Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/Today

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion policies for the official rules of this page, and how to do cleanup.

Deletion tools
Policy (log)
Articles (howto · log)
Templates (howto · log)
Categories (howto · log)
Mergers
Page moves
Speedy
All speedy templates
Unfree files
Transwiki (howto · log)
All transwiki templates

Deletion of a category may mean that the articles and images in it are directly put in its parent category, or that another subdivision of the parent category is made. If they are already members of more suitable categories, it may also mean that they become a member of one category less.

How to use this page

[edit]
  1. Know if the category you are looking at needs deleting (or to be created). If it is a "red link" and has no articles or subcategories, then it is already deleted (more likely, it was never really created in the first place), and does not need to be listed here.
  2. Read and understand Wikipedia:Categorization before using this page. Nominate categories that violate policies here, or are misspelled, mis-capitalized, redundant/need to be merged, not NPOV, small without potential for growth, or are generally bad ideas. (See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Manual of Style.)
  3. Please read the Wikipedia:Categorization of people policy if nominating or voting on a people-related category.
  4. Unless the category to be deleted is non-controversial – vandalism or a duplicate, for example – please do not depopulate the category (remove the tags from articles) before the community has made a decision.
  5. Add {{cfd}} to the category page for deletion. (If you are recommending that the category be renamed, you may also add a note giving the suggested new name.) This will add a message to it, and also put the page you are nominating into Category:Categories for deletion. It's important to do this to help alert people who are watching or browsing the category.
    1. Alternately, use the rename template like this: {{cfr|newname}}
    2. If you are concerned with a stub category, make sure to inform the WikiProject Stub sorting
  6. Add new deletion candidates under the appropriate day near the top of this page.
    1. Alternatively, if the category is a candidate for speedy renaming (see Wikipedia:Category renaming), add it to the speedy category at the bottom.
  7. Make sure you add a colon (:) in the link to the category being listed, like [[:Category:Foo]]. This makes the category link a hard link which can be seen on the page (and avoids putting this page into the category you are nominating).
  8. Sign any listing or vote you make by typing ~~~~ after your text.
  9. Link both categories to delete and categories to merge into. Failure to do this will delay consideration of your suggestion.

Special notes

[edit]

Some categories may be listed in Category:Categories for deletion but accidently not listed here.

Discussion for Today

[edit]
This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025_March_23


March 23

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:People from the Øresund Region

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Not diffusing; not defining – just all "Category:People from" the area that is now branded as the Øresund Region, born at any time, without any specific connection to it. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 09:17, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of 20th-century trips

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, aligning with Category:Lists of diplomatic visits by heads of state. Almost, but not every, article in the nominated categories is about a head of state. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:42, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chronology by event

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content of the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:47, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Elliot Rodger copycat crimes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Strains of copycat crimes can be defining (and is for Christchurch and Columbine, which have had academic works written about them in connection with the attacks they inspired), but there has not been a single actually confirmed or generally agreed upon Isla Vista copycat attack and the phenomenon is not really discussed as it does not exist. The Toronto van attack tie to Isla Vista was later revealed to be a lie the perp of that made up for attention and the connection to the others is not established, and is not even mentioned in some of these articles - the perp merely being an incel who mentioned him does not a copycat make. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:50, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Creator was also indeffed as a sock (not that that alters the merits of the category). PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:54, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs third opinion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:11, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of days

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, largely overlapping scope. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:05, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1st house of Courtenay

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Merge per nom. Being honest, I can't tell the distinction between the "1st" and the "House of Courtenay". As far as I can tell, its the same family/relation. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:32, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:04, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People associated with GLAAD

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization by association. The people categorized here were not all associated with GLAAD in the same way -- some were presidents, some were staffers, some were board members -- so they cannot simply be generically categorized as "associated with". Bearcat (talk) 22:27, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on Marcocapelle's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, it's lio! | talk | work 06:48, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:55, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearcat: thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:55, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Dispute of scope: All staff, or only presidents?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:57, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bolshevik Regional Forces During The Russian Civil War

