – Fayenatic London 21:52, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge to Category:Synagogues in Vermont. Small category (2 articles) that is unlikely to grow. TM 14:51, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per OCAT as part of wider scheme (16 state sub-cats in Category:Conservative synagogues in the United States). Johnbod ( talk) 14:09, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per Johnbod. Debresser ( talk) 18:39, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Dual Merge 11 of those 16 state categories under Category:Conservative synagogues in the United States have 4 or fewer articles and I don't see how having a whole tree of mostly anemic categories aids navigation. (It should also be upmerged to Category:Synagogues in Vermont though.) RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:43, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Dual merge per RevelationDirect. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Dual merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:John F. Kennedy High School (San Antonio, Texas) alumni
- 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: do not delete, therefore rename to Category:John F. Kennedy High School (Texas) alumni . – Fayenatic London 21:49, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Small category (1 article) that has existed since 2014. TM 14:37, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per 'unless' clause of WP:SMALLCAT: part of Category:Alumni by high school in Texas, but rename to Category:John F. Kennedy High School (San Antonio) alumni per John F. Kennedy High School (San Antonio). Oculi ( talk) 17:59, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- There are 95 categories in that scheme, but there are over 3,200 high schools in the state, so I don't think the 'unless' applies. I don't think we have agreed to create a category for every high school alumni so I am not sure how it applies.--
TM 18:31, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- We have, for high schools with at least 1 notable alumnus. Most high schools have no notable alumni, much as many artists have no notable songs (cf
Category:Songs by artist). And then there are notable alumni for whom a sourced reference for their school cannot be found. And why is there "no potential for growth"?
Oculi (
talk) 10:56, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Is that policy? If so, can you please link to it? As for the possibility of growth, I would point to the category's existence since 2014 and the inclusion of a single article.-- TM 16:48, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- We have, for high schools with at least 1 notable alumnus. Most high schools have no notable alumni, much as many artists have no notable songs (cf
Category:Songs by artist). And then there are notable alumni for whom a sourced reference for their school cannot be found. And why is there "no potential for growth"?
Oculi (
talk) 10:56, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge, we shouldn't stretch the smallcat exception too far. I can imagine we categorize alumni of well-known secondary schools which have generated a lot of famous people, but just any random secondary school is not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle ( talk) 11:22, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per Oculi. Debresser ( talk) 18:40, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep (perhaps renamed) -- Alumni by high school is a widely accepted cat-type. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:10, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep we have heretofore figured that one's high school is a notable characteristic, thus this is part of some big tree exception to
WP:SMALLCAT.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 00:37, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Then we should have a discussion and formally codify that. To me, it doesn't make sense to have hundreds of categories with a couple of articles in them but if it is to be so, we should at least make it formal.--
TM 13:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- There were many such discussions long ago, eg Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_April_21#High_school_alumni_(United_States). Oculi ( talk) 23:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Then we should have a discussion and formally codify that. To me, it doesn't make sense to have hundreds of categories with a couple of articles in them but if it is to be so, we should at least make it formal.--
TM 13:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Note, page is now at John F. Kennedy High School (Texas) as there are no other schools of this name in Texas, and in line with the formatting of other schools. Steven (Editor) ( talk) 01:12, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 for now without prejudice to a fresh discussion about an alternative name, preferably after closure of this RM ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:16, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: More precise. Ditto for subcategories. Create a "2019..." category, and a parent "Category:Deaths from coronavirus disease 2019" if needed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:16, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support- some rearrangement of
Category:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (main article
2019–20 coronavirus pandemic), would be a good idea, perhaps to create a subcat
Category:Coronavirus disease 2019, main article
coronavirus disease 2019. Or is
COVID-19 not the more common name?
Oculi (
talk) 13:47, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- If the category is to be renamed, I think "COVID-19" is much more commonly used than "coronavirus disease 2019". That would also match the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject COVID-19#COVID-19 or Coronavirus disease 2019?. — Granger ( talk · contribs) 01:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- I've no problem with using "COVID-19" (which is an abbreviation of "coronavirus disease 2019"). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:42, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: To me it doesn't flow correctly. 2020 deaths from coronavirus disease 2019? If you're encompassing both years, why change it?
