< June 2 June 4 >

June 3

Category:Teen superhero television shows

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) 00:49, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Most if not all are television series, so this should be titled as such. Anything not can be moved to Category:Superhero television shows. Gonnym (talk) 21:10, 3 June 2021 (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:Natural cultivars

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) 04:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per a discussion at WP:PLANTS, this category makes no sense. Abductive (reasoning) 18:17, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: the creator seems to be no longer active on Wikipedia, so his intent can't be interrogated. At best the category is misnamed, but in the absence of knowledge of intent it's not possible to rename the category and clean up membership. Lavateraguy (talk) 10:52, 4 June 2021 (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:Superhero television series

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The result of the discussion was: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There really is no real distinction between the categories here and even if there was, as evident by the pages in the categories, no one either knows what it is, or cares about it. Gonnym (talk) 18:16, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Wasn't "televison shows" supposed to replace "television programs"? Wasn't that a discussion had about a year ago? So Television shows should be a parent category to TV specials and movies as well.★Trekker (talk) 18:27, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any that fit that criteria? Currently everything is thrown in the parent category. Gonnym (talk) 19:55, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Justice League of America, Legends of the Superheroes, Wonder Woman, DC Super Hero Girls: Super Hero High, Ultraman vs. Kamen Rider, Generation X, Dr. Strange, Ben 10 Versus the Universe: The Movie, Ben 10: Destroy All Aliens, The Trial of the Incredible Hulk, The Incredible Hulk Returns and Firebreather do.★Trekker (talk) 20:36, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Then withdraw nomination. It just needs a massive cleanup. Gonnym (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2021 (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:LGBT gangsters

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) 04:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete per WP:EGRS / WP:CATLGBT. User:Namiba 15:59, 3 June 2021 (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:Sexual misconduct allegations involving Buddhist leaders

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) 04:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Sexual misconduct allegations involving Buddhist leaders (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Attempt to bypass the recent decision to delete a similar category [1]. Decision was that only convicted persons should be so categorized and this applies to none of the categorized persons. Skyerise (talk) 15:48, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is when you quote yourself at length when that is not necessary to convey the facts. It is "not COI" only if it is "not excessive" and does "not place undue emphasis on yourself." Surely there was a second source you could have cited and the length of the addition was excessive for its purpose. Still is, even after the removal of the long blockquote.
One might also wonder whether the recreation of a category that had been definitively deleted with clear reasons had something to do with the fact that your work was quoted at length (by yourself) in one of the articles in that category. Skyerise (talk) 11:59, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
First, the block quote in Surya Das was from his press release responding to the allegations. I quoted it in the interest of fairness — I was trying to avoid bias.
Second, as Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Reporting to the conflict of interest noticeboard says, "During the COIN discussion, avoid making disparaging remarks about the user in question, their motives or the subject of the article(s)" (emphasis added). This obviously isn't Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard, but I think it would be best if we followed the same guidelines here.
Finally, I'm new to editing on Wikipedia, and I'm happy to be wrong about how things work here. So I will gladly withdraw my objections to deleting this category. I am also going to stop contributing to Wikipedia. I'm not interested in discussions where people immediately assume the worst of my motives, and I don't want to risk even the appearance of skirting good professional ethics. Joshua Eaton (talk) 17:10, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly why the policy exists, not only to protect Wikipedia, but to protect you. Using the loopholes can be problematic for the editor so doing. Skyerise (talk) 18:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • In all fairness, User:Joshua Eaton's earlier keep vote has been stricken just now not by themselves but by User:Skyerise. While the striking is line with Joshua Eaton's latest comment it is not very appropriate to edit someone else's contribution to a discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:07, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. Skyerise (talk) 22:10, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Day care sexual abuse allegations has a similar name but consists mostly non-biography articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:39, 5 June 2021 (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:Books with cover art by Michael Koelsch

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. As of this close, Category:Michael Koelsch, Category:Book covers by Michael Koelsch, and Category:Film posters by Michael Koelsch still exist. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-notable category - article on Michael Koelsch was recently deleted (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Koelsch) and this category exists simply to promote this non-notable illustrator. Ganesha811 (talk) 15:46, 3 June 2021 (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:Record labels owned by women

