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 Indian, Japanese and Swiss, now containing 3 or 4; merge the rest for now, as they still only contain 1 or 2 pages, so potential for growth has not been demonstrated.–
FayenaticLondon10:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)reply
Many of the children who were kidnapped later became an adult. Putting them in "FOOian children" is only appropriate if they did not survive the kidnapping. That can/should be done manually.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
07:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Clearly? Please explain. (Note that with a growth rate of articles of 10% per year it will, on average, take 17 years before a current one-article category reaches 5 articles).
Marcocapelle (
talk)
08:25, 21 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Cpmment Difficult case. I do understand nominators
WP:SMALLCAT. But would Category:Kidnapped children not take enormous size, 1 cat for the whole world? And how come that people who never ever would become notable for an encyclopedia just get an article b/c being part of a kidnapping? It's also an ethical question if people should be labeled as eternal victims of crime. I'm not happy at all neither with this cat nor with the merger. --
Just N. (
talk)
23:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge I'm open to having a few small countries to finish out a by country breakdown, but the vast majority of this tree is anemic so it doesn't aid navigation. The dual merge to "Category:Kidnapped Fooian people" means any interested reader would still be able to find the articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
00:47, 11 April 2021 (UTC)reply
I don't know why that was done either. But looking over
Category:Kidnapped children, I see that
Category:Kidnapped African children was not nominated either, so my first thought was that maybe the plan was to leave the continent ones in place (which would mean the american one would need to be renamed to North American). But the I see that the subcats of the africa one were not listed either. So my best guess is that this is merely the first round of nominations and that more are forthcoming? I dunno. I don't have much of an opinion on these myself, but if they are not kept, I think upmerging them by continent, unless/until the rest are nommed, might be helpful. - jc3714:46, 12 April 2021 (UTC)reply
In the nomination I did not include country categories that contain at least 4 articles, so that is the reason why the African countries have not been included.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
19:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)reply
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.
Ancient Greeks in Macedon
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.
Nominator's rationale: delete/merge, the categories suggest that this was a kind of emigration, but in fact the articles in these categories are about people living in an era when Macedonia was part of the Greek civilization, so there was nothing special about Greek people in ancient Macedonia. Note that
Thessalia and
Epirus were immediate neighbors of Macedonia and just as well part of the Greek civilization. If kept, rename "Macedon" to "Macedonia" per article title
Ancient Macedonia.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
22:07, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Expatriate categories, which these functionally are, should not be applied into the ancient world. There is no unified ancient Greek polity for Greeks to be functioning outside of. This clearly does not work or make sense in Macedonia. Do we have
Category:Ancient Greeks in Egypt. That might make sense, but this one does not.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
13:38, 20 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge last 2 as nom -- I am not sure that these are in fact expatriate categories, as JPL seems to think. SilentResident raises an important issue. The present North Macedonia is a Slavic state. The Balkan wars (early 20th century) resulted in the Ottoman province being split between Greece and others (subsequently Yugoslavia). Ancient Macedonia was a Greek polity, as were
Thessalia and
Epirus. It might avoid confusion to call it Macedon, but that is an issue for another day. I am not clear what inclusion criterion for the first is, but merging to
Category:People of Ancient Macedonia might be an option, rather than delete.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:29, 21 March 2021 (UTC)reply
CommentMacedonia (ancient kingdom) did attract Greeks from other locations. For example, the Athenian tragedian
Euripides went into self-exile and ended his life as a courtier in the Macedonian court. The Stagirite philosopher
Aristotle was hired as the head of the royal academy of Macedon, tutoring boys belonging to the Macedonian royalty and nobility.
Dimadick (
talk)
05:48, 22 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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:Judges of the Uttarakhand High Court
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.