Snickers2686 (
talk) 16:50, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- It is being changed from 'deaths from a pandemic' (one does not die of a pandemic) to 'deaths from a disease'. My view is that
Category:Deaths from COVID-19 would be preferable. (According to
List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic there weren't any deaths of notable people in 2019 so as yet there is no need for a 2020 subcat.)
Oculi (
talk) 17:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
"one does not die of a pandemic"
Quite. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:42, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- It's not "encompassing both years", the "2019" in that name refers to the year of discovery, not the year of death. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:42, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- It is being changed from 'deaths from a pandemic' (one does not die of a pandemic) to 'deaths from a disease'. My view is that
Category:Deaths from COVID-19 would be preferable. (According to
List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic there weren't any deaths of notable people in 2019 so as yet there is no need for a 2020 subcat.)
Oculi (
talk) 17:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: The pandemic is occurring in both 2019 and 2020, so I don't see how it makes sense to separate the years. Of course, the articles should still be categorized by their year of death, e.g. Category:2019 deaths and Category:2020 deaths.-- TM 17:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Are we saying that we need a deaths that happened in 2019 as well as a deaths that happened in 2020, since there doesn't appear to have been any deaths outside China in the year 2019 so only China would need a deaths in 2019 category, all other categories should probably just use "2020" namely Category:Deaths from the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United Kingdom per 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United Kingdom/ Category:2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United Kingdom but per my reasoning at Talk:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic/Archive 22#Requested move 22 March 2020 we shouldn't use something like Category:Deaths from coronavirus disease 2019 since the virus/disease is usually/often called just "coronavirus" rather than "coronavirus disease 2019". Crouch, Swale ( talk) 22:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: The pandemic started in China late December and didn't start spreading out of its borders until past the new year. Creating a category specially for 2020 implies that a category for 2019 deaths should be created as well and would cause it to be limited in scope. -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 00:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. If (Ghu forbid) this thing is still going at the beginning of 2021 we can reassess. Grutness... wha? 01:59, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose This should cover the entire period of the pandemic, and not a name which suggests limitation to the year of its discovery.
Dimadick (
talk) 17:37, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- The proposed name says nothing about "limitation to the year of its discovery". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:44, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Prefer
Category:Deaths from COVID-19 - no reason to break down by year. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 17:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC).
- Comment the phrase died with COVID-19 is being used a lot. The cause on the death certificate may well different. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 17:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC).
- Oppose The proposed name is IMHO not very good. It is clunky and does not conform to other, similar categories. I would be comfortable with 2020 deaths from COVID-19 or something similar but spelling out both 2019 and 2020 would be confusing and unintuitive to readers (relatively few people call it coronavirus disease 2019). Michepman ( talk) 20:56, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Superfluous, as there are few deaths in 2019, the year is no helpful. Deaths are by year anyway. Wait until 2022 and it is known how many having an article did not die in 2020 until then. Bibliotaker ( talk) 14:32, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:Deaths from COVID-19. This will avoid the difficulty inherent in including "2019" in the name. The name was devised by WHO, but may need explaining in the headnote. There are other corona viruses. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:14, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment "COVID-19" is its proper name; the longer version is just a description (and awkward). - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 00:34, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
-
2019–20 coronavirus pandemic is the article name.--
TM 01:05, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- You say that as if it's somehow helpful. The disease is still called "COVID-19". - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 18:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
-
2019–20 coronavirus pandemic is the article name.--
TM 01:05, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- Don't do anything yet. A very closely related question about the name of the corresponding list article is being extensively debated at Talk:List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic#Requested move 20 March 2020. Please let that discussion play out first. There are several nuances that have come up, for example the idea that the list (and presumably also the category) might include deaths directly attributable to the pandemic, which may not necessarily be exhausted by deaths resulting strictly from the disease. – Uanfala (talk) 02:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- Don't do anything yet per Uanfala above AND it's just generally too soon. We should wait to consider this move after EITHER there are deaths from this disease that are not in the current pandemic, OR until the category is effectively "closed" due to the disease dying out completely. Neither will happen in the next year. The only other reason to rename would be to provide consistency with other topics/pages/categories that have been renamed. That MIGHT come soon if the discussion that Uanfala mentioned passes. In any case, there is no harm in closing this discussion as "not now, maybe later." davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 14:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Wait for the following discussion to conclude: Talk:List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic#Requested move 20 March 2020. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Non-defining for the vast majority of people in this category. The list is OK. b uidh e 00:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose it just sounds awkward in my opinion, at the very least wait a few months. 109.79.144.249 ( talk) 13:36, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:Deaths from COVID-19. There is no reason to limit this category to a specific time frame. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 15:29, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Habitable zone planets