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) 00:45, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEGRS. This past discussion is another example where the relationship between the female gender and a business activity was not deemed DEFINING. Place Clichy (talk) 15:27, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • For clarification: WP:DEFINING is not about whether people see it as defining but whether it is defining in sources. It is a small difference, but needed to avoid subjectivity. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:37, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was talking about objectivity as being covered by sources. If sources objectively discuss record label ownership by gender then it is objectively defining. So far I haven't seen any evidence about that, so this looks like a WP:OR intersection. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:20, 3 June 2021 (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:Western writers about Russia

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, with the second one going to Category:Writers about the Soviet Union. – Fayenatic London 12:32, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Renaming Category:Western writers about Soviet Russia to Category:Writers about Soviet Russia
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:CATNAME and the spirit of WP:C2C
The entire Category:Writers by geographical subject area category tree has a bit of ambiguity about whether it it includes outsiders writing about an area or locals clearly setting their works in their own area. Only these two subcats add "Western" which adds it's own ambiguity: I don't think it means "Western Europe" since there are many American authors and I don't think it means "Western Civilization" since that would include Russian authors. There might be an alternative rename here based on List of foreign observers of Russia but this nomination favors the most common format in this tree which will expand the scope. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:41, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking at the contents, the title is wrong - a common and erroneous conflation of "Russia" with "Soviet Union". The second one should be Category:Western writers about the Soviet Union, or Category:Writers about the Soviet Union. Category:Writers about the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic could be a subcat of this if desired, I suppose for instances where people have written about the RSFSR as distinct from the other SSRs. Spokoyni (talk) 06:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • We currently have Soviet Russia (disambiguation), which suggests that using "Soviet Russia" to refer to the Soviet Union is wrong. I'm not sure about that, it just seems like an imprecise, but not necessarily "wrong", way of referring to the USSR. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:26, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:18, 3 June 2021 (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:People associated with the Boy Scouts of America

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; subcategories moved to Category:Boy Scouts of America. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:09, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Category:People associated with the Boy Scouts of America
Robert Tait McKenzie also did sculptures for the Red Cross, Vicksburg Military Park, and the University of Pennsylvania. Categorizing him by every commission would be WP:PERFCAT. - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:23, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Very good point. If McKenzie's only connection to scouting was doing a sculture for the scouts he clearly does not belong.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:53, 8 June 2021 (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:Songs about nightingales

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) 04:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: One entry, unlikely to be expanded, and the song really isn't about nightingales, it's a love song, "I may be right, I may be wrong/But I'm perfectly willing to swear/That when you turn'd and smiled at me/A Nightingale Sang In Berkley Square Richhoncho (talk) 10:14, 3 June 2021 (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:Bisexual rappers

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) 04:06, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per longstanding consensus, we do not want every "LGBT" category to be comprehensively chopped up into separate "lesbian", "gay", "bisexual" and "transgender" subcategories -- this is permitted only when a single common "LGBT" category has become extremely large and needs the subcategories for size control purposes, and not as an automatic feature of every LGBT category that exists. But the parent category isn't large enough to need diffusion, and upmerging the contents of these three categories won't make it all that much larger as most of the articles were left in the parent category alongside these, so subcategorizing it isn't necessary. Bearcat (talk) 04:55, 3 June 2021 (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:Album awards

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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:00, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Indiscriminate and effectively unmaintainable category for a characteristic that isn't a particularly useful point of categorization. As constituted, this sweeps across every category presented by 11 different awards programs that is presented for albums in any genre, all the way through pop, R&B, hip hop, jazz, world music, new age, indigenous music, country, gospel, classical, norteno, salsa, merengue, bluegrass, musical theatre and polka -- but that's not a useful grouping, because nobody needs a category that places the Billboard Latin Music Award for Reggaeton Album of the Year directly alongside the Juno Award for Children's Album of the Year and the Grammy Award for Best Classical Crossover Album just because they're presented for whole albums rather than individual songs. Categories by genre would be useful; this is not. Bearcat (talk) 02:32, 3 June 2021 (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.

Brooklyn Bulldogs football

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) 02:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Brooklyn College's fight name was "Kingsmen" when the football team was disbanded after the 1990 season. "Bulldogs" was not adopted until 2010. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jweiss11 (talk • contribs)
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:Jain phrases

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 after ensuring all member pages are in other Jain categories. – Fayenatic London 18:25, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Jain phrases to Category:Jain terminology
  • Propose merging Category:Jain terms to Category:Jain terminology
Nominator's rationale: I suggest merging these two categories into a new Category:Jain terminology, which will match the standard format of subcategories within Category:Religious terminology. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:51, 3 June 2021 (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.
More