Rename per nom. Probably allright. Even if 'Justices' isnt easily recognized as placeholder for 'judges' in other parts of the world beyond India. --
Just N. (
talk)
00:05, 26 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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:Television series about size change
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category not clearly or consistently
defining of its contents. As usual with "[Media] about [X]" categories, the problem here is the distinction between whether the show is genuinely "about'" X, or whether it just happens to incorporate X as a plot device within a show that is primarily "about" something else. For instance, the category includes Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures -- but while Pac-Man is a character who we all know possesses the ability to temporarily grow in size and kill the ghosts when he eats the power pellet, the size change is not itself the core subject of the Pac-Man franchise. It also includes The Simpsons, which has once or twice used character shrinkage or growth as a standalone gag but is in no sense whatsoever "about" that. And then there's Big John, Little John, a show about a character age-reverting to childhood, so that the "size" change is at best a secondary byproduct of the age change, and not the thing the show was "about" in and of itself. And on and so forth: just because a TV show uses size change as a plot point doesn't necessarily mean the show is about size change per se -- so the category is simply too subjective to stand.
Bearcat (
talk)
15:17, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose picking off just one medium from
Category:Fiction about size change; the whole hierarchy should be considered together. Also, this plotline is clearly defining for some stories e.g. Ant-Man or Fantastic Voyage; where it is only incidental to some category members, just remove those. –
FayenaticLondon22:16, 20 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Fayenatic london's argument. The category just needs to be limited to articles where size-changing is not limited to a single episode or so.
Dimadick (
talk)
05:50, 22 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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 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:Characters of the Slavic Cabinet Mythology
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.
Nominator's rationale: I can't decipher the name of this category or the connection between the articles in it other than them being from Slavic folklore. There is nothing on Wikipedia about "Slavic Cabinet Mythology". A Google search only brings up results from this category on Wikipedia or mirrors. The contents are already in other appropriate Slavic folklore categories so no upmerging is necessary.
MClay1 (
talk)
12:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
There are scientific publications about each character in this category that such a deity did not exist. They were introduced into the Slavic deities by mistake in the 19th century. --
Лобачев Владимир (
talk)
13:10, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
This means that these characters were not among the people. They became characters as a result of the mistakes of some researchers. And then these mistakes were repeated many times. This is well stated in the Russian Wikipedia and in the five-volume edition of the Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences "Slavic Antiquities: Ethnolinguistic Dictionary". --
Лобачев Владимир (
talk)
07:20, 22 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Unless there's missing context, "cabinet" seems like a bad translation. Using the title of the corresponding category on the Russian Wikipedia, Google Translate suggests the word could be "armchair". Either way, this information is not self-explanatory or common knowledge, so I think the articles need information about it backed by reliable sources before we can safely categorise them as such.
MClay1 (
talk)
11:28, 23 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep and Rename. Slavic deities articles are in very bad condition and I wouldn't go by what they say. In a few days, I'm starting to rewrite the
List of Slavic deities article from scratch, but I will also write a separate list with pseudodeities, as there are dozens of them in Slavic mythology. I also want to make quick/stub article "Pseudodeity" or translate it from
de:Pseudogottheit. Deities like
Lada (her article has good article status and it is full of fakelore!), Yesha, Chislobog,
Vesna (!!!) and other popular pseudodeities are gonna have separate pages too. So I propose to rename category to "Slavic pseudodeities", because I wanted to do it anyway.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Sławobóg (
talk •
contribs) 08:08, March 27, 2021 (UTC)
If invented Slavic mythology is a legitimate area of academic study, then I'd support renaming the category (and rewriting the articles). However, it's worth noting that half the articles currently in the category do not appear to be deities, so renaming the category something like "Invented Slavic deities" would narrow the scope. If there's a new article made on Slavic
fakelore, we should also make a topic category to go with that.
MClay1 (
talk)
23:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete/Listify if wanted - Even just looking at this discussion, it seems obvious that the inclusion criteria is murky at best and this would be much better as a list, if anything, so to better explain each of the entries, per
WP:CLS, etc. - jc3720:34, 8 April 2021 (UTC)reply
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:SZA (singer) songs
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 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 written by SZA (singer)
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 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:Ethnic issues in Japan
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 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:2003 Texas redistricting
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.
