Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 9

< January 8
January 10 >

January 9

Category:OL Reign

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:Seattle Reign FC. (non-admin closure) Seawolf35 T--C 00:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Team has been renamed. SounderBruce 23:51, 9 January 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.

Category:Kurdish men by occupation

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 to Category:Kurdish men. (non-admin closure) Seawolf35 T--C 00:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer, it is the only subcategory of the target and itself it is also not densely populated. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:49, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom Mason (talk) 02:15, 10 January 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.

Category:Transgender prostitutes

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 17#Category:Transgender prostitutes

Category:Search procedures

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 between Category:Search and rescue and Category:Search algorithms. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories Mason (talk) 00:37, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clarify, Where do search procedures which are not algorithms go? I think this is a miscategorisation. Are search algorithms search procedures? It seems more likely that all algorithms are procedures than that all procedures are algorithms.· · · Peter Southwood (talk): 10:07, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:41, 9 January 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.

Category:Underwater diving on Guam

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 17#Category:Underwater diving on Guam

Category:Underwater diving associations

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 to Category:Diving organizations. It can be renamed after merge. (non-admin closure) Seawolf35 T--C 00:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories Mason (talk) 01:15, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:37, 9 January 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.

Category:State land commissioners of the United States

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: soft rename. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:CATNAME and the spirit of WP:C2D
What defines these public officials is that they are in charge of administering state public lands, usually State Trust Lands. While the official titles within this category vary, the proposed name clearly conveys they are not in charge of zoning for private property. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:24, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pbsouthwood: When I found this category it only contained only the Texas subcategory which follows this naming convention but, after I populated it, I thought the proposed name was more representative of the typical official titles across the U.S. as well as better conveying the purpose with "public lands". I think most readers would think that "state" described the office of "commissioner" not that it was state owned land. No intent in scope is intended. (Your call if those reasons are substantive though.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 17:48, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, I have no objections if no-one else does, it seems a harmless or slightly helpful change. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:35, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:35, 9 January 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.

Category:Free and open-source software programmed in C

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 per nom.There is clear consensus to merge one way or another. A larger nomination on the whole tree should be discussed seperately. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:15, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge because parent category already contains only open-source software. Deltaspace42 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as nominated. I think it would be beneficial to have a discussion on renaming the entire tree, and I think it would be easiest to have that discussion if all categories are already named consistently. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:50, 17 January 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.

Category:Patent holders

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. (non-admin closure) Seawolf35 T--C 00:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping category. Inventor is defining, while holding a patent isn't really as much Mason (talk) 01:52, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, a patent merely confirms the inventorship, it is not a stand alone defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this is wrong. Patent trolls are patent holder but not inventors. In corporate contexts, the inventor is not the employer but the employee, however the entity holding the rights to the invention is the employer. Thus the filer would be the employer, who may sell the patent to a patent troll, which would then be the patent holder, and not any sort of inventor. Thus, persons, R&D sections of corporations, and patent trolls could be categorized. What is the purpose of "patent holder" categories, is it for patent holders, in which case it is not in any way similar to inventors. -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 01:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- possibly renamed. These are categories for individuals, not companies, but not every invention is patented. However, I think that Category:Patentees or Category:Patent grantees would be better. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:58, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge as nominated per nom and Marcocapelle. Marco raises good points about how holding a patent is not really distinct from being an inventor. He also rebuts the quasi-keep from 65.92.247.66. As for the above keep, the point about how not all inventions are patented would be relevant if we were merging in the other direction. However, if you can patent something you invented something, so nothing would be msicategorized by the proposed merge. HouseBlastertalk 22:44, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:08, 9 January 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.

Category:Chechen sportsmen

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) Seawolf35 T--C 00:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I think we should repurpose this category to not exclude women, as I don't think that the intersection between gender, ethnicity, and occupation is practularlly helpful here. Mason (talk) 22:52, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete / rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:59, 9 January 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.

Category:Proposed National parks in Wales

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 17#Category:Proposed National parks in Wales

Category:Recipients of the Four Freedoms Award

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) Seawolf35 T--C 00:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A non-defining characteristic. User:Namiba 18:51, 9 January 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.

Category:Wikipedians interested in Akhand Bharat

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) Seawolf35 T--C 00:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Inappropriate advocacy category masquerading as a "interested in" category. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:05, 9 January 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.

Samoa 1920–1961

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) Seawolf35 T--C 00:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Use full name matching others in Category:Western Samoa Trust Territory. – Fayenatic London 22:01, 9 January 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.

Western Samoa

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 17#Western Samoa

Category:English-language Amazon Prime Video original programming

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: dual merge to Category:English-language television shows and Category:Amazon Prime Video original programming. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:26, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Following suit of the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 13#Category:Netflix original programming by language, this one fell through the cracks. Propose unmerging to both parent categories. -2pou (talk) 04:30, 9 January 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.

Category:Travelers in Asia Minor

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 17#Category:Travelers in Asia Minor

Category:1st-century BC travelers

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 to Category:Ancient explorers. (non-admin closure) Seawolf35 T--C 00:06, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: None of the people in this category are actually travelers, they're all explorers. So I think that the category should be renamed/reparented. (most of the traveler categories are poorly populated). An alternative would be to merge to Category:Ancient explorers and Category:Medieval explorers. (or travelers, if that's to be kept). Mason (talk) 04:15, 9 January 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.

Category:United Nations diplomats

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 to Category:United Nations officials. (non-admin closure) Seawolf35 T--C 00:06, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping category Mason (talk) 03:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unless all officials are diplomats. Otherwise, it breaks the navigation from Category:Diplomats. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:47, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Justin, once again, you are off the mark. The articles in here are all in respective fooite diplomats categories so no navigation is broken. Please look at the articles so you can make an actual informed vote in the future. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:36, 9 January 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.

Category:Poet-diplomats

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) Seawolf35 T--C 00:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection Mason (talk) 03:10, 9 January 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.

Category:12th-century diplomats by nationality

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 to Category:12th-century diplomats. (non-admin closure) Seawolf35 T--C 00:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in here which is unhelpful for navigation Mason (talk) 03:02, 9 January 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.

Category:Noblemen

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: manual merge. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:52, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need a category for male nobility? This seems very much not in keeping with WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 01:38, 9 January 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.