Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 April 23

< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion‎ | Log
< April 22 April 24 >

April 23

edit

Category:Degrassi High episodes

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: do not rename. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It wouldn't make sense for a category to be for only random episodes of a show so it would make the most sense for it to be a list of episodes for the show DemonStalker (talk) 18:59, 23 April 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:Films about mobile phones

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: no consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:47, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This can allow a relatively small category actually fit in the scope of telephones, landlines basic phones and smartphones ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 15:34, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Does this nominaton confuse the medium with the message? While the use of telephony may be prominent in the films, is telephony per se the essence of those films? Would it be more accurate to say that telephone instruments were merely instruments to convey messages about deeper truths? The film "French Connection" was notable for its car chases, but was it about chases or cars? Was it not just a cops & robbers thriller that was notable for its car chases? Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:17, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Laurel Lodged, That is redundant as none of The French Connection films are even included in the category and a larger scope can better fit possible or undiscovered films that have a majority of their films dedicated to phones that are not mobile such as landline or fixed phones. The point of these subject based movie categories is to fit films with other films that share related plot characteristics or details. And to prove my point better, there are films in this category currently that does not fit the current scope. Films such as Phone Booth (film) and One Missed Call (2003 film) are included when a Phone Booth is not a mobile phone by definition and One Missed Call is mainly about telephones which are not considered mobile phones.ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 14:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominators may not support their own nomination. Incidentally, a better title, if it is retained, is "films that share related plot characteristics involving telephone instruments". Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:22, 26 April 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.

All vice presidents 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: rename. This is in line with MOS:JOBTITLES, not contradictory to it. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:23, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming
Nominator's rationale: rename, conforms to MOS:JOBTITLES. Woko Sapien (talk) 14:38, 23 April 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.

Administrative territorial entities

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:20, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming
Nominator's rationale: rename, there is no need to insert "administrative" in the category name, and it is sometimes not very accurate either (e.g. in case of regions as a subcategory of Category:Administrative territorial entities by type). Marcocapelle (talk) 08:40, 23 April 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.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission (South Africa)

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 and merge as nominated. ✗plicit 08:41, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This scheme is a bit of a mess. The head category should not be a generic, pluralized category; it should be named after the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (South Africa). The abbreviation in the subcategories should be expanded. The category for testimony should make it clear that it is for individuals who testified at the commission. The category for committees should be merged to the one for people as there are no articles about TRC Committees and the category contains TRC people. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:53, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Comment' I'm not an insider of SA history, but am I wrong about supposing that there were indeed a lot of local/regional Truth and Reconciliation commissions? If so, the article name could be misleading b/c it's not one and only one (central national) TRC which constituted the process. Nevertheless the article (name) would be a sum up of those TRC meetings all over the land? --Just N. (talk) 20:17, 25 April 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.

Holocaust denying media

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: no consensus to use "denial", but rename with hyphen per WP:C2A. ✗plicit 08:41, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Why not just "Holocaust denial" media, rather than "Holocaust denying"? The parent category is ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Holocaust denial. (If kept, rename to Category:Holocaust-denying books and Category:Holocaust-denying websites.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:29, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, to me "Holocaust denial books" sounds like books on the subject of Holocaust denial, and Holocaust denial websites sounds like they are tracking incidents of Holocaust denial, or are otherwise about the subject. "Holocaust denying" at least makes it clear that the books and websites themselves are denying the holocaust. Similarly if someone was a "holocaust denial teacher" I'd think they were teaching the subject, whereas a "holocaust denying teacher" is a teacher who denies the holocaust. Spokoyni (talk) 20:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I haven't looked into any of this, but just from a word usage perspective, a "Holocaust denial book" sounds like a scholarly text which discusses the topic of Holocaust denial, while "Holocaust denying book" sounds like a book in which the author denies the Holocaust. So I guess the category name should probably be whichever of these the category's members reflect. - jc37 18:44, 9 May 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:Recipients of the Order of the White Eagle (Russia)

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: no consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Nondefining Russian Empire award. Checked several recipients at random and they all had it listed with other awards. Not at all defining for Otto von Bismarck, Nicholas II of Russia, Napoleon III, etc. (t · c) buidhe 02:44, 23 April 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:Recipients of the Order of St. Anna

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: no consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:46, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Nondefining Russian Empire award. All the bios that I randomly checked, Philip, Landgrave of Hesse-Homburg, Radko Dimitriev, Maksud Alikhanov, Duke Adolf Friedrich of Mecklenburg, Samuel Hoare, 1st Viscount Templewood, Jacques-Joachim Trotti, marquis de La Chétardie, Hovhannes Hakhverdyan, and others, either list it in an award section or not at all. (t · c) buidhe 02:05, 23 April 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:Anthony family (Susan B. Anthony)

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 May 29#Category:Anthony family (Susan B. Anthony)

Category:ABB Group

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: C2D. Kayplates (talk) 00:44, 23 April 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.

ACW Confederate units

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 to Category:Units and formations of the Confederate States Army from Alabama format. There wasn't a strong consensus for this, but it seems to be the best option based on the discussions. This discussion was closed in conjunction with this one. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:04, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming the following:
Nominator's rationale: Per this discussion. More inclusive noun; existing noun "regiments" doesn't adequately cover other unit types like battalions and batteries. I have proposed adding "Confederate" to one or two categories where Union units were raised in the location as well. BusterD (talk) 00:20, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Change proposed renaming Our naming conventions go "X of Y." See WP:MILMOS#CATNAME, "Intersection categories:" "The names of intersection categories generally follow the same conventions as above, with the name components of their parent categories placed in normal grammatical order (usually with period/war designations given after country/branch ones). This produces, for example, "Naval battles of the Early Modern period" (type and period) and "Airborne regiments of the United States Army in World War II" (type, size, branch, and war)."
Thus they should be, for example, Category:Units and formations of Florida in the American Civil War, which would have to have a Union subcategory, a Confederate subcategory, and within those, possibly depending on numbers of regiments, cavalry and infantry sub sub categories, plus categories if necessary for battalions, brigades, companies etc. Buckshot06 (talk) 15:54, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: (1) Need to make sure the state and Union/Confederate categories fit into each other properly, so you have state Union/Confederate subcats when the state sent soldiers to both sides that properly fit into the highest level Union & Confederate subcats. (2) Suggest Category:Units and formations of the Confederate States Army from Alabama, otherwise will not bring in formations - divisions, brigades, corps - as opposed to units and subunits, regiments, battalions and smaller, and, also, 'Military' is superfluous - all units, formations, etc of the CSA from Alabama and everywhere else were inherently military by their nature, covered by the word 'Army'. Buckshot06 (talk) 07:46, 26 April 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_April_23&oldid=1027077976"