- 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
Timrollpickering (
Talk) 15:13, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Habitable zone planets to Category:Planets in the circumstellar habitable zone
- Nominator's rationale: Stilted syntax zone. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 12:52, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Add Category:Exoplanets in the habitable zone to all parent categories, then delete. This is a too poorly populated intermittent category layer. If kept, by all means rename. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support that -- The inclusion of earth in a category for such exo-planets is a waste of space. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:17, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Dungeons & Dragons undead creatures
- 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 Timrollpickering ( Talk) 15:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Only three articles, but Libris Mortis seems irrelevant to the "creatures" categorization. Also upmerge to "Fictional undead." TTN ( talk) 12:15, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Dungeons & Dragons magical beasts
- 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
Timrollpickering (
Talk) 15:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Dungeons & Dragons magical beasts to Category:Dungeons & Dragons creatures
- Nominator's rationale: Compared to the previous nomination, there are now only three articles. TTN ( talk) 12:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Dungeons & Dragons extraplanar creatures
- 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 Timrollpickering ( Talk) 15:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. The category fits in the parent category as well. TTN ( talk) 12:12, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Ghosts'n Goblins
- 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.
MER-C 15:01, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Ghosts'n Goblins to Category:Ghosts 'n Goblins
- Nominator's rationale: Consistency with other articles in the Ghosts 'n Goblins series. Mika1h ( talk) 11:48, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy per WP:C2A and WP:C2D. Typographical error that doesn't match the main article. RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:50, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Songs with music by M.I.A. (rapper)
- 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 Timrollpickering ( Talk) 15:15, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: The current title is inaccurate, as we normally only name categories "Songs with music by X" when the person is specifically credited with composing the music but not writing the lyrics. On the other hand, on most/all of the songs in the category, M.I.A. is simply credited with "songwriting" which could mean one or both of those things. ｖａｐｏｒｇａｚｅ 💬 (please ping on reply) 11:38, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:The Daily Wire
- 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 Timrollpickering ( Talk) 15:16, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Too little content. Also leave Category:The Daily Wire people to its other parent, Category:Media people by publication. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 08:12, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:German kings of Burgundy
- 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. – Fayenatic London 19:26, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:NONDEF as "king of Burgundy" was a mere secondary title of the Holy Roman Emperors and the Kings of the Romans of this period; WP:OVERLAPCAT therefore also applies. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- See also previous discussion which was closed as "no consensus". Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge to Category:Kings of Burgundy and purge. See List of kings of Burgundy for detail. This should be limited to c953-1032 when there was a separate polity. At this period, "French" and "German" are problematic is distinguish at this level. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:25, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- This already happened. Rudolf I up to Rudolf III are directly in Category:Kings of Burgundy. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:OVERLAPCAT. Secondary titles are not defining so long as they are already categorized by the primary one. RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:06, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep The title is defining for these rulers. Dimadick ( talk) 18:37, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Support Was it 15 different entities were called the "Kingdom of Burgundy" over time? The first couple of entities had Germanic, rather than German rulers. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 08:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Politics overviews by decade
- 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 to
Category:Politics by decade. Note that the articles in
Category:Politics overviews by decade have already been transferred to their respective "XXXXs in politics categories".
bibliomaniac
1
5 18:21, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Politics overviews by decade to Category:Politics by decade
- Nominator's rationale: merge, as "overview" is subjective and not a defining characteristic. In practice it is being used as a kind of a WP:SHAREDNAME category for all "20x0s in something" articles. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:01, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Suggest rename. Okay, thanks. is there perhaps an option that might be more viable for this category's name? Would "Political history by decade" be more feasible? thanks. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 14:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- That is more or less synonymous to Category:Politics by decade, the fact that it is by decade implies that it is a history category. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - at present Category:Politics by decade is a container category (typical subcat scheme for Category:Politics). Category:Politics overviews by decade in contrast has no subcats. (It's not 'sharedename' - that applies to unrelated topics with the same name.) Oculi ( talk) 15:22, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- It is okay to diffuse the articles further down in the tree of Category:Politics by decade. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:28, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment -- all the sub-cats are called political history, but we only have articles on 2010s and the barely started 2020s. In due course these may need to be split into
Category:Political histories of the 2010s by country, etc.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:30, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Everything that I have seen (articles, categories) was created by
User:Sm8900.
