One-page Jewish history categories
[edit]
- 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 each to all its parent categories , without prejudice to recreating any category if and when its content amounts to more than a single eponymous article.
Per WP:CAT, categories are about navigation, and none of the opposers offered any argument founded in category policy to counter the nominator's point. Arguments such as "if the categories are eliminated it downgrades the status of the subject matter
" fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of categories; "status" is no part of their purpose. And if anyone is inclined to count heads, see WP:NOTVOTE.--BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:49, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Barbadian history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Bolivian history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Dominican Republic history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Salvadoran history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Honduran history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Icelandic history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Indonesian history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Kyrgyzstani history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Malaysian history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Maltese history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Namibian history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Nicaraguan history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Paraguayan history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Philippine history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Qatari history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Tajikistani history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Emirati history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Vietnamese history to all parents
- Propose merging Category:Jewish Zambian history to all parents
- Nominator's rationale: Merge to all parents as WP:SOFTDELETE until further content is found. Single-page categories are not useful for navigation. Note that Category:Jewish history by country already contains 16 other "history of the Jews in [country]" pages directly. – Fayenatic London 23:06, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. 02:31, 18 December 2017 (UTC) IZAK (talk) 02:31, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose All To amplify IZAK, these categories are a small fraction of the almost fully diffused parent Category:Jewish history by country, which includes 120 subcategories. By including only those subcategories with one page -- and only one page as of today, as many have a strong likelihood for growth -- you have made navigation through the structure that much more difficult while gaining absolutely nothing. Alansohn (talk) 13:48, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Which category does not have an article specifically on that topic? Bus stop (talk) 23:33, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
-
-
- Sure. These categories upgrade the lead article each one hosts. If the categories are eliminated it downgrades the status of the subject matter. A category represents a higher status of importance than merely having an article on the topic. These categories are part of a bigger conceptual entity, meaning the efforts on WP to build a larger infrastructure of categories to house Jewish history by country articles. While some categories may contain less articles than others, they are all part of one organic and holistic set of categories encompassing more of countries' Jewish history. In other words conceptualizing is what I am saying is the key and one should therefore not nit pick that will just result in a "plucked chicken" effect if things go your way which I totally oppose. Thanks so much, IZAK (talk) 01:41, 4 January 2018 (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 computer programmers
[edit]
- 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). Marcocapelle (talk) 09:20, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: Non-WP:DEFINING intersection of occupation with sexual orientation or gender identity. The standard for when such a category should exist, per WP:CATEGRS, is not just a question of whether there are LGBT people in that occupation with articles to file in it, but of whether the intersection of occupation with LGBTness is a defining characteristic in its own right. The basis for such a category is whether LGBT people in that occupation can be shown and sourced to represent a distinct and notable and defining group in their own right (e.g. LGBT writers make LGBT literature) -- we do not create a category for every possible intersection of LGBTness with occupation, if LGBTness and occupation don't have a defining relationship with each other. Bearcat (talk) 22:29, 16 December 2017 (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 from Zhdeniievo
[edit]Category:Radical feminist books
[edit]Category:Primeval Beech Forests of the Carpathians and Other Regions of Europe (Germany)
[edit]
- 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/merge to Category:Primeval Beech Forests in Europe (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 09:30, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose deleting Category:Primeval Beech Forests of the Carpathians and Other Regions of Europe (Germany)
- Propose deleting Category:Primeval Beech Forests of the Carpathians and Other Regions of Europe (Romania) added December 23rd
- Nominator's rationale: There is only one article in this category. Even if this is work in progress and more are added, the title seems excessively long. AFAICS there is just one sister category and that only has three articles. Bermicourt (talk) 15:31, 16 December 2017 (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:Naval battles of the 1383–85 Crisis
[edit]
- 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/rename per nom. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:24, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose merging Category:Naval battles of the 1383–85 Crisis to Category:Battles of the 1383–85 Crisis
- Propose merging Category:Sieges of the 1383–85 Crisis to Category:Battles of the 1383–85 Crisis
- Propose renaming Category:Battles of the 1383–85 Crisis to Category:Battles of the 1383–85 Portuguese interregnum
- Nominator's rationale: upmerge per WP:SMALLCAT. (Note, other potential merge targets are already in covered in the articles.) And after the merge, rename the parent category in order to align with the article name 1383–1385 Portuguese interregnum. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:40, 16 December 2017 (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.
Template:Cultural-studies-stub
[edit]Category:Picture books by Wayne Anderson
[edit]
- 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: relisted, see here (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 09:52, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: Illustrator Wayne Anderson is not notable enough for a biography on Wikipedia, so why is there a category of books he worked on? Binksternet (talk) 04:14, 16 December 2017 (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:2017 in Manhattan
[edit]
- 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. Yes, I shouldn't close my own nomination, but it has been open for 25 days and seems clearcut, so I am closing it to clear the backlog of CfDs. If anyone objects, I will revert.
At time of closing, the cat contains only 1 article: Tilagor Eco Park. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:23, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: per WP:SHAREDNAME and WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. There is no article defining an "ecopark" as a concept, and its various uses indicate that it's just a greenwashing buzzword:
- Tilagor Eco Park, the only article in the categ, is a nature reserve in Bangladesh
- Ecopark (Vietnam) is an an urban township development on the outskirts of Hanoi
- EcoPark (Hong Kong) is similar to an industrial park exclusively for waste recycling and environmental engineering.
- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:49, 16 December 2017 (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:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections
[edit]
- 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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:26, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator's rationale: The scope of this category is unclear. Is it for people and groups who participated in Russian interference or who were seemingly complicit? If so, why isn't Vladimir Putin on the list? Alternately, is it for people who are or were investigating Russian interference, or who revealed stuff about it like Reality Winner? I think either the scope of this category should be properly defined to avoid WP:PERFCAT and WP:BLP issues, or it should be deleted altogether. FallingGravity 01:35, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not concerned about Putin's absence, I'm concerned about people's presence and the BLP implications. FallingGravity 05:04, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, but purge of biography articles. I agree that people articles shouldn't be in here, but there are enough standalone articles to justify a cat. Neutralitytalk 17:32, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- keep as is. This is obviously a topic of great interest to the polity of the United States. People in this category are not a problem: people get categorized based on the content of their articles, which contain the reference citations. Hmains (talk) 19:57, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Support properly defining scope – this category is too vague to be used for persons, especially living or recently dead. If this category is properly defined to exclude people per WP:COP, I don't see a reason to delete the category. If the category is applied to people, then yes, it should be rather deleted because people are not Russian interference. Politrukki (talk) 07:52, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep but purge biography articles, also per WP:PERFCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:53, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep There is little ambiguity, but any borderline cases should be addressed on a case-by-case basis without the need to eliminate the category in its entirety. Alansohn (talk) 20:09, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The subject, while current, deserves coherent organization which this helps and removal would hinder. Trackinfo (talk) 10:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Hmains. 100% agree with them on this. We can deal with any problems that arise on a case-by-case basis as mentioned elsewhere. ―Matthew J. Long -Talk-☖ 21:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Purge (and then delete if empty). The only articles in this category should be articles specifically about these events in 2016 - not articles about people, GCHQ etc. If you want to know what people, organisations are connected (in some way) to this then read the article. DexDor (talk)
- 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.