July 16
NEW NOMINATIONS
Category:Villains in mythology and legend
- Nominator's rationale: As far as I know, "villain" is usually used in a literary context. We typically use "evil" to describe malevolent gods and there is already such a category called Category:Evil deities, making this redundant and pointless. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 05:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Decades in the Colony of Virginia
- Propose merging Category:Decades in the Colony of Virginia to Category:Decades in Virginia
- Nominator's rationale: Redundant categoey lay Mason ( talk) 03:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- It could be populated and turned into a subcategory of Category:Colony of Virginia. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Current roller hockey seasons
- Nominator's rationale: Empty and not enough possible articles to justify it as a subcat to "current sporting seasons". Pelmeen10 ( talk) 03:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Boxing matches at Madison Square Garden
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Madison Square Garden to Category:Boxing matches in New York City and Category:Sports competitions in Manhattan
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Boardwalk Hall to Category:Boxing matches in Atlantic City, New Jersey
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Caesars Palace to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at the Las Vegas Hilton to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Manchester Arena to Category:Boxing matches in Manchester
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Mandalay Bay Events Center to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at MGM Grand Garden Arena to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Staples Center to Category:Boxing matches in Los Angeles
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Caesars Palace to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at T-Mobile Arena to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley and Category:Sports competitions in Paradise, Nevada
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Thomas & Mack Center to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at The O2 Arena to Category:Boxing matches in London
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Wembley Stadium to Category:Boxing matches in London
.:* Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Wembley Arena to Category:Boxing matches in London
- Nominator's rationale: Per the
recent discussion and
WP:OCVENUE.
User:Namiba
16:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strongly oppose Removing these Categories will severely overpopulate the populated place pages
User:Sam11333
16:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- The only one to which that might apply is the Las Vegas Valley and even that won't be massive.--
User:Namiba
16:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think there is any doubt on that one!
- I can't see the logic in removing the venue categories, given that
WP:OCVENUE states that "categories that indicate how a specific facility is regularly used in a specific and notable way" can be appropriate. I would argue that a boxing match falls under that description.
Sam11333 (
talk)
17:03, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Including these arenas in the boxing venues category is fine. But OCVENUE and the recent consensus I've cited is very clear "avoid categorizing events by their hosting locations".--
User:Namiba
- Tagging editors who commented on the most recent discussion User:Marcocapelle, User:Omnis Scientia, User:Epicgenius, User:Flibirigit.-- User:Namiba 19:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Including these arenas in the boxing venues category is fine. But OCVENUE and the recent consensus I've cited is very clear "avoid categorizing events by their hosting locations".--
User:Namiba
- The only one to which that might apply is the Las Vegas Valley and even that won't be massive.--
User:Namiba
16:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strongly oppose Removing these Categories will severely overpopulate the populated place pages
User:Sam11333
16:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Constitutionalism
- Propose merging Category:Constitutionalism to Category:Constitutional law
- Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category. The category creator really needs to slow down with the creation of narrow/non-defining categories. Mason ( talk) 23:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge or delete per nom. I am not sure of the merge target, hence deletion may be an option too. I added links between the two articles in the "See also" sections. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Counts of Geneva
- Nominator's rationale: delete, the category consists of two very different sets of medieval ruling counts of Geneva, who are already in
Category:House of Geneva and for early modern members of the House of Savoy for whom this was merely an empty title.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
07:22, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I don't believe the above summary to be quite right. Several members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county and they are not going to be recorded in 'house of Geneva'. There is also the house of Thoire that controlled the county briefly in the late medieval period who presently lack articles but would be members of the category if they didn't. Moreover even after the city of Geneva slipped from their grasp (they maintained control of other parts of the county such as Annecy) the county remained prominent among their titulary (several of the sons of the dukes of Nemours were called the prince de Genevois until the death of their fathers) and is featured in the leading sentences of many of the articles.
sovietblobfish (
talk)
08:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I do agree some form of re-allocation needs to happen from
Jacques on down. Especially given the county was raised to a duchy by the duke of Savoy in 1564. Perhaps they should be migrated to a category called something like 'Prince de Genevois' or 'Prince of the Genevois'.
sovietblobfish (
talk)
08:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Of course members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county because it was part of the
Savoyard state and the rulers of the latter were the ones enjoying practical control.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
11:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- At times yes, however the county (-1564 duchy) was under the authority of the cadet branch Savoie-Nemours for the majority of the 16th century and parts of the 17th century, and they were primarily French princes.