Oculi (
talk) 09:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
- true enough. I appreciate your comments above, at various points in this colloquy. I assume the role of these items is apparent, but if further comment is needed, I am glad to discuss. I assume my opinion on this topic is not one whit more important than that of any other editor here. I appreciate your help. thanks. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 17:29, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
- Everything that I have seen (articles, categories) was created by
User:Sm8900.
Oculi (
talk) 09:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
- I agree that there is no need for a category of political history by decade separate from Category:Politics by decade, so merge there. As the one-year "overview" pages are both in the year and the decade categories, e.g. 2000 in politics is both in Category:2000 in politics and Category:2000s in politics, I have also added these decade "overview" pages to 2010s/2020s politics and Category:21st century in politics. – Fayenatic London 07:12, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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.
March 27
Category:Twin sportspeople
- 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: no consensus. –
Fayenatic
London 05:49, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Twin sportspeople to Category:Twin people
- Nominator's rationale: Per WP:COP#N, we are instructed that categories should be made for "standard biographical details: year of birth, year of death and nationality [as well as] the reason(s) for the person's notability; i.e., the characteristics the person is best known for.not everything a celebrity does after becoming famous warrants categorization." This is a non-notable intersection birth and profession. In some cases, including in music or modeling, being a twin is notable. However, in sports, it is unrelated or wholly peripheral to the topic's notability. TM 20:18, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Not so sure about it being trivial for sports. For example, it's defining for Steve and Mark Waugh, who both played international cricket for Australia, and are refered to as "the Waugh twins". Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 08:37, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Or indeed the Bryan brothers. Or Gary Neville and Phil Neville. Oculi ( talk) 10:07, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge, WP:DEFINING mentions "commonly and consistently" which does not seem to be the case here. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:16, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. This feature is often defining for sportspeople. An example that to mind, hockey players Daniel and Henrik Sedin are consistently referred as twins or the Sedin Twins in e.g. Sedin, Vancouver Canucks, the first lines of their bio articles. They were named co-recipients of individual player awards, and they were even the subject of an elaborate scheme to make sure that they could be selected by the same team during the NHL draft. In this case, and many other cases, being twins had a clearly defining impact on their sports career and their notability. However, the category would not be used for people who just happened to be twins and were never in sports together. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep, defining characteristics for sportspeople. 94.178.234.44 ( talk) 12:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Sportspeople from Myanmar
- 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 and redirect. – Fayenatic London 05:44, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: The category structure for sportspeople is by country and city, and not by the top-level of country. For example, there are no categories for Category:Sportspeople from Germany or Category:Sportspeople from France. Where the city is known, there is the Category:Sportspeople by city in Myanmar. However, these are Burmese sportspeople who don't have the info of where they are from within the country. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:21, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge into the subcategories of the correctly named Category:Burmese sportspeople (see also Category:German sportspeople and Category:French sportspeople). Grutness... wha? 01:56, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per Grutness. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:11, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Oculi ( talk) 09:13, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge or rename We need to clarify what Burmese means. There is a category named "Burmese sportspeople stub". Myanmar used to be called Burma. And that was ethnic appropriation from the more powerful Burmese. There is over 100 ethnic groups in Myanmar with Burmese being one of them. I dont know how to propose the name change or correction but the correct name should included Myanmar.Burmese, Katchin, Kayin, Mon, etc are the all ethnicities. The "Burmese sports people category is reflecting people for many other ethnicity. I propose to RENAME the Burmese sports people category to Myanmese sportspeople. Although many are from various ethnicities, all of them are
Myanmese, but not all are Burmese. To correct one user, this category is not correctly named:
Category:Burmese sportspeople. Many of these athletes are not from the Burmese etchnicity, but they are in fact from Myanmar, therefore Myanmese. Please look at the disambiguation page
Burmese people, the category confuses the
Bamar people also known as Burmese "Bama". Delete Sportspeople from Myanmar and rename Burmese sportspeople for Myanmese sportspeople.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Lethweimaster (
talk •
contribs)
- That would need a far wider discussion than is possible on this process page. I suggest taking this up primarily with Wikipedia:WikiProject Myanmar and proceeding from there. Grutness... wha? 04:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- This has been discussed several times already. Burmese is used here unambiguously as the demonym for Myanmar, a usage which is indicated in the Myanmar article infobox. The ethnic group is at Category:Bamar people. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Merge to equivalent Burma categories. We had a mong discussion over this and decided that the country should be called Burma in WP. Leave a cat-redirect to prevent inadvertent repopulation.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- @
Peterkingiron: did you mean a
Hmong discussion?