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Not sure what the purpose of this category is supposed to be. It appears to be a collection of republics, which are already well categorized, rather than a collection of "Regional Forces." Gjs238 (talk) 12:46, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The category was originally meant to be a collection of soviet republics and regional forces that existed during the russian civil and acted under the bolsheviks. The list came from a previous version of the russian civil war article which at present does not list these republics, instead listing them under "Regional forces". I tried adding the category as a link in the infobox but ran into problems. In my opinion, the category still has use since it directly links several soviet republics with little documentation outside of their own articles and esspecialy within the russian civil article which makes little mention of them. BreadStickGuy (talk) 13:14, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:56, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tyla (South African singer)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I was going to submit a speedy rename request per C2D before realizing that this was requested 5 months ago but was opposed at Category talk:Tyla (South African singer) on the grounds of "Tyla" being too ambiguous. I disagree with this assertion because the main subject article has no disambiguation required and there is nothing at the non-existent Tyla cat. Considering no formal CfD was initiated from that original discussion, I am starting this now. People looking for a cat about Tyla would not be surprised to find articles only for the singer mononymously known as Tyla. Trailblazer101 (talk) 03:36, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support, all I can say is that I was the one who requested the move/rename 5 months ago. dxneo (talk) 04:03, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, too ambiguous. After renaming, people may well add articles of other Tylas to this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:57, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Even when Tyla is the primary topic of the singer predominantly known by this name? That's why Tyla (disambiguation) exists, and if any other Tylas from that DAB warranted a cat of their own, I'm pretty sure they would be properly disambiguated. That logic just does not add up to me. Trailblazer101 (talk) 05:08, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • People can add articles to categories without looking at the main article or even without looking at the category page, so disambiguators are more important for categories than for articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:23, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      I suppose, but reasonably, most editors would likely do their due diligence first. We cannot and should not preemptively take inaction just because some people could assume something that is incorrect. I find it hard to believe someone would genuinely want to add this cat thinking it would be for anyone with this name. Trailblazer101 (talk) 22:54, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Saying people might add other articles to the cat is not really valid reason, because there are lots of Chris Browns and we do not see that happening. Beside, we will keep our eyes on the cat to make sure that simple mistake does not happen. dxneo (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:55, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

700s–990s in Japan

[edit]
more nominations
Nominator's rationale: Not useful for navigation through at least the end of the 10th century. WP:NARROW/WP:OCYEAR. Manually merge to the decade parent as many of the articles may already be in subcategories of that category. –Aidan721 (talk) 16:38, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom and WP:G4. After merging it will become much easier between the articles of the century. Within a decade there is very little to navigate to. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Disagree. Time categories like years are inherent categories. One knows what the categories will be even if they "don't exist" yet (i.e. don't have an included Wikipedia article--yet). The answer in this and other cases of (for now) "underpopulated" years is to always include a good breadcrumb template at the top of the category to easily move to the next or previous year in the category. This provides not only simpler navigation but more precise categorization. If people who insist on "ease of navigation" through years really want to help out, I suggest a discussion on assigning an all-purpose standardized year navigation template, expected in any year category, that would have a robust skip-gap feature that seamlessly incorporates years as they are added to the category. Doprendek (talk) 15:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is no such thing as inherent categories, we create categories upon need. In ancient periods there is no need for years, in even more ancient periods there is no need for decades. The chance that someone interested in the ancient history of Japan is only interested in the 950s is very close to zero. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:49, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia categories named after events

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete/merge, "events" is used here in the vague meaning of "anything that happened". The subcategories do not really have something in common. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:42, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wireless Power Consortium

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The two pages are already interlinked, the current category doesn't help navigation SMasonGarrison 02:24, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/Today&oldid=931652817"