- Irrespective of whether they or the dukes of Savoy enjoyed practical control, this surely challenges the notion that it was an 'empty title' and it is therefore meaningful to keep it. sovietblobfish ( talk) 12:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Of course members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county because it was part of the
Savoyard state and the rulers of the latter were the ones enjoying practical control.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
11:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I do agree some form of re-allocation needs to happen from
Jacques on down. Especially given the county was raised to a duchy by the duke of Savoy in 1564. Perhaps they should be migrated to a category called something like 'Prince de Genevois' or 'Prince of the Genevois'.
sovietblobfish (
talk)
08:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I don't believe the above summary to be quite right. Several members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county and they are not going to be recorded in 'house of Geneva'. There is also the house of Thoire that controlled the county briefly in the late medieval period who presently lack articles but would be members of the category if they didn't. Moreover even after the city of Geneva slipped from their grasp (they maintained control of other parts of the county such as Annecy) the county remained prominent among their titulary (several of the sons of the dukes of Nemours were called the prince de Genevois until the death of their fathers) and is featured in the leading sentences of many of the articles.
sovietblobfish (
talk)
08:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Bedouin businesspeople
- Propose merging Category:Bedouin businesspeople to Category:Arab businesspeople
- Nominator's rationale: Not necessary to subcategorize the target category this way. Also contains only 2 articles. Gjs238 ( talk) 17:41, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just delete, the articles are already in
Category:Egyptian businesspeople and
Category:Syrian businesspeople, which should suffice.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
18:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Marco. Omnis Scientia ( talk) 22:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Isn't there some benefit to categorising by ethnicity and nationality? Anecdotally, every Bedouin I've ever met would say that they're a Bedouin first and their nationality second. – Joe ( talk) 06:38, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- merge I will nominate
Category:Arab businesspeople shortly because it conflates ethnicity and nationality, like so many similar categories that have been brought to CfD. –
LaundryPizza03 (
d
c̄)
22:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Does it conflate them or just set up a parallel scheme for ethnicity, i.e.
Category:Businesspeople by ethnicity? Do you also object to
Category:African-American businesspeople and
Category:Jewish businesspeople? –
Joe (
talk)
06:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
-
Category:Jewish businesspeople is a recreation of a previously deleted category, so it is at least controversial.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- But it exists now. And
Nyttend recently declined a CSD nom with this enlightening edit summary:
We're no longer in the same situation as before — the recent "keep" for Jews by occupation (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 26) means that there's recent support for categories of this type, and speedy-deleting just this one would be absurd
. I don't have a dog in this fight, but wouldn't it make sense to establish a consensus for or against categories by ethnicity, rather than seeking to delete individual ones here and there? – Joe ( talk) 11:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- But it exists now. And
Nyttend recently declined a CSD nom with this enlightening edit summary:
-
Category:Jewish businesspeople is a recreation of a previously deleted category, so it is at least controversial.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Does it conflate them or just set up a parallel scheme for ethnicity, i.e.
Category:Businesspeople by ethnicity? Do you also object to
Category:African-American businesspeople and
Category:Jewish businesspeople? –
Joe (
talk)
06:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retain I can list quite a few reasons for this: Bedouins have a distinct cultural, historical, and social identity within the Arab world. Merging their category into a general "Arab businesspeople" category could be seen as diluting the unique aspects of their cultural heritage. A specific category helps represent their unique challenges and contributions which might not be adequately covered. The Bedouin community has a history of nomadic trade and business practices that differ significantly from other Arab groups. A specific category preserves this historical context. Bedouins have distinct social structures and community dynamics that influence their business practices. Specific business strategies, success stories and challenges faced by Bedouin businesspeople can be studied with the help of a dedicated category. For cultural studies research, having a specific category can help in drawing more nuanced conclusions about the Bedouin way of life and their integration into modern economies. Furthermore, Wikipedia claims to be an inclusive platform representing diverse perspectives and communities. This category aligns with the principle of giving minority groups adequate representation. Merging the category marginalizes the Bedouin community within the larger Arab context.--
Simxaraba (
talk)
08:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- None of this addresses the small size of the category, and this is just WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 10:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge? Delete? Keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Brainwashing theory proponents
- Propose merging Category:Brainwashing theory proponents to Category:Mind control theorists
- Nominator's rationale: Whatever the difference is supposed to be between these two categories is beyond me. As far as I can tell, both categories are about people notable for writing works promoting the legitimacy of the sociological concept of brainwashing/mind control (which are more or less the same thing). This just seems like a slightly less neutral version of the other category made by a banned sock. PARAKANYAA ( talk) 19:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just delete, the articles are already in
Category:Researchers of new religious movements and cults and that is exactly where they belong.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle I disagree with this, because brainwashing is actually a sociological debate, not strictly related to cults, that had quite a lot of scientific input. Like half the people in the mind control category have no relation to NRMs/cults at all. Brainwashing as a concept has been discussed in relation to politics, kidnapping (see
Patty Hearst), etc. It is its own thing: while it is often brought up in relation to cults that's not its only relevance.