Place Clichy (
talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- @
Peterkingiron: did you mean a
Hmong discussion?
- Delete per Grutness. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:35, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete and leave a redirect to Category:Burmese sportspeople. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Periodic continued fractions
- 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 Timrollpickering ( Talk) 15:11, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: An irrational number has a periodic continued fraction if and only if it is quadratic. The inclusion of cubic numbers such as the plastic constant is incorrect. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 18:15, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support, even where it does fit it is not a very defining characteristic. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:19, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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 Fort Smith, Arkansas, by occupation
- 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) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:02, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Small container category with only 2 sub-categories that is unlikely to grow. TM 15:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge' per nominator. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge -- Minimum for a category is generally five; also to a state or other occupational category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:07, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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 Pine Bluff, Arkansas, by occupation
- 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) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:03, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Small container category (2 sub-categories) that is unlikely to grow. TM 15:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge' per nominator. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge -- Minimum for a category is generally five; also to a state or other occupational category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:07, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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 Braintree, Massachusetts, by occupation
- 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) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:03, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Small container category (2 sub-categories) that is unlikely to grow. TM 15:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge' per nominator. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge -- Minimum for a category is generally five; also to a state or other occupational category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:08, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Conservative synagogues in Alabama
- 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: dual merge. – Fayenatic London 21:56, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge to Category:Synagogues in Alabama. Small category (2 articles) that is unlikely to grow. TM 14:56, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per OCAT as part of wider scheme (16 state sub-cats in Category:Conservative synagogues in the United States). Johnbod ( talk) 14:09, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per Johnbod. Debresser ( talk) 18:39, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Dual merge per RevelationDirect in the nomination below. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:20, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Dual Merge 11 of those 16 state categories under Category:Conservative synagogues in the United States have 4 or fewer articles and I don't see how having a whole tree of mostly anemic categories aids navigation. (It should also be upmerged to Category:Synagogues in Alabama though.)
- Dual merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Conservative synagogues in Vermont
- 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: dual merge. – Fayenatic London 21:52, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge to Category:Synagogues in Vermont. Small category (2 articles) that is unlikely to grow. TM 14:51, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per OCAT as part of wider scheme (16 state sub-cats in Category:Conservative synagogues in the United States). Johnbod ( talk) 14:09, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per Johnbod. Debresser ( talk) 18:39, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Dual Merge 11 of those 16 state categories under Category:Conservative synagogues in the United States have 4 or fewer articles and I don't see how having a whole tree of mostly anemic categories aids navigation. (It should also be upmerged to Category:Synagogues in Vermont though.) RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:43, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Dual merge per RevelationDirect. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Dual merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:John F. Kennedy High School (San Antonio, Texas) alumni
- 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: do not delete, therefore rename to Category:John F. Kennedy High School (Texas) alumni . – Fayenatic London 21:49, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Small category (1 article) that has existed since 2014. TM 14:37, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per 'unless' clause of WP:SMALLCAT: part of Category:Alumni by high school in Texas, but rename to Category:John F. Kennedy High School (San Antonio) alumni per John F. Kennedy High School (San Antonio). Oculi ( talk) 17:59, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- There are 95 categories in that scheme, but there are over 3,200 high schools in the state, so I don't think the 'unless' applies. I don't think we have agreed to create a category for every high school alumni so I am not sure how it applies.--
TM 18:31, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- We have, for high schools with at least 1 notable alumnus. Most high schools have no notable alumni, much as many artists have no notable songs (cf
Category:Songs by artist). And then there are notable alumni for whom a sourced reference for their school cannot be found. And why is there "no potential for growth"?
