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.
I am not at all sure about this. The word consortmeans "a husband or wife, especially of a monarch", "a companion or partner". "Consorts of Bosnia" therefore seems a bit silly, as one cannot be married to a country. Following up on that, everyone knows what to expect to find in
Category:Queens of Bosnia, while
Category:Consorts of Bosnia would leave many scratching their heads due to either not knowing what consorts means or, indeed, due to knowing what it means. The latter could reasonably include all married people from Bosnia.
Surtsicna (
talk) 15:46, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
By the way, when we were faced with the same question for
List of Milanese consorts, you and I concluded it would not be necessary to rename
Category:Duchesses of Milan to
Category:Duchesses consort of Milan, because they were all consorts, and it would make more sense to create a new separate category for
Category:Ladies of Milan, which we did. The two situations are very similar, except that
Helen of Bosnia was also briefly a queen regnant after having been a queen consort (and creating
Category:Queens regnant of Bosnia just for Helen would be a
WP:SMALLCAT, so that won't help), and we probably don't have enough duchesses consort and banesses consort of Bosnia to prevent SMALLCAT. So, I concluded renaming to
Category:Consorts of Bosnia, and including the duchesses consort and banesses consort, is the best solution in this case. Cheers,
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 17:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Surtsicna Why
have you removedMaria of Bosnia from the list? Her own bio says Maria too was aware of her higher status and, in addition to the title Countess of Helfenstein, often referred to herself as Duchess of Bosnia. From 1365 until 1399, she signed her donations as "Maria Herzogin von Bosnien". It is supported by multiple reliable sources.
Moreover, you have boldly renamed the list to
List of banesses and queens of Bosnia. I don't think that's a good idea when we are in the middle of a discussion about its title and scope. Admittedly, I boldly renamed the main article just before I CfR'd and CfM'd the categories, but that was because I did not expect it to be controversial. I'm quite open to changing the title to something else, but not in the middle of a discussion, especially when no proposal for this new title was made, let alone accepted, by anyone in the discussion. I hope we can reach agreements first before changing things under discussion. Cheers,
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 21:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The article is a list of the consorts of the rulers of Bosnia. Maria was not a consort of a ruler of Bosnia. I too am very open for discussion, but I do not think it is a good idea to keep the article in the meantime at a blatantly nonsensical title for which no consensus was sought.
Surtsicna (
talk) 21:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Fair enough then. Let's keep this title for now. Your and other people's comments have given me some pause that I might be wrong, even though that would mean the vast majority of titles of
Category:Lists of duchesses must then also be wrong. Perhaps they are. We'll see.
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 21:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Update Added Alt (Marcocapelle). Looks like there is a consensus for this Alt proposal.
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 18:32, 5 July 2023 (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:Medically important anaerobes
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:WP:SUBJECTIVECAT containing a mixture of bacteria with different characteristics (about half are Clostridium spp. and related genera). Some pages are not in related categories such as
Category:Pathogenic bacteria, but the missing categories differ between the articles. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 12:38, 20 June 2023 (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:Avar Khanate
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 The rename proposal for the target will need to be handled separatedly since it wasn't tagged or mentioned by the other participants. (
non-admin closure)
* Pppery *it has begun... 18:16, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:WP:NARROWCAT/
WP:OVERLAPCAT, almost exact duplicates. Since we're talking about people, the "Avar Khans" is the obvious target. We might change "Khans" to lowercase "khans" while we're at it.
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 12:25, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
PS: I might add that lots of Avar khans are overcategorised in general.
Example.
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 12:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Support we're unlikely to see capital cites, governments, royal Palaces etc.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 14:50, 21 June 2023 (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.
Remaining national anthem compositions by key categories
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:Speedy deleted as empty, which was technically out of process, but is moot since there was a clear consensus to delete (
non-admin closure)
* Pppery *it has begun... 18:16, 1 July 2023 (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:7th-century rulers in Europe
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.
Support, keeping the doges of Venice in the monarchs tree. In principle, the doges of Venice ruled until death.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 11:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Support per
Marcocapelle's definition. The doges were elective reigning dukes, basically elective monarchs.
Est. 2021 (
talk·contribs) 07:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC)reply
That's what we've essentially agreed above. Does that clear things up? :)
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 10:55, 11 July 2023 (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.