PARAKANYAA (
talk)
20:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Possibly, but the articles in the nominated category are about researchers of new religious movements and cults.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle They're also primarily notable for brainwashing in a NRM context so I think it should be upmerged.
PARAKANYAA (
talk)
21:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
The articles do not mention that they are a mind control theorist so I think you are applying WP:SYNTH.Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)- @ Marcocapelle Of the 7 people in the to-be-merged category,
- 1) Abgrall is noted as being a brainwashing theorist
- 2) Clark’s article is a stub that doesn’t say much of anything
- 3) Eichel’s article prominently mentions him presenting theories of brainwashing and mindcontrol
- 4) Hassan’s article prominently mentions his theories of mind control
- 5) Lalich’s article discusses her “coercive control” theories (also a synonym for mind control)
- 6) Langone discusses his theories of mind control/coercive control as it relates to cults
- 7) Singer’s article declares her notable primary for advancing theories of brainwashing
- At least 6 out of the 7 with the other being a stub without proper context.
- Mind control and brainwashing are the same thing (and our brainwashing page was at mind control until a few years ago)
PARAKANYAA (
talk)
03:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- I may have jumped to conclusions too quickly.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- lol don't worry it's fine PARAKANYAA ( talk) 01:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- I may have jumped to conclusions too quickly.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle They're also primarily notable for brainwashing in a NRM context so I think it should be upmerged.
PARAKANYAA (
talk)
21:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Possibly, but the articles in the nominated category are about researchers of new religious movements and cults.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle I disagree with this, because brainwashing is actually a sociological debate, not strictly related to cults, that had quite a lot of scientific input. Like half the people in the mind control category have no relation to NRMs/cults at all. Brainwashing as a concept has been discussed in relation to politics, kidnapping (see
Patty Hearst), etc. It is its own thing: while it is often brought up in relation to cults that's not its only relevance.
PARAKANYAA (
talk)
20:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Video games with expansion packs
- Nominator's rationale: Last year, on May 7, 2023. A similar category "Video games with downloadable content" was deleted, and expansion packs are pretty much the same as downloadable content. In turn, this category is probably non-defining. Expansion packs are as common as DLC, and are essentially the same. QuantumFoam66 ( talk) 20:28, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I'd agree with the nominator - having an expansion pack does not always modify the base game, so it's hard to call it a defining feature. Categories should be defining aspects of the subject, not something tangential.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
09:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose because there are several other potentially non defining categories like "Video games with alternate versions" that I would have put under discussion in the same nomination or whatever.
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
21:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not a reason to oppose.
Just discuss with nominator whether the other categories should be included in this nomination or elseyou can nominate them separately, then you can support both nominations. Marcocapelle ( talk) 03:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)- Striking half of my comment because I did not realize that the oppose was from nominator themselves. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not a reason to oppose.
- Oppose because there are several other potentially non defining categories like "Video games with alternate versions" that I would have put under discussion in the same nomination or whatever.
