Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 29

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: make non-diffusing with no consensus about whether it should continue to exist. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose editing Category:Native American male artists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Category:Native American women artists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), and subcategories to be non-diffusing

Nominator's rationale: If there are concerns that lead to categories such as Category:American male artists (and similar articles) being treated as non-diffusing, it seems that the same rationale should apply to Native American artists. (Apologies if I've made any formatting errors. This is my first time submitting a cfd.) Katya (talk) 21:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Category:Native American artists, per WP:OCEGRS unless there is indication that male or female Native American artists are a notable topic in themselves. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and make non-diffusing. There seems to be solid academic interest in the intersection of gender and Native American artists, including exhibitions [1][2], academic books [3], and academic courses [4]. I looked for women artists. Also if not kept, the category should also be merged to American male artists and American women artists. Mason (talk) 21:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok, then I modify to: Merge Category:Native American male artists to Category:Native American artists, per WP:OCEGRS unless there is indication that male Native American artists are a notable topic in themselves. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  So, it looks like there's been discussion in the past about whether or not there should be any "male artist" categories, without any consensus. In the absence of consensus to delete them, I think we should keep the Native American male artist categories, in keeping with other paired male / female artist categories elsewhere on the site. (Or we could revisit the issue of whether "male artist" categories should exist at all, but I think that's a separate issue. Again, my original question was just whether or not the categories should be non-diffusing.) Katya (talk) 01:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:59, 29 April 2024 (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 result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 19:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Politicians of the Second Polish Republic to Category:Politicians from the Second Polish Republic

Nominator's rationale: The contents seem to be broader than political office-holders, so "from" will be more appropriate than "of". – Fayenatic London 11:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, while "from" is the default, I think "of" is also a good possibility for politicians and for military personnel. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Of" is fitting for political office-holders, but we don't use it for politicians generally. I suppose we have "opposition politicians of a country" who are appointed to a formal role, but e.g. revolutionaries or independence activists would be better described as "from" the country. – Fayenatic London 22:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support for consistency and given the broader scope of the category. Mason (talk) 21:11, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:59, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 05:37, 7 May 2024 (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 result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Political office-holders of the Korean Empire. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Politicians of the Korean Empire to Category:Political office-holders of the Korean Empire

Nominator's rationale: Either (A) purge and rename to political office-holders, removing some e.g. Syngman Rhee who was born under the Empire but IIUC not a politician until it ended; or (B) rename to Category:Politicians from the Korean Empire, because where there is no demonym we usually use "Politicians from" rather than "of" (see various siblings in Category:Politicians by former country). – Fayenatic London 15:16, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• At least purge, possibly rename, people who weren't a politician in the Korean Empire do not belong here. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:58, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I have added project banners on the talk page, which may draw more participation via Article Alerts. – Fayenatic London 09:48, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support purge and rename plan per provided reasoning. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 12:28, 4 May 2024 (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 result of the discussion was: rename and purge. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Politicians of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan to Category:Political office-holders of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan

Nominator's rationale: Purge and rename. E.g. Abdul Rashid Dostum was a military officer, not a politician, of the DRA (1978–1992). – Fayenatic London 15:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• At least purge, possibly rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:04, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I have added project banners on the talk page, which may draw more participation via Article Alerts. – Fayenatic London 09:49, 1 May 2024 (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 result of the discussion was: Merge. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:03, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Muppet performers to Category:Puppeteers
• Propose merging Category:Sesame Street Muppeteers to Category:Puppeteers
• Propose merging Category:Fraggle Rock performers to Category:Puppeteers

Nominator's rationale: Performers by performance is textbook WP:PERFCAT. --woodensuperman 09:58, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, obvious application of the guideline. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Merge. I think they should be merged not deleted per nom. Mason (talk) 21:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but modify, or merge into each other, as these categories are akin to Category:American film actors by studio.

These actors are on contract with either Jim Henson Company or Disney (Muppet), Sesame Workshop (Sesame Street), or Jim Henson Company (Fraggle Rock), to perform numerous roles. Such contracts are incredibly rare, and even the most finite involvement with any of them, the puppeteer remains known as having been part of the troupe, akin to a college alumni category.

For reference, they also each play endless characters, so it's not really by performance.

I'd propose Category:Muppet Studios performers, Category:Sesame Workshop performers, and Category:Jim Henson Company performers. -- Zanimum (talk) 23:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, especially the Muppet category. They're distinct performances/performers, categories and brands of puppeteering. Scanlan (talk) 01:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge as nominated per nom. It is certainly a textbook WP:PERFCAT. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 13:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. --Aldij (talk) 15:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Manual merge. Most were already in sub-cats by nationality; https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=28616290 found 12 omissions, which I have now categorised. (I moved Thad Mumford into voice actors rather than puppeteers.) Only List of Sesame Street puppeteers still needs to be moved up into the target, then the categories can simply be deleted. – Fayenatic London 08:22, 14 June 2024 (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 result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:18, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:IIHF World Women's U18 Championships to Category:IIHF Ice Hockey U18 Women's World Championship

Nominator's rationale: Official tournament name as used by the IIHF. Maiō T. (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Spitzmauskc (talk) 15:19, 30 April 2024 (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 result of the discussion was: split. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Lists of films by year to Category:Lists of films by year and country and Category:Lists of films by year and language