Oculi (
talk) 10:56, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Is that policy? If so, can you please link to it? As for the possibility of growth, I would point to the category's existence since 2014 and the inclusion of a single article.-- TM 16:48, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- We have, for high schools with at least 1 notable alumnus. Most high schools have no notable alumni, much as many artists have no notable songs (cf
Category:Songs by artist). And then there are notable alumni for whom a sourced reference for their school cannot be found. And why is there "no potential for growth"?
Oculi (
talk) 10:56, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge, we shouldn't stretch the smallcat exception too far. I can imagine we categorize alumni of well-known secondary schools which have generated a lot of famous people, but just any random secondary school is not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle ( talk) 11:22, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per Oculi. Debresser ( talk) 18:40, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep (perhaps renamed) -- Alumni by high school is a widely accepted cat-type. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:10, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep we have heretofore figured that one's high school is a notable characteristic, thus this is part of some big tree exception to
WP:SMALLCAT.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 00:37, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Then we should have a discussion and formally codify that. To me, it doesn't make sense to have hundreds of categories with a couple of articles in them but if it is to be so, we should at least make it formal.--
TM 13:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- There were many such discussions long ago, eg Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_April_21#High_school_alumni_(United_States). Oculi ( talk) 23:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Then we should have a discussion and formally codify that. To me, it doesn't make sense to have hundreds of categories with a couple of articles in them but if it is to be so, we should at least make it formal.--
TM 13:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Note, page is now at John F. Kennedy High School (Texas) as there are no other schools of this name in Texas, and in line with the formatting of other schools. Steven (Editor) ( talk) 01:12, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 for now without prejudice to a fresh discussion about an alternative name, preferably after closure of this RM ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:16, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: More precise. Ditto for subcategories. Create a "2019..." category, and a parent "Category:Deaths from coronavirus disease 2019" if needed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:16, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support- some rearrangement of
Category:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (main article
2019–20 coronavirus pandemic), would be a good idea, perhaps to create a subcat
Category:Coronavirus disease 2019, main article
coronavirus disease 2019. Or is
COVID-19 not the more common name?
Oculi (
talk) 13:47, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- If the category is to be renamed, I think "COVID-19" is much more commonly used than "coronavirus disease 2019". That would also match the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject COVID-19#COVID-19 or Coronavirus disease 2019?. — Granger ( talk · contribs) 01:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- I've no problem with using "COVID-19" (which is an abbreviation of "coronavirus disease 2019"). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:42, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: To me it doesn't flow correctly. 2020 deaths from coronavirus disease 2019? If you're encompassing both years, why change it?
Snickers2686 (
talk) 16:50, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- It is being changed from 'deaths from a pandemic' (one does not die of a pandemic) to 'deaths from a disease'. My view is that
Category:Deaths from COVID-19 would be preferable. (According to
List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic there weren't any deaths of notable people in 2019 so as yet there is no need for a 2020 subcat.)
Oculi (
talk) 17:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
"one does not die of a pandemic"
Quite. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:42, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- It's not "encompassing both years", the "2019" in that name refers to the year of discovery, not the year of death. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:42, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- It is being changed from 'deaths from a pandemic' (one does not die of a pandemic) to 'deaths from a disease'. My view is that
Category:Deaths from COVID-19 would be preferable. (According to
List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic there weren't any deaths of notable people in 2019 so as yet there is no need for a 2020 subcat.)