Nominator's rationale: Having been responsible for getting a bunch of categorized articles merged into the main article through the AfD process, I can see now that this category is sparsely populated as it is at this moment. Therefore, I suggest deletion.
Love of Corey (
talk)
03:20, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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.
Things in Fez, Morocco
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.
Nominator's rationale: These were opposed in the
speedy section as creating a redundancy in category names; also mentioned was that it would be less
concise and intuitive. The rationale for renaming is per
C2D, to match the main article
Fez, Morocco. The category for the city is
Category:Fez, Morocco, and the other subcategories of it are also in this format, including the parent category of these,
Category:Buildings and structures in Fez, Morocco. The general practice is to follow the head article name in categories even if omitting a disambiguator would not render the category name ambiguous. See, e.g.,
Category:U.S. Highways in Georgia (U.S. state). As for
WP:CONCISE, it is part of
the guideline for article titles, not category names. As for being less intuitive, I think this is subjective. It can just as easily be argued that it is less intuitive for subcategories to refer to a city in a different way than the parent category refers to the city.
Good Ol’factory(talk)03:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose, I should have brought this up earlier during a similar speedy rename had I been paying closer attention, but these renames are unnecessary as "Fez" is not ambiguous in this context (obviously there are no gates, mosques, and palaces in a
Fez hat, and there are no other notable cities named Fez) and therefore adding the disambiguator to further categories is redundant. I'm struggling to see that C2D would require that every single category under it automatically needs to include the same disambiguator as the main article after it's redundant. So adding ", Morocco" to every Fez city subcategory makes the category name less
WP:CONCISE and slightly less intuitive for readers. Some of the main article equivalents of these categories may have, or have had, titles without the disambiguator (e.g.
Gates of Fez before it was merged to
Fortifications of Fez) and other main-space articles about subtopics of Fez now and in the future would likewise lack the disambiguator, so doing this may actually create inconsistency that violates C2D in the long term. Not the end of the world if this goes through, but it looks like extra work for nothing.
R Prazeres (
talk)
02:42, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose Not strong opposition but still opposed as per reasons stated in speedy discussion. As per conventions in
WP:CATNAME: "Standard article
naming conventions apply", so
WP:CONCISE is of course still applicable. As for "Fez" on its own being more intuitive, I think that's common sense: it's why articles like
History of Fez,
Fortifications of Fez, and
Architecture of Fez don't include "Morocco" (which is also why this could create C2D inconsistencies of its own in the future when such subtopic articles are created). Because the original ambiguity was between a city name and a very different semantic category (a hat), the ambiguity isn't extensible in the same way as it is for two identical place names (like Georgia). That said, I agree the best reason for simply continuing with this move is that it's already done for other subcategories so far; if the opposing arguments are applicable then it's reason to simply change course and maybe revert to more concise names in the future.
R Prazeres (
talk)
03:59, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Rename per
Fez, Morocco and
Category:Fez, Morocco. This is both C2C and C2D. The whole point of C2C and C2D is that one does not not have to undertake exhaustive research to establish whether 'This&that of Fez' is ambiguous, one simply follows the name of the parent category.
Oculi (
talk)
11:12, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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.
That's not the case if you remove the categories from
WP:CFDS. Now the only tag on the categories links to a place, where they are not even mentioned. (I am under no obligation to tag these, that's the nominator's responsibility.)
ArmbrustTheHomunculus14:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Maybe
Marcocapelle, but how often does anybody come via the tag? After all, it is visible on the CfD page, even though not linked to the specific subsection. It just bothers me that an experienced editor would waste our time posting complaints, rather than just fixing problems. That's what I've done, and I've seen you do. Lost whatever remaining respect for him. Anyway, I'd already updated them some time ago, so I'm going to collapse this irrelevant side discussion. William Allen Simpson (
talk)
22:32, 11 February 2021 (UTC)reply
It is not a big deal to me, but I still think that option A, the current nomination, is more according to the rules of linguistic logic.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
08:33, 21 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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:Krishnan Medal recipients
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 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:Winners of the Queen's Award for Voluntary Service
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 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 Indian, Japanese and Swiss, now containing 3 or 4; merge the rest for now, as they still only contain 1 or 2 pages, so potential for growth has not been demonstrated.–
FayenaticLondon10:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)reply
Many of the children who were kidnapped later became an adult. Putting them in "FOOian children" is only appropriate if they did not survive the kidnapping. That can/should be done manually.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
07:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Clearly? Please explain. (Note that with a growth rate of articles of 10% per year it will, on average, take 17 years before a current one-article category reaches 5 articles).