Strong keep. There's already a strong precedent for categories like this one. See everything in
Category:Albums recorded in the United States and
Category:Albums recorded in the United Kingdom. As a music recording and production major, I think anyone with experience in sound recording would tell you that the studio an album is recorded at is one of its most defining characteristics. It's a decision made before a single note is recorded and influences every aspect of the record. Furthermore, many of these categories, such as
Category:Albums recorded at Hitsville U.S.A., represent unique moments in music history. This is very clearly the type of information that an encyclopedia exists to keep track of.
The Midnite Wolf (
talk) 07:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Since people in the last discussion cited
WP:NONDEF as reasoning, let's look at the three rules-of-thumb listed:
"a defining characteristic is one that reliable, secondary sources commonly and consistently define, in prose, the subject as having." Pretty much any reliable source on an album's creation will talk about the studio it was recorded at, as this has a large impact on the album's sound.
"if the characteristic would not be appropriate to mention in the lead portion of an article (determined without regard to whether it is mentioned in the lead), it is probably not defining..." The two featured articles I could find in this category,
The Dark Side of the Moon and
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, mention Abbey Road/EMI studios in their first and second paragraphs respectively.
"if the characteristic falls within any of the forms of overcategorization mentioned on this page, it is probably not defining." So far, no one has suggested another form of overcategorization that this category falls under.
The Midnite Wolf (
talk) 17:31, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete, it is not a characteristic that is prominently discussed in the articles. Sometimes it is not mentioned at all.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 11:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Even in that article, there is plenty information about how the Beatles recreated the atmosphere, but hardly anything about the studio itself. The claim that the studio has a large impact on the album's sound does not appear in any form.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 04:44, 22 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Speedy Delete per
WP:G4. The claim is made above that "there's already a strong precedent for categories like this one" but that's just another way of saying
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The actual precedent is
right here. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 00:11, 23 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The only real argument made in the past discussion is
WP:NOTDEFINING, which was refuted above. We shouldn’t be beholden to a small discussion three years ago. And see
WP:OTHERCATSEXIST for a more nuanced and applicable perspective here.
The Midnite Wolf (
talk) 00:59, 25 June 2023 (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.
Nominator's rationale:delete, too early category creation, with only a main article and a subcategory. The category can easily be recreated if and when there are a handful articles about it.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 04:37, 20 June 2023 (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.
I am not at all sure about this. The word consortmeans "a husband or wife, especially of a monarch", "a companion or partner". "Consorts of Bosnia" therefore seems a bit silly, as one cannot be married to a country. Following up on that, everyone knows what to expect to find in
Category:Queens of Bosnia, while
Category:Consorts of Bosnia would leave many scratching their heads due to either not knowing what consorts means or, indeed, due to knowing what it means. The latter could reasonably include all married people from Bosnia.
Surtsicna (
talk) 15:46, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
By the way, when we were faced with the same question for
List of Milanese consorts, you and I concluded it would not be necessary to rename
Category:Duchesses of Milan to
Category:Duchesses consort of Milan, because they were all consorts, and it would make more sense to create a new separate category for
Category:Ladies of Milan, which we did. The two situations are very similar, except that
Helen of Bosnia was also briefly a queen regnant after having been a queen consort (and creating
Category:Queens regnant of Bosnia just for Helen would be a
WP:SMALLCAT, so that won't help), and we probably don't have enough duchesses consort and banesses consort of Bosnia to prevent SMALLCAT. So, I concluded renaming to
Category:Consorts of Bosnia, and including the duchesses consort and banesses consort, is the best solution in this case. Cheers,
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 17:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Surtsicna Why
have you removedMaria of Bosnia from the list? Her own bio says Maria too was aware of her higher status and, in addition to the title Countess of Helfenstein, often referred to herself as Duchess of Bosnia. From 1365 until 1399, she signed her donations as "Maria Herzogin von Bosnien". It is supported by multiple reliable sources.
Moreover, you have boldly renamed the list to
List of banesses and queens of Bosnia. I don't think that's a good idea when we are in the middle of a discussion about its title and scope. Admittedly, I boldly renamed the main article just before I CfR'd and CfM'd the categories, but that was because I did not expect it to be controversial. I'm quite open to changing the title to something else, but not in the middle of a discussion, especially when no proposal for this new title was made, let alone accepted, by anyone in the discussion. I hope we can reach agreements first before changing things under discussion. Cheers,
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 21:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The article is a list of the consorts of the rulers of Bosnia. Maria was not a consort of a ruler of Bosnia. I too am very open for discussion, but I do not think it is a good idea to keep the article in the meantime at a blatantly nonsensical title for which no consensus was sought.