Oculi (
talk) 17:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: The pandemic is occurring in both 2019 and 2020, so I don't see how it makes sense to separate the years. Of course, the articles should still be categorized by their year of death, e.g. Category:2019 deaths and Category:2020 deaths.-- TM 17:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Are we saying that we need a deaths that happened in 2019 as well as a deaths that happened in 2020, since there doesn't appear to have been any deaths outside China in the year 2019 so only China would need a deaths in 2019 category, all other categories should probably just use "2020" namely Category:Deaths from the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United Kingdom per 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United Kingdom/ Category:2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United Kingdom but per my reasoning at Talk:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic/Archive 22#Requested move 22 March 2020 we shouldn't use something like Category:Deaths from coronavirus disease 2019 since the virus/disease is usually/often called just "coronavirus" rather than "coronavirus disease 2019". Crouch, Swale ( talk) 22:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: The pandemic started in China late December and didn't start spreading out of its borders until past the new year. Creating a category specially for 2020 implies that a category for 2019 deaths should be created as well and would cause it to be limited in scope. -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 00:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. If (Ghu forbid) this thing is still going at the beginning of 2021 we can reassess. Grutness... wha? 01:59, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose This should cover the entire period of the pandemic, and not a name which suggests limitation to the year of its discovery.
Dimadick (
talk) 17:37, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- The proposed name says nothing about "limitation to the year of its discovery". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:44, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Prefer
Category:Deaths from COVID-19 - no reason to break down by year. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 17:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC).
- Comment the phrase died with COVID-19 is being used a lot. The cause on the death certificate may well different. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 17:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC).
- Oppose The proposed name is IMHO not very good. It is clunky and does not conform to other, similar categories. I would be comfortable with 2020 deaths from COVID-19 or something similar but spelling out both 2019 and 2020 would be confusing and unintuitive to readers (relatively few people call it coronavirus disease 2019). Michepman ( talk) 20:56, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Superfluous, as there are few deaths in 2019, the year is no helpful. Deaths are by year anyway. Wait until 2022 and it is known how many having an article did not die in 2020 until then. Bibliotaker ( talk) 14:32, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:Deaths from COVID-19. This will avoid the difficulty inherent in including "2019" in the name. The name was devised by WHO, but may need explaining in the headnote. There are other corona viruses. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:14, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment "COVID-19" is its proper name; the longer version is just a description (and awkward). - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 00:34, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
-
2019–20 coronavirus pandemic is the article name.--
TM 01:05, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- You say that as if it's somehow helpful. The disease is still called "COVID-19". - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 18:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
-
2019–20 coronavirus pandemic is the article name.--
TM 01:05, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- Don't do anything yet. A very closely related question about the name of the corresponding list article is being extensively debated at Talk:List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic#Requested move 20 March 2020. Please let that discussion play out first. There are several nuances that have come up, for example the idea that the list (and presumably also the category) might include deaths directly attributable to the pandemic, which may not necessarily be exhausted by deaths resulting strictly from the disease. – Uanfala (talk) 02:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- Don't do anything yet per Uanfala above AND it's just generally too soon. We should wait to consider this move after EITHER there are deaths from this disease that are not in the current pandemic, OR until the category is effectively "closed" due to the disease dying out completely. Neither will happen in the next year. The only other reason to rename would be to provide consistency with other topics/pages/categories that have been renamed. That MIGHT come soon if the discussion that Uanfala mentioned passes. In any case, there is no harm in closing this discussion as "not now, maybe later." davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 14:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Wait for the following discussion to conclude: Talk:List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic#Requested move 20 March 2020. Place Clichy ( talk) 17:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Non-defining for the vast majority of people in this category. The list is OK. b uidh e 00:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose it just sounds awkward in my opinion, at the very least wait a few months. 109.79.144.249 ( talk) 13:36, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:Deaths from COVID-19. There is no reason to limit this category to a specific time frame. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 15:29, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Habitable zone planets
- 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
Timrollpickering (
Talk) 15:13, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Habitable zone planets to Category:Planets in the circumstellar habitable zone
- Nominator's rationale: Stilted syntax zone. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 12:52, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Add Category:Exoplanets in the habitable zone to all parent categories, then delete. This is a too poorly populated intermittent category layer. If kept, by all means rename. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support that -- The inclusion of earth in a category for such exo-planets is a waste of space. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:17, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Dungeons & Dragons undead creatures
- 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 Timrollpickering ( Talk) 15:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Only three articles, but Libris Mortis seems irrelevant to the "creatures" categorization. Also upmerge to "Fictional undead." TTN ( talk) 12:15, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Dungeons & Dragons magical beasts
- 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
Timrollpickering (
Talk) 15:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Dungeons & Dragons magical beasts to Category:Dungeons & Dragons creatures
- Nominator's rationale: Compared to the previous nomination, there are now only three articles. TTN ( talk) 12:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Dungeons & Dragons extraplanar creatures
- 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 Timrollpickering ( Talk) 15:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. The category fits in the parent category as well. TTN ( talk) 12:12, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Ghosts'n Goblins
- 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.
