Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 16



Anti- categories

 * 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. – Fayenatic  L ondon 18:01, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–Iraq War activists to Category:Anti-Iraq War activists
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–death penalty organisations to Category:Anti-death penalty organizations
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–death penalty activists to Category:Anti-death penalty activists
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–death penalty activists by nationality to  Category:Anti-death penalty activists by nationality
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–death penalty organizations in the United States to Category:Anti-death penalty organizations in the United States
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–nuclear weapons activists to Category:Anti-nuclear weapons activists
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–nuclear power movement to Category:Anti-nuclear power movement
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–Vietnam War groups to Category:Anti-Vietnam War groups
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–child pornography organizations to Category:Anti-child pornography organizations
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–nuclear power activists by nationality to Category:Anti-nuclear power activists by nationality
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–nuclear weapons activists by nationality to Category:Anti-nuclear weapons activists by nationality
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–World War II activists to Category:Anti-World War II activists
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–World War I activists to Category:Anti-World War I activists
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–Iraq War groups to Category:Anti-Iraq War groups
 * Propose renaming Category:Anti–nuclear weapons movement to Category:Anti-nuclear weapons movement
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. The previous rationale for moving contradicts the guidelines. Chicago Manual of Style, University of Sussex guideline, Dashhyphen.com, APS Online Style Manual, The Economist all specifically recommend using hyphen in the prefix anti-, not dash (with few exceptions like antihero). MOS:NDASH itself uses hyphen in anti-, not dash: anti-intellectual alliance, Post–September 11 anti-war movement. The majority of all other categories starting with anti- use hyphen. For Category:Anti-death penalty organizations - also per organization and Category:Organizations. Brandmeistertalk   21:09, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose. The only reason an endash is used here is because the "Anti-" applies to multiple words, not just the first one that follows the "anti-". They are anti "Iraq War", for instance, not anti-Iraq. The organizations are against child pornography, not anti-child. This issue is covered by WP:DASH, where it says that an endash should be used "Instead of a hyphen, when applying a prefix (but not a suffix) to a compound that includes a space". The examples given are "ex–prime minister Thatcher;  pre–World War II aircraft". Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:04, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd say that is a weird interpretation, bordering double standards. Per MOS:HYPHEN, hyphen indicates a conjunction and in all these examples hyphen is used as a conjunction - if you remove "anti-", the meaning will become the opposite. Also, being a prefix, anti- itself doesn't exist as a separate word and as such is in a conjunction. Dash counter-intuitively severes it from the word it should be attached to. Brandmeistertalk  08:04, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, that's what's in the MOS. Like hyphens, endashes do serve multiple purposes and aren't interpreted in the same way in all contexts. This use with prefixes to adjectival phrases does seem to be based on sources (my Chicago Manual of Style 15th ed. supports it). I could be open to having it changed in our MOS (I'm not a strong advocate of either approach), but until it does change, it should be applied as written. Good Ol’factory (talk) 09:16, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete the activists categories; no opinion on the others. Our article on activism makes it clear that basically everyone is an activist if they merely voice their opinions, whether for change or status quo. Minimal effort is required and most of the people categorized as "activists" are notable for something else. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:17, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Why not just reserve it for those who are defined by such activism, as all categories are meant to do per the guidelines? For someone like Lijon Eknilang, for instance, campaigning against nuclear weapons is defining and is pretty much the reason she is notable. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:36, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * These categories are mostly misapplied - Lists would be better, they could be sourced. Many people are "activists" at everything these days. Take a politician - every speech they give pro- or anti- something makes them an activist on that topic, of which there's no end. Moreover, we highly disfavor categories of by opinion, but "activists" is merely a by-opinion category in disguise, because merely speaking your mind makes you and "activist" and without speaking your mind, we have no reliable source you possess the opinion, hence their equivalence. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:29, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I agree they can be and are overused categories—I'm not questioning that—but your comment didn't really answer my question. Why don't we keep the categories and reserve it for those who are defined by such activism, since articles about such people do exist? In other words, set out a category definition, purge the articles that don't belong, and see where that leaves us. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete activist categories per reasoning of Carlossuarez46. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:15, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support typical Wikipedia style does not widely use endashes when hyphenating multiple phrases (though some periodicals do follow that format). Fine in prose, but I would keep out of category structure for consistency. Disagree with the above interpretation of anyone who declares an opinion is an activist – that is a misuse. SFB 20:47, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * So you're suggesting that we apply the WP MOS to prose, but not to category names? Why the distinction? The MOS has always applied to article names, which is also non-prose. On virtually all other issues, the MOS does apply to category names. So if it's consistency you're after, you're headed in the wrong direction. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:15, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose All These category structures should continue to exist using the appropriate hyphenation, which is what they have now per WP:MOS when used in this context. Alansohn (talk) 19:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:MOS. Beagel (talk) 08:12, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support all The hyphen permits easy page searches by the simple typing of anti(hyphen)text and, quite frankly, after anti, the hyphen looks better - at least to my eyes. I think these issues are more important than WP:MOS which says: Instead of a hyphen, when applying a prefix (but not a suffix) to a compound that includes a space.  ex–prime minister Thatcher;   pre–World War II aircraft.  The old debate on the use on hyphens ended with no consensus.  There are no hard and fast rules.  Gregkaye  ✍ ♪  17:45, 19 September 2014 (UTC)