Nominator's rationale: A prior discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 11#Lists of films by country or language split the "Lists of YYYY films by country or language" subcategories that used to be here into separate country and language categories, which is fine and I'm not disputing that result -- but now this category is a bit confusing and difficult to navigate because of its mixture of two categories (one by country and one by language) per year for virtually every year after 1920. So now that by-country and by-language are two separate sets of categories rather than one set of merged ones, they should actually be split up to their own separate parent categories rather than being mixed together in the same place.
This can certainly still be kept as a parent for those two new subcategories, if desired, but the by-country and by-language categories really should be split up into separate subcategories. Bearcat (talk) 14:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Yes, the lists should be kept seperate I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 05:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any thoughts Ser Amantio di Nicolao? Bearcat's proposal makes sense I think. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 05:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Split per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:31, 30 April 2024 (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 result of the discussion was: keep. No prejudice against nominating Category:Remote viewers for merging. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:27, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Remote viewing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. This is a fringe subject with only three articles and one subcat, which has a tendentious name (there are no "remote viewers", remote viewing is nonsense). Creator is permabanned and globally locked. Guy (help! - typo?) 21:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• If not deleted, it may be renamed to Category:Stargate Project, that is what the category and subcategory are primarily about. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Even that is a small category with no hope of expansion (because it doesn't exist any more). Guy (help! - typo?) 15:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will note that WP:SMALLCAT is no longer a guideline.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 12:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but Upmerge Category:Remote viewers to Category:Remote viewing. Nom is correct that this is a fringe subject generally considered pseudoscience, and the claim that anyone is a "remote viewer" is WP:SUBJECTIVECAT / WP:OPINIONCAT. But I think we can put them in the parent category as people making claims about remote viewing, which at least has a main article. This seems to solve most issues pointed out by nom. I just think they nominated the wrong category to be changed. NLeeuw (talk) 15:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep both as sufficiently well populated to be useful for navigation. People are normally categorised separately from topics, see WP:SEPARATE, and the remote viewers category has parents which look useful for navigation. Hella Hammid is not mentioned in the main article, but states that "Hammid was also a remote viewer who worked with Russell Targ and Harold E. Puthoff at SRI International doing work for the CIA" with five citations, so the involvement of these persons is sufficiently well documented. – Fayenatic London 10:02, 1 May 2024 (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 result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:18, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Continental Singers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation to have a category that's with two pages (just the band and their discography) Mason (talk) 03:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. The discography page doesn't look like it would survive an AfD as is anyway, and I'm not even sure the main article would. Regardless, the main article doesn't look likely to spawn any more additional pages any time soon, so the category would be staying at two entries. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 04:02, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, the articles are already interlinked directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:07, 29 April 2024 (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 result of the discussion was: merge as nominated, and to Category:Housing in FOO as nominated. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 19:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Housing rights organizations in Nashville to Category:Housing rights organizations in the United States and Category:Organizations based in Nashville, Tennessee
• Additional orgs Mason (talk) 13:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Housing rights organizations in Seattle to Category:Housing rights organizations in the United States and Category:Organizations based in Seattle
• Propose merging Category:Housing rights organizations in Miami to Category:Housing rights organizations in the United States and Category:Organizations based in Miami
• Propose merging Category:Housing rights organizations in Missouri to Category:Housing rights organizations in the United States and Category:Organizations based in Missouri
• Propose merging Category:Housing rights organizations in Philadelphia to Category:Housing rights organizations in the United States and Category:Organizations based in Philadelphia

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one page in this category, which is uphelpful for navigation. If not merged, it should be renamed to Housing rights organizations based in Nashville, Tennessee Mason (talk) 03:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:08, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Dual merge for now without prejudice per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 06:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Marcocapelle and Nederlandse Leeuw:I've added 4 more orgs that only have a single page in them. Mason (talk) 13:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Seems fine. Confirming my !vote. NLeeuw (talk) 14:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 'merge also to Category:Housing in Nashville, Tennessee and so on.--User:Namiba 15:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Smasongarrison, Marcocapelle, and Nederlandse Leeuw: are you guys okay with the triple merge as suggested by Namiba? HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:24, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @HouseBlaster: yes. Marcocapelle (talk) 00:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Yep Mason (talk) 00:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Sure! NLeeuw (talk) 05:35, 7 May 2024 (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 result of the discussion was: keep. Anyone interested can create subcategories. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:24, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Television in Cleveland to Category:Original programming by local channels in Cleveland
• Propose renaming Category:Television in Detroit to Category:Original programming by local channels in Detroit
• Propose renaming Category:Television in Minnesota to Category:Original programming by local channels in Minnesota
• Propose renaming Category:Television in Philadelphia to Category:Original programming by local channels in Philadelphia
• Propose renaming Category:Television in St. Louis to Category:Original programming by local channels in St. Louis
• Propose renaming Category:Television in the San Francisco Bay Area to Category:Original programming by local channels in the San Francisco Bay Area

Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 18#Category:Chicago television shows. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 03:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Not all content is about original programming. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:10, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Most of these categories have scopes that go beyond television programming. No objection to creating subcategories for programming, where appropriate. - Eureka Lott 05:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose renaming, but support creation of subcategories. The proposed categories could legitimately be created as subcategories of the "Television in" categories where there are enough programs to support one, but just doing a straight rename of the "Television in" categories isn't appropriate as they don't only contain original local programs — they also have subcategories for (and/or directly contain) television stations, and people, and television programs that were national Hollywood productions set or filmed in that place but not "original" local-channel programming per se. I'll grant that they're misfiled as subcategories of a "local television programming" tree, so that should be moved to subcategories if they get created, but these categories don't only contain original local programming. Bearcat (talk) 14:53, 29 April 2024 (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.