Marcocapelle (
talk)
08:25, 21 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Cpmment Difficult case. I do understand nominators
WP:SMALLCAT. But would Category:Kidnapped children not take enormous size, 1 cat for the whole world? And how come that people who never ever would become notable for an encyclopedia just get an article b/c being part of a kidnapping? It's also an ethical question if people should be labeled as eternal victims of crime. I'm not happy at all neither with this cat nor with the merger. --
Just N. (
talk)
23:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge I'm open to having a few small countries to finish out a by country breakdown, but the vast majority of this tree is anemic so it doesn't aid navigation. The dual merge to "Category:Kidnapped Fooian people" means any interested reader would still be able to find the articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
00:47, 11 April 2021 (UTC)reply
I don't know why that was done either. But looking over
Category:Kidnapped children, I see that
Category:Kidnapped African children was not nominated either, so my first thought was that maybe the plan was to leave the continent ones in place (which would mean the american one would need to be renamed to North American). But the I see that the subcats of the africa one were not listed either. So my best guess is that this is merely the first round of nominations and that more are forthcoming? I dunno. I don't have much of an opinion on these myself, but if they are not kept, I think upmerging them by continent, unless/until the rest are nommed, might be helpful. - jc3714:46, 12 April 2021 (UTC)reply
In the nomination I did not include country categories that contain at least 4 articles, so that is the reason why the African countries have not been included.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
19:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)reply
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.
Ancient Greeks in Macedon
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.
Nominator's rationale: delete/merge, the categories suggest that this was a kind of emigration, but in fact the articles in these categories are about people living in an era when Macedonia was part of the Greek civilization, so there was nothing special about Greek people in ancient Macedonia. Note that
Thessalia and
Epirus were immediate neighbors of Macedonia and just as well part of the Greek civilization. If kept, rename "Macedon" to "Macedonia" per article title
Ancient Macedonia.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
22:07, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Expatriate categories, which these functionally are, should not be applied into the ancient world. There is no unified ancient Greek polity for Greeks to be functioning outside of. This clearly does not work or make sense in Macedonia. Do we have
Category:Ancient Greeks in Egypt. That might make sense, but this one does not.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
13:38, 20 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge last 2 as nom -- I am not sure that these are in fact expatriate categories, as JPL seems to think. SilentResident raises an important issue. The present North Macedonia is a Slavic state. The Balkan wars (early 20th century) resulted in the Ottoman province being split between Greece and others (subsequently Yugoslavia). Ancient Macedonia was a Greek polity, as were
Thessalia and
Epirus. It might avoid confusion to call it Macedon, but that is an issue for another day. I am not clear what inclusion criterion for the first is, but merging to
Category:People of Ancient Macedonia might be an option, rather than delete.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:29, 21 March 2021 (UTC)reply
CommentMacedonia (ancient kingdom) did attract Greeks from other locations. For example, the Athenian tragedian
Euripides went into self-exile and ended his life as a courtier in the Macedonian court. The Stagirite philosopher
Aristotle was hired as the head of the royal academy of Macedon, tutoring boys belonging to the Macedonian royalty and nobility.
Dimadick (
talk)
05:48, 22 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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:Judges of the Uttarakhand High Court
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.