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
21:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am going to note that nom is QuantumFoam66.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Palestinian bedouins
- Propose merging Category:Palestinian bedouins to Category:Bedouins in the State of Palestine
- Nominator's rationale: Effectively redundant. Will require manual addition of parent categories to the target, for it is a downmerge. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 22:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge per nom, but purge Al-Hamra, Baysan which is about a village that was depopulated in 1948. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- What about Bedouins that originate in Palestine but now live in Israel (such as the Negev Bedouin) or Jordan? Category:Palestinian bedouins seems the broader category and therefore the better merge target. It also corresponds to an article, Palestinian Bedouin. – Joe ( talk) 06:31, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Joe's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:19th-century feminists
- Nominator's rationale: There is no need to have an intersection between political orientation and century. Mason ( talk) 02:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
July 16
NEW NOMINATIONS
Category:Villains in mythology and legend
- Nominator's rationale: As far as I know, "villain" is usually used in a literary context. We typically use "evil" to describe malevolent gods and there is already such a category called Category:Evil deities, making this redundant and pointless. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 05:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Decades in the Colony of Virginia
- Propose merging Category:Decades in the Colony of Virginia to Category:Decades in Virginia
- Nominator's rationale: Redundant categoey lay Mason ( talk) 03:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- It could be populated and turned into a subcategory of Category:Colony of Virginia. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Current roller hockey seasons
- Nominator's rationale: Empty and not enough possible articles to justify it as a subcat to "current sporting seasons". Pelmeen10 ( talk) 03:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Boxing matches at Madison Square Garden
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Madison Square Garden to Category:Boxing matches in New York City and Category:Sports competitions in Manhattan
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Boardwalk Hall to Category:Boxing matches in Atlantic City, New Jersey
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Caesars Palace to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at the Las Vegas Hilton to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Manchester Arena to Category:Boxing matches in Manchester
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Mandalay Bay Events Center to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at MGM Grand Garden Arena to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Staples Center to Category:Boxing matches in Los Angeles
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Caesars Palace to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at T-Mobile Arena to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley and Category:Sports competitions in Paradise, Nevada
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Thomas & Mack Center to Category:Boxing matches in the Las Vegas Valley
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at The O2 Arena to Category:Boxing matches in London
- Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Wembley Stadium to Category:Boxing matches in London
.:* Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Wembley Arena to Category:Boxing matches in London
- Nominator's rationale: Per the
recent discussion and
WP:OCVENUE.
User:Namiba
16:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strongly oppose Removing these Categories will severely overpopulate the populated place pages
User:Sam11333
16:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- The only one to which that might apply is the Las Vegas Valley and even that won't be massive.--
User:Namiba
16:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think there is any doubt on that one!
- I can't see the logic in removing the venue categories, given that
WP:OCVENUE states that "categories that indicate how a specific facility is regularly used in a specific and notable way" can be appropriate. I would argue that a boxing match falls under that description.
Sam11333 (
talk)
17:03, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Including these arenas in the boxing venues category is fine. But OCVENUE and the recent consensus I've cited is very clear "avoid categorizing events by their hosting locations".--
User:Namiba
- Tagging editors who commented on the most recent discussion User:Marcocapelle, User:Omnis Scientia, User:Epicgenius, User:Flibirigit.-- User:Namiba 19:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Including these arenas in the boxing venues category is fine. But OCVENUE and the recent consensus I've cited is very clear "avoid categorizing events by their hosting locations".--
User:Namiba
- The only one to which that might apply is the Las Vegas Valley and even that won't be massive.--
User:Namiba
16:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strongly oppose Removing these Categories will severely overpopulate the populated place pages
User:Sam11333
16:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Constitutionalism
- Propose merging Category:Constitutionalism to Category:Constitutional law
- Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category. The category creator really needs to slow down with the creation of narrow/non-defining categories. Mason ( talk) 23:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge or delete per nom. I am not sure of the merge target, hence deletion may be an option too. I added links between the two articles in the "See also" sections. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Counts of Geneva
- Nominator's rationale: delete, the category consists of two very different sets of medieval ruling counts of Geneva, who are already in
Category:House of Geneva and for early modern members of the House of Savoy for whom this was merely an empty title.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
07:22, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I don't believe the above summary to be quite right. Several members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county and they are not going to be recorded in 'house of Geneva'. There is also the house of Thoire that controlled the county briefly in the late medieval period who presently lack articles but would be members of the category if they didn't. Moreover even after the city of Geneva slipped from their grasp (they maintained control of other parts of the county such as Annecy) the county remained prominent among their titulary (several of the sons of the dukes of Nemours were called the prince de Genevois until the death of their fathers) and is featured in the leading sentences of many of the articles.
sovietblobfish (
talk)
08:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I do agree some form of re-allocation needs to happen from
Jacques on down. Especially given the county was raised to a duchy by the duke of Savoy in 1564. Perhaps they should be migrated to a category called something like 'Prince de Genevois' or 'Prince of the Genevois'.
sovietblobfish (
talk)
08:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Of course members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county because it was part of the
Savoyard state and the rulers of the latter were the ones enjoying practical control.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
11:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- At times yes, however the county (-1564 duchy) was under the authority of the cadet branch Savoie-Nemours for the majority of the 16th century and parts of the 17th century, and they were primarily French princes.