Surtsicna (
talk) 21:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Fair enough then. Let's keep this title for now. Your and other people's comments have given me some pause that I might be wrong, even though that would mean the vast majority of titles of
Category:Lists of duchesses must then also be wrong. Perhaps they are. We'll see.
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 21:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Update Added Alt (Marcocapelle). Looks like there is a consensus for this Alt proposal.
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 18:32, 5 July 2023 (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:Medically important anaerobes
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:WP:SUBJECTIVECAT containing a mixture of bacteria with different characteristics (about half are Clostridium spp. and related genera). Some pages are not in related categories such as
Category:Pathogenic bacteria, but the missing categories differ between the articles. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 12:38, 20 June 2023 (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:Avar Khanate
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 The rename proposal for the target will need to be handled separatedly since it wasn't tagged or mentioned by the other participants. (
non-admin closure)
* Pppery *it has begun... 18:16, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:WP:NARROWCAT/
WP:OVERLAPCAT, almost exact duplicates. Since we're talking about people, the "Avar Khans" is the obvious target. We might change "Khans" to lowercase "khans" while we're at it.
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 12:25, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
PS: I might add that lots of Avar khans are overcategorised in general.
Example.
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 12:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Support we're unlikely to see capital cites, governments, royal Palaces etc.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 14:50, 21 June 2023 (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.
Remaining national anthem compositions by key categories
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:Speedy deleted as empty, which was technically out of process, but is moot since there was a clear consensus to delete (
non-admin closure)
* Pppery *it has begun... 18:16, 1 July 2023 (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:7th-century rulers in Europe
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.
Support, keeping the doges of Venice in the monarchs tree. In principle, the doges of Venice ruled until death.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 11:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Support per
Marcocapelle's definition. The doges were elective reigning dukes, basically elective monarchs.
Est. 2021 (
talk·contribs) 07:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC)reply
That's what we've essentially agreed above. Does that clear things up? :)
Nederlandse Leeuw (
talk) 10:55, 11 July 2023 (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.
Strong keep. There's already a strong precedent for categories like this one. See everything in
Category:Albums recorded in the United States and
Category:Albums recorded in the United Kingdom. As a music recording and production major, I think anyone with experience in sound recording would tell you that the studio an album is recorded at is one of its most defining characteristics. It's a decision made before a single note is recorded and influences every aspect of the record. Furthermore, many of these categories, such as
Category:Albums recorded at Hitsville U.S.A., represent unique moments in music history. This is very clearly the type of information that an encyclopedia exists to keep track of.
The Midnite Wolf (
talk) 07:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Since people in the last discussion cited
WP:NONDEF as reasoning, let's look at the three rules-of-thumb listed:
"a defining characteristic is one that reliable, secondary sources commonly and consistently define, in prose, the subject as having." Pretty much any reliable source on an album's creation will talk about the studio it was recorded at, as this has a large impact on the album's sound.
"if the characteristic would not be appropriate to mention in the lead portion of an article (determined without regard to whether it is mentioned in the lead), it is probably not defining..." The two featured articles I could find in this category,
The Dark Side of the Moon and
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, mention Abbey Road/EMI studios in their first and second paragraphs respectively.
"if the characteristic falls within any of the forms of overcategorization mentioned on this page, it is probably not defining." So far, no one has suggested another form of overcategorization that this category falls under.
The Midnite Wolf (
talk) 17:31, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete, it is not a characteristic that is prominently discussed in the articles. Sometimes it is not mentioned at all.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 11:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Even in that article, there is plenty information about how the Beatles recreated the atmosphere, but hardly anything about the studio itself. The claim that the studio has a large impact on the album's sound does not appear in any form.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 04:44, 22 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Speedy Delete per
WP:G4. The claim is made above that "there's already a strong precedent for categories like this one" but that's just another way of saying
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The actual precedent is
right here. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 00:11, 23 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The only real argument made in the past discussion is
WP:NOTDEFINING, which was refuted above. We shouldn’t be beholden to a small discussion three years ago. And see
WP:OTHERCATSEXIST for a more nuanced and applicable perspective here.
The Midnite Wolf (
talk) 00:59, 25 June 2023 (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.
Nominator's rationale:delete, too early category creation, with only a main article and a subcategory. The category can easily be recreated if and when there are a handful articles about it.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 04:37, 20 June 2023 (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.