Rename per nom. Probably allright. Even if 'Justices' isnt easily recognized as placeholder for 'judges' in other parts of the world beyond India. --
Just N. (
talk)
00:05, 26 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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:Television series about size change
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category not clearly or consistently
defining of its contents. As usual with "[Media] about [X]" categories, the problem here is the distinction between whether the show is genuinely "about'" X, or whether it just happens to incorporate X as a plot device within a show that is primarily "about" something else. For instance, the category includes Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures -- but while Pac-Man is a character who we all know possesses the ability to temporarily grow in size and kill the ghosts when he eats the power pellet, the size change is not itself the core subject of the Pac-Man franchise. It also includes The Simpsons, which has once or twice used character shrinkage or growth as a standalone gag but is in no sense whatsoever "about" that. And then there's Big John, Little John, a show about a character age-reverting to childhood, so that the "size" change is at best a secondary byproduct of the age change, and not the thing the show was "about" in and of itself. And on and so forth: just because a TV show uses size change as a plot point doesn't necessarily mean the show is about size change per se -- so the category is simply too subjective to stand.
Bearcat (
talk)
15:17, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose picking off just one medium from
Category:Fiction about size change; the whole hierarchy should be considered together. Also, this plotline is clearly defining for some stories e.g. Ant-Man or Fantastic Voyage; where it is only incidental to some category members, just remove those. –
FayenaticLondon22:16, 20 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Fayenatic london's argument. The category just needs to be limited to articles where size-changing is not limited to a single episode or so.
Dimadick (
talk)
05:50, 22 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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 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:Characters of the Slavic Cabinet Mythology
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.
Nominator's rationale: I can't decipher the name of this category or the connection between the articles in it other than them being from Slavic folklore. There is nothing on Wikipedia about "Slavic Cabinet Mythology". A Google search only brings up results from this category on Wikipedia or mirrors. The contents are already in other appropriate Slavic folklore categories so no upmerging is necessary.
MClay1 (
talk)
12:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
There are scientific publications about each character in this category that such a deity did not exist. They were introduced into the Slavic deities by mistake in the 19th century. --
Лобачев Владимир (
talk)
13:10, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
This means that these characters were not among the people. They became characters as a result of the mistakes of some researchers. And then these mistakes were repeated many times. This is well stated in the Russian Wikipedia and in the five-volume edition of the Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences "Slavic Antiquities: Ethnolinguistic Dictionary". --
Лобачев Владимир (
talk)
07:20, 22 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Unless there's missing context, "cabinet" seems like a bad translation. Using the title of the corresponding category on the Russian Wikipedia, Google Translate suggests the word could be "armchair". Either way, this information is not self-explanatory or common knowledge, so I think the articles need information about it backed by reliable sources before we can safely categorise them as such.
MClay1 (
talk)
11:28, 23 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep and Rename. Slavic deities articles are in very bad condition and I wouldn't go by what they say. In a few days, I'm starting to rewrite the
List of Slavic deities article from scratch, but I will also write a separate list with pseudodeities, as there are dozens of them in Slavic mythology. I also want to make quick/stub article "Pseudodeity" or translate it from
de:Pseudogottheit. Deities like
Lada (her article has good article status and it is full of fakelore!), Yesha, Chislobog,
Vesna (!!!) and other popular pseudodeities are gonna have separate pages too. So I propose to rename category to "Slavic pseudodeities", because I wanted to do it anyway.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Sławobóg (
talk •
contribs) 08:08, March 27, 2021 (UTC)
If invented Slavic mythology is a legitimate area of academic study, then I'd support renaming the category (and rewriting the articles). However, it's worth noting that half the articles currently in the category do not appear to be deities, so renaming the category something like "Invented Slavic deities" would narrow the scope. If there's a new article made on Slavic
fakelore, we should also make a topic category to go with that.
MClay1 (
talk)
23:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete/Listify if wanted - Even just looking at this discussion, it seems obvious that the inclusion criteria is murky at best and this would be much better as a list, if anything, so to better explain each of the entries, per
WP:CLS, etc. - jc3720:34, 8 April 2021 (UTC)reply
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:SZA (singer) songs
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 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 written by SZA (singer)
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 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:Ethnic issues in Japan
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 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:2003 Texas redistricting
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.