 * 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:Folklore

 * 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, unanimously supported. – Fayenatic  L ondon 18:42, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose splitting Category:Folklore to Category:Folk culture and Category:Folklore
 * Nominator's rationale: Split to a new parent Category:Folk culture, which would hold folklore, including folk music and dance, and . There is a main article Folk culture, and a few other articles with that phrase in their title. I noticed that the categories are split along these lines at Commons:Category:Folk culture, and believe this would be an improvement here in English Wikipedia. At present we only have  to hold all folk culture, which is beyond its proper scope.  – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:37, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Editor2020 01:47, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support narrowing of Category:Folklore to principally oral traditions and creation of Category:Folk culture as the parent of the various folk traditions. Folk music and art, particularly, are not commonly referred to as "folklore". This split matches common usage. SFB 21:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * 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:Obsolete video game consoles

 * 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:11, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting obsolete video game consoles


 * Nominator's rationale: Vague. Obviously any older game console not in the current generation or last gen will not be sold in most stores. With the larger category, obsolete technology, other technology is not so rigidly made into "generations", so it makes more sense.  Konveyor   Belt  19:06, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete That is basically Category:Video game consoles by generation and the category's content will gradually repeat it more and more. Brandmeistertalk  08:46, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: the point of the categories seems to be to place 1st–5th gen consoles into Category:Obsolete technologies. That category is very incomplete, so the question is whether it would be helpful to expand it with these and other contents. – Fayenatic  L ondon 11:57, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * 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.

Years in pre-independent Indonesian sport

 * 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: Upmerge all. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:00, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:1914 in Indonesian sport to Category:1914 in the Dutch East Indies
 * Propose merging Category:1915 in Indonesian sport to Category:1915 in the Dutch East Indies
 * Propose merging Category:1919 in Indonesian sport to Category:1919 in the Dutch East Indies
 * Propose merging Category:1922 in Indonesian sport to Category:1922 in the Dutch East Indies
 * Propose merging Category:1930 in Indonesian sport to Category:1930 in the Dutch East Indies
 * Propose merging Category:1931 in Indonesian sport to Category:1931 in the Dutch East Indies
 * Propose merging Category:1932 in Indonesian sport to Category:1932 in the Dutch East Indies
 * Nominator's rationale: Merge. These 7 categories each contain just one page on a football championship. All seven pages are all categorised in Category:Football in Indonesia Category:Seasons in Indonesian football competitions as well as in "19xx in Asian football". If anyone thinks the categories should not be upmerged as WP:SMALLCAT, then instead of "keep" please choose Rename to "19xx in Dutch East Indies sport", following this recent precedent. – Fayenatic  L ondon 13:05, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Support -- the practice is to use the contemporary polity, but Do we not also need a "Sport in Dutch East Indies" parent? Peterkingiron (talk) 18:09, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support but per Peterkingiron's analysis. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:56, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, I have set that up now: Category:Sport in the Dutch East Indies. – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:36, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge per nom. Sport articles have been the source of some of the worst categorization along these lines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)


 * 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.