MER-C 15:01, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Ghosts'n Goblins to Category:Ghosts 'n Goblins
- Nominator's rationale: Consistency with other articles in the Ghosts 'n Goblins series. Mika1h ( talk) 11:48, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy per WP:C2A and WP:C2D. Typographical error that doesn't match the main article. RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:50, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Songs with music by M.I.A. (rapper)
- 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 Timrollpickering ( Talk) 15:15, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: The current title is inaccurate, as we normally only name categories "Songs with music by X" when the person is specifically credited with composing the music but not writing the lyrics. On the other hand, on most/all of the songs in the category, M.I.A. is simply credited with "songwriting" which could mean one or both of those things. ｖａｐｏｒｇａｚｅ 💬 (please ping on reply) 11:38, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:The Daily Wire
- 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 Timrollpickering ( Talk) 15:16, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Too little content. Also leave Category:The Daily Wire people to its other parent, Category:Media people by publication. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 08:12, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- 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:German kings of Burgundy
- 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. – Fayenatic London 19:26, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:NONDEF as "king of Burgundy" was a mere secondary title of the Holy Roman Emperors and the Kings of the Romans of this period; WP:OVERLAPCAT therefore also applies. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- See also previous discussion which was closed as "no consensus". Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Merge to Category:Kings of Burgundy and purge. See List of kings of Burgundy for detail. This should be limited to c953-1032 when there was a separate polity. At this period, "French" and "German" are problematic is distinguish at this level. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:25, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- This already happened. Rudolf I up to Rudolf III are directly in Category:Kings of Burgundy. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:OVERLAPCAT. Secondary titles are not defining so long as they are already categorized by the primary one. RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:06, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep The title is defining for these rulers. Dimadick ( talk) 18:37, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Support Was it 15 different entities were called the "Kingdom of Burgundy" over time? The first couple of entities had Germanic, rather than German rulers. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 08:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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:Politics overviews by decade
- 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 to
Category:Politics by decade. Note that the articles in
Category:Politics overviews by decade have already been transferred to their respective "XXXXs in politics categories".
bibliomaniac
1
5 18:21, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Politics overviews by decade to Category:Politics by decade
- Nominator's rationale: merge, as "overview" is subjective and not a defining characteristic. In practice it is being used as a kind of a WP:SHAREDNAME category for all "20x0s in something" articles. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:01, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Suggest rename. Okay, thanks. is there perhaps an option that might be more viable for this category's name? Would "Political history by decade" be more feasible? thanks. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 14:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- That is more or less synonymous to Category:Politics by decade, the fact that it is by decade implies that it is a history category. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - at present Category:Politics by decade is a container category (typical subcat scheme for Category:Politics). Category:Politics overviews by decade in contrast has no subcats. (It's not 'sharedename' - that applies to unrelated topics with the same name.) Oculi ( talk) 15:22, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- It is okay to diffuse the articles further down in the tree of Category:Politics by decade. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:28, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment -- all the sub-cats are called political history, but we only have articles on 2010s and the barely started 2020s. In due course these may need to be split into
Category:Political histories of the 2010s by country, etc.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:30, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Everything that I have seen (articles, categories) was created by
User:Sm8900.
Oculi (
talk) 09:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
- true enough. I appreciate your comments above, at various points in this colloquy. I assume the role of these items is apparent, but if further comment is needed, I am glad to discuss. I assume my opinion on this topic is not one whit more important than that of any other editor here. I appreciate your help. thanks. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 17:29, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
- Everything that I have seen (articles, categories) was created by
User:Sm8900.
Oculi (
talk) 09:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
- I agree that there is no need for a category of political history by decade separate from Category:Politics by decade, so merge there. As the one-year "overview" pages are both in the year and the decade categories, e.g. 2000 in politics is both in Category:2000 in politics and Category:2000s in politics, I have also added these decade "overview" pages to 2010s/2020s politics and Category:21st century in politics. – Fayenatic London 07:12, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- 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.