- Irrespective of whether they or the dukes of Savoy enjoyed practical control, this surely challenges the notion that it was an 'empty title' and it is therefore meaningful to keep it. sovietblobfish ( talk) 12:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Of course members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county because it was part of the
Savoyard state and the rulers of the latter were the ones enjoying practical control.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
11:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I do agree some form of re-allocation needs to happen from
Jacques on down. Especially given the county was raised to a duchy by the duke of Savoy in 1564. Perhaps they should be migrated to a category called something like 'Prince de Genevois' or 'Prince of the Genevois'.
sovietblobfish (
talk)
08:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I don't believe the above summary to be quite right. Several members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county and they are not going to be recorded in 'house of Geneva'. There is also the house of Thoire that controlled the county briefly in the late medieval period who presently lack articles but would be members of the category if they didn't. Moreover even after the city of Geneva slipped from their grasp (they maintained control of other parts of the county such as Annecy) the county remained prominent among their titulary (several of the sons of the dukes of Nemours were called the prince de Genevois until the death of their fathers) and is featured in the leading sentences of many of the articles.
sovietblobfish (
talk)
08:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Bedouin businesspeople
- Propose merging Category:Bedouin businesspeople to Category:Arab businesspeople
- Nominator's rationale: Not necessary to subcategorize the target category this way. Also contains only 2 articles. Gjs238 ( talk) 17:41, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just delete, the articles are already in
Category:Egyptian businesspeople and
Category:Syrian businesspeople, which should suffice.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
18:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Marco. Omnis Scientia ( talk) 22:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Isn't there some benefit to categorising by ethnicity and nationality? Anecdotally, every Bedouin I've ever met would say that they're a Bedouin first and their nationality second. – Joe ( talk) 06:38, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- merge I will nominate
Category:Arab businesspeople shortly because it conflates ethnicity and nationality, like so many similar categories that have been brought to CfD. –
LaundryPizza03 (
d
c̄)
22:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Does it conflate them or just set up a parallel scheme for ethnicity, i.e.
Category:Businesspeople by ethnicity? Do you also object to
Category:African-American businesspeople and
Category:Jewish businesspeople? –
Joe (
talk)
06:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
-
Category:Jewish businesspeople is a recreation of a previously deleted category, so it is at least controversial.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- But it exists now. And
Nyttend recently declined a CSD nom with this enlightening edit summary:
We're no longer in the same situation as before — the recent "keep" for Jews by occupation (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 26) means that there's recent support for categories of this type, and speedy-deleting just this one would be absurd
. I don't have a dog in this fight, but wouldn't it make sense to establish a consensus for or against categories by ethnicity, rather than seeking to delete individual ones here and there? – Joe ( talk) 11:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- But it exists now. And
Nyttend recently declined a CSD nom with this enlightening edit summary:
-
Category:Jewish businesspeople is a recreation of a previously deleted category, so it is at least controversial.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Does it conflate them or just set up a parallel scheme for ethnicity, i.e.
Category:Businesspeople by ethnicity? Do you also object to
Category:African-American businesspeople and
Category:Jewish businesspeople? –
Joe (
talk)
06:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retain I can list quite a few reasons for this: Bedouins have a distinct cultural, historical, and social identity within the Arab world. Merging their category into a general "Arab businesspeople" category could be seen as diluting the unique aspects of their cultural heritage. A specific category helps represent their unique challenges and contributions which might not be adequately covered. The Bedouin community has a history of nomadic trade and business practices that differ significantly from other Arab groups. A specific category preserves this historical context. Bedouins have distinct social structures and community dynamics that influence their business practices. Specific business strategies, success stories and challenges faced by Bedouin businesspeople can be studied with the help of a dedicated category. For cultural studies research, having a specific category can help in drawing more nuanced conclusions about the Bedouin way of life and their integration into modern economies. Furthermore, Wikipedia claims to be an inclusive platform representing diverse perspectives and communities. This category aligns with the principle of giving minority groups adequate representation. Merging the category marginalizes the Bedouin community within the larger Arab context.--
Simxaraba (
talk)
08:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- None of this addresses the small size of the category, and this is just WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 10:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge? Delete? Keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Brainwashing theory proponents
- Propose merging Category:Brainwashing theory proponents to Category:Mind control theorists
- Nominator's rationale: Whatever the difference is supposed to be between these two categories is beyond me. As far as I can tell, both categories are about people notable for writing works promoting the legitimacy of the sociological concept of brainwashing/mind control (which are more or less the same thing). This just seems like a slightly less neutral version of the other category made by a banned sock. PARAKANYAA ( talk) 19:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just delete, the articles are already in
Category:Researchers of new religious movements and cults and that is exactly where they belong.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle I disagree with this, because brainwashing is actually a sociological debate, not strictly related to cults, that had quite a lot of scientific input. Like half the people in the mind control category have no relation to NRMs/cults at all. Brainwashing as a concept has been discussed in relation to politics, kidnapping (see
Patty Hearst), etc. It is its own thing: while it is often brought up in relation to cults that's not its only relevance.