Nominator's rationale: Having been responsible for getting a bunch of categorized articles merged into the main article through the AfD process, I can see now that this category is sparsely populated as it is at this moment. Therefore, I suggest deletion.
Love of Corey (
talk)
03:20, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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.
Things in Fez, Morocco
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.
Nominator's rationale: These were opposed in the
speedy section as creating a redundancy in category names; also mentioned was that it would be less
concise and intuitive. The rationale for renaming is per
C2D, to match the main article
Fez, Morocco. The category for the city is
Category:Fez, Morocco, and the other subcategories of it are also in this format, including the parent category of these,
Category:Buildings and structures in Fez, Morocco. The general practice is to follow the head article name in categories even if omitting a disambiguator would not render the category name ambiguous. See, e.g.,
Category:U.S. Highways in Georgia (U.S. state). As for
WP:CONCISE, it is part of
the guideline for article titles, not category names. As for being less intuitive, I think this is subjective. It can just as easily be argued that it is less intuitive for subcategories to refer to a city in a different way than the parent category refers to the city.
Good Ol’factory(talk)03:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose, I should have brought this up earlier during a similar speedy rename had I been paying closer attention, but these renames are unnecessary as "Fez" is not ambiguous in this context (obviously there are no gates, mosques, and palaces in a
Fez hat, and there are no other notable cities named Fez) and therefore adding the disambiguator to further categories is redundant. I'm struggling to see that C2D would require that every single category under it automatically needs to include the same disambiguator as the main article after it's redundant. So adding ", Morocco" to every Fez city subcategory makes the category name less
WP:CONCISE and slightly less intuitive for readers. Some of the main article equivalents of these categories may have, or have had, titles without the disambiguator (e.g.
Gates of Fez before it was merged to
Fortifications of Fez) and other main-space articles about subtopics of Fez now and in the future would likewise lack the disambiguator, so doing this may actually create inconsistency that violates C2D in the long term. Not the end of the world if this goes through, but it looks like extra work for nothing.
R Prazeres (
talk)
02:42, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose Not strong opposition but still opposed as per reasons stated in speedy discussion. As per conventions in
WP:CATNAME: "Standard article
naming conventions apply", so
WP:CONCISE is of course still applicable. As for "Fez" on its own being more intuitive, I think that's common sense: it's why articles like
History of Fez,
Fortifications of Fez, and
Architecture of Fez don't include "Morocco" (which is also why this could create C2D inconsistencies of its own in the future when such subtopic articles are created). Because the original ambiguity was between a city name and a very different semantic category (a hat), the ambiguity isn't extensible in the same way as it is for two identical place names (like Georgia). That said, I agree the best reason for simply continuing with this move is that it's already done for other subcategories so far; if the opposing arguments are applicable then it's reason to simply change course and maybe revert to more concise names in the future.
R Prazeres (
talk)
03:59, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Rename per
Fez, Morocco and
Category:Fez, Morocco. This is both C2C and C2D. The whole point of C2C and C2D is that one does not not have to undertake exhaustive research to establish whether 'This&that of Fez' is ambiguous, one simply follows the name of the parent category.
Oculi (
talk)
11:12, 19 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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.
That's not the case if you remove the categories from
WP:CFDS. Now the only tag on the categories links to a place, where they are not even mentioned. (I am under no obligation to tag these, that's the nominator's responsibility.)
ArmbrustTheHomunculus14:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Maybe
Marcocapelle, but how often does anybody come via the tag? After all, it is visible on the CfD page, even though not linked to the specific subsection. It just bothers me that an experienced editor would waste our time posting complaints, rather than just fixing problems. That's what I've done, and I've seen you do. Lost whatever remaining respect for him. Anyway, I'd already updated them some time ago, so I'm going to collapse this irrelevant side discussion. William Allen Simpson (
talk)
22:32, 11 February 2021 (UTC)reply
It is not a big deal to me, but I still think that option A, the current nomination, is more according to the rules of linguistic logic.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
08:33, 21 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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:Krishnan Medal recipients
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 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:Winners of the Queen's Award for Voluntary Service
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 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.