< May 13 May 15 >

May 14

Category:Chess films

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:25, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We don't need two categories. This one was created days ago, likely to match the preferred naming structure of siblings in Category:Sports films by sport, which is "Foo films." I prefer the target category, which has been around since 2005 and matches the X of Y structure of other parent categories. Whatever we decide, we don't need two. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:26, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quantification is obviously impossible, but in this case the films in the category really are about chess, it's not as if there is one accidental chess game in the film. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:24, 23 May 2016 (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:National Baseball Hall of Fame inductees

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:27, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OC#AWARD. In another of today's CFDs, it is argued that that category should not be deleted because this one exists. That is a false argument. This is clearly an award category, which WP does not allow except in the most notable cases (such as Nobel Prizes and some national awards). I am therefore nominating this. The normal outcome for an award category is "listify and delete": lists do the job much better than categories because the winners can be placed in date order and some details of the citation can be given. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:37, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(I am flattered by the solidarity with my earlier nomination that this entry represents though. Thanks! RevelationDirect (talk) 20:40, 14 May 2016 (UTC))[reply]
  • I've also posted a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball, in an effort to get more eyes on this. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:16, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also have to say that nominating this category for as a way advancing the argument to delete Category:Canadian Olympic Hall of Fame inductees (below) is just ridiculous and shows no comprehension of what the Cooperstown Baseball Hall of Fame means to the lives and legacy of pro ballplayers. It's a false equivalency. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:33, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Those facts ("highest award", "fairly exclusive" etc) are good reasons why the award should be mentioned in the articles about recipients (and that there should be a list of recipients). But this discussion is about how we categorize players. DexDor (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2016 (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:Personal Life

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: speedily deleted by user:J Milburn under WP:G2. As it has been repeatedly recreated, I will also WP:SALT it. – Fayenatic London 21:59, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category page seems to be an attempt to create an article; it duplicates MADHU SUDHANA REDDY KASI REDDY 331dot (talk) 12:56, 14 May 2016 (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:Transmetals

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. For now there is no need to merge, all articles are already in a subcat of Category:Transformers characters and having the latter merged requires a new nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:33, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category mostly gutted by merges and deletions (including the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transmetals and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transmetal 2), meaning that it's now underpopulated. This seems to be an example of over-categorisation. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:13, 14 May 2016 (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:Persecution by early Christians

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:30, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: align with main article Persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire. Nomination was opposed when nominated for speedy rename. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:56, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy rename discussion
  • Oppose the proposed name. Agree that it should change but not to this. "Persecution" is too POV. Wait until the main article has been through a rename proposal that I will initiate. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:44, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given the failure of my proposal to win support, I now withdraw my objection. It's still wrong IMHO. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:50, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly oppose. There was a persecution of pagans by Early Christians that was not only restricted to the Late Roman Empire. Further, there's obviously a systematic attempt to make all the "persecutions by Christians" articles and categories disappear, as in the very strange renaming and rewriting of the now so-called History of Christian thought on persecution and tolerance (!). Even further, there's already an specific article about the Persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire which fits within this category, but this category is not limited to that. --MaeseLeon (talk) 04:57, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It sounds like these are two very different topics. I wouldn't mind having a category like Category:Mutual persecution of Christians in late antique Christianity provided that an article about the topic comes first and provided we have a substantial number of related articles, e.g. about Christian people who have been persecuted this way. For the time being, the category that we are discussing mainly contains articles about persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:59, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say that the Nestorians were persecuting the Monophysites. I said that both were persecuted by other Christians. The question is whether there ought to be a category for persecutions by early Christians. Since early Christians didn't only persecute pagans, eliminating a category that would include all religious persecutions by early Christians would seem to be a mistake. The fact that other persecutions may not have been added to the category yet doesn't affect the usefulness of the category; it merely argues that more attention should be given to included topics. If you want to redefine the scope of the category as proposed, are you saying that there shouldn't be a category for all types of religious persecution by early Christians, irrespective of who they were persecuting or whether they occurred before or after 476? P Aculeius (talk) 21:41, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the point in doing that, if the category as it exists is sufficiently broad for it. It would make more sense to simply create the proposed new category, instead of renaming this one and narrowing its scope. I don't think it matters if there's a lot of overlap in the beginning, since each category can evolve as new articles are added. P Aculeius (talk) 03:17, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • We can't keep the nominated category anyway because the title is wrong. Early Christians didn't persecute, they were persecuted. Persecution by Christians didn't start any earlier than in the course of the 4th century, i.e. in the late Roman Empire, as the article title says. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:06, 21 May 2016 (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:Macroeconomics and monetary economics

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:31, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose merging Category:Macroeconomics and monetary economics to Category:Economics by specialty
  • Propose merging Category:Health, education, and welfare economics to Category:Economics by specialty
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, these are two categories having 2 + 3 subcategories without any room for expansion. Note that the category names are derived from the JEL classification codes, but there is no policy that Wikipedia categories have to follow one particular classification scheme. Also, there is no article Macroeconomics and monetary economics or Health, education, and welfare economics. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 14 May 2016 (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:Canadian Olympic Hall of Fame inductees

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:33, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting Category:Canadian Olympic Hall of Fame
    • Propose Deleting Category:Canadian Olympic Hall of Fame inductees
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OVERLAPCAT (subcat) and WP:SMALLCAT (parent)
The Canadian Olympic Hall of Fame recognizes Olympic competitors for Canada but we already categorize those same people in Category:Olympic competitors for Canada so the inductees category is completely redundant. (The parent category contains nothing but the main article with little room for growth.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:00, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Notified Walor as the parent category creator and this discussion has been included in WikiProject Olympics. – RevelationDirect (talk) 03:00, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Valid point about teams and coaches not being competitors; I should have said there is no one defined by being a Canadian Olympian that isn't already somewhere in the Category:Canada at the Olympics tree. I don't doubt that being a Canadian Olympian is defining, just whether hundreds of people receiving this award years after the fact is. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:56, 14 May 2016 (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:Energy Globe Award winners

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:40, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting Category:Energy Globe Award winners
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCAWARD (WP:NONDEFINING)
The Energy Globe Awards are given to multiple people, cities and organizations every year in multiple countries as well as at the international level. The articles in the category do mention the award in passing but it seems non-defining. I already listed the contents of the category here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:57, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Notified Gralo as the category creator and this discussion has been included in WikiProject Energy. – RevelationDirect (talk) 02:57, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per OCAWARD. Category not needed with a list of winners in the main award article. -- GreenC 04:32, 14 May 2016 (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.