PARAKANYAA (
talk)
20:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Possibly, but the articles in the nominated category are about researchers of new religious movements and cults.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle They're also primarily notable for brainwashing in a NRM context so I think it should be upmerged.
PARAKANYAA (
talk)
21:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
The articles do not mention that they are a mind control theorist so I think you are applying WP:SYNTH.Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)- @ Marcocapelle Of the 7 people in the to-be-merged category,
- 1) Abgrall is noted as being a brainwashing theorist
- 2) Clark’s article is a stub that doesn’t say much of anything
- 3) Eichel’s article prominently mentions him presenting theories of brainwashing and mindcontrol
- 4) Hassan’s article prominently mentions his theories of mind control
- 5) Lalich’s article discusses her “coercive control” theories (also a synonym for mind control)
- 6) Langone discusses his theories of mind control/coercive control as it relates to cults
- 7) Singer’s article declares her notable primary for advancing theories of brainwashing
- At least 6 out of the 7 with the other being a stub without proper context.
- Mind control and brainwashing are the same thing (and our brainwashing page was at mind control until a few years ago)
PARAKANYAA (
talk)
03:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- I may have jumped to conclusions too quickly.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- lol don't worry it's fine PARAKANYAA ( talk) 01:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- I may have jumped to conclusions too quickly.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle They're also primarily notable for brainwashing in a NRM context so I think it should be upmerged.
PARAKANYAA (
talk)
21:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Possibly, but the articles in the nominated category are about researchers of new religious movements and cults.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- @
Marcocapelle I disagree with this, because brainwashing is actually a sociological debate, not strictly related to cults, that had quite a lot of scientific input. Like half the people in the mind control category have no relation to NRMs/cults at all. Brainwashing as a concept has been discussed in relation to politics, kidnapping (see
Patty Hearst), etc. It is its own thing: while it is often brought up in relation to cults that's not its only relevance.
PARAKANYAA (
talk)
20:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Video games with expansion packs
- Nominator's rationale: Last year, on May 7, 2023. A similar category "Video games with downloadable content" was deleted, and expansion packs are pretty much the same as downloadable content. In turn, this category is probably non-defining. Expansion packs are as common as DLC, and are essentially the same. QuantumFoam66 ( talk) 20:28, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I'd agree with the nominator - having an expansion pack does not always modify the base game, so it's hard to call it a defining feature. Categories should be defining aspects of the subject, not something tangential.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
09:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose because there are several other potentially non defining categories like "Video games with alternate versions" that I would have put under discussion in the same nomination or whatever.
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
21:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not a reason to oppose.
Just discuss with nominator whether the other categories should be included in this nomination or elseyou can nominate them separately, then you can support both nominations. Marcocapelle ( talk) 03:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)- Striking half of my comment because I did not realize that the oppose was from nominator themselves. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not a reason to oppose.
- Oppose because there are several other potentially non defining categories like "Video games with alternate versions" that I would have put under discussion in the same nomination or whatever.
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
21:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am going to note that nom is QuantumFoam66.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Palestinian bedouins
- Propose merging Category:Palestinian bedouins to Category:Bedouins in the State of Palestine
- Nominator's rationale: Effectively redundant. Will require manual addition of parent categories to the target, for it is a downmerge. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 22:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge per nom, but purge Al-Hamra, Baysan which is about a village that was depopulated in 1948. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- What about Bedouins that originate in Palestine but now live in Israel (such as the Negev Bedouin) or Jordan? Category:Palestinian bedouins seems the broader category and therefore the better merge target. It also corresponds to an article, Palestinian Bedouin. – Joe ( talk) 06:31, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Joe's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/they) 02:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:19th-century feminists
- Nominator's rationale: There is no need to have an intersection between political orientation and century. Mason ( talk) 02:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)