Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 June 16



Category:Telenovelas set in Brazil

 * 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) 23:01, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Telenovelas set in Brazil to Category:Television shows set in Brazil
 * Nominator's rationale: Merge.Obsolete and sharing same purpose as the other. NeoBatfreak (talk) 21:06, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:34, 18 June 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:Telenovelas by country of setting

 * 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) 23:00, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Telenovelas by country of setting to Category:Television shows by country of setting
 * Nominator's rationale: Merge. Obsolete and sharing same purpose as the other. NeoBatfreak (talk) 21:06, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:34, 18 June 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:Presidents of the United Nations Security Council

 * 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 08:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting presidents of the united nations security council


 * Nominator's rationale: This is an ex-officio position that rotates on a more or less monthly basis. As such, holding that position is not WP:DEFINING of the person who held it, who is usually a head of the delegation (and sometimes a head of state) and notable for many other reasons. There is a list, which is useful, but categorizing everyone who has sat in that chair just adds category clutter otherwise. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:11, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. I think that's probably correct. I created the category to parallel, then upon seeing how many individuals had actually held the post, decided to make the list, and I think the list is a better way to deal with this. Support deletion as cat creator. There is no need to merge to anything. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:52, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Support per nom & creator. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete -- With a frequently rotating chairmanship, almost every Permanent Representative of a state that is a Secutity Council member is likely to hold the office. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:13, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Support Not defining. RevelationDirect (talk) 04:13, 21 June 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:King Adora

 * 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) 22:58, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting king adora


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete. With only songs and albums subcategories, this is overcategorization per WP:OC. Linking from the main article serves the same purpose and the two subcats are interlinked. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 17:23, 16 June 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:Graphviz

 * 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) 22:58, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting graphviz


 * Nominator's rationale: Category with only one page in it. I don't see what other pages would go into it, either. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 13:59, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete. Technical. Codename Lisa (talk) 15:27, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 08:27, 21 June 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:Putta Surya Narasinga Rao

 * 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) 00:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting putta surya narasinga rao


 * Nominator's rationale: This appears to be a bio article, not a category. DexDor (talk) 06:06, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Not sure this is notable, hence no recommendation from me to move into article space. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:43, 23 June 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:People who knew William Shakespeare

 * 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) 22:57, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting people who knew william shakespeare


 * Nominator's rationale: This is the only "People who knew..." category and IMO it's not a road we should go down ("People who knew Adolf Hitler", "People who knew George Washington" ...). DexDor (talk) 06:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete as being non-defining.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 07:33, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * delete a dangerous road to go down. Next is 'people who once met Shakespeare' and 'people who stayed at hotels which used to be the home of XXX'. Clearly not defining.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 11:29, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * strong keep. The context is being ignored. It is a fundamental part of controversialist literature that 'Shakespeare' is not the Shakespeare of Stratford. There is extraordinary confusion, particularly on net sites, as to who knew or is said to have known, the real Shakespeare. This cat will certainly enable the wiki reader to rapidly access all wiki pages on Shakespeare's acquaintances, where the relevant details of the association are given. The Hitler/George Washington analogies are wrong, because you have there casts of several hundreds or (tens of) thousands, and their identity is not, as here, challenged. Nishidani (talk) 14:08, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No matter how important "acquaintances" is in the literature, we don't categorize people by who they knew or were friends with. Some of these people might usefully be categorized as "Members of Shakespeare's theater company" or something like that.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:28, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * 'We' I presume means customary practice. Wikipedia is more creative in designing and making choices by consensus, surely, than this. I gather there is a fear this will create a precedent. The point is, Shakespeare's identity is, rather uniquely because of the polemics surrounding him, substantially established or corroborated by the testimonies of those who knew him, - he has been targeted for historical exceptionalism in other words, since no one else's identity has to be certified by he testimony of friends.Nishidani (talk) 18:57, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * All good meal for an article on shakespeare's identity and how it was so-formed. I looked at the ledes of the articles in this category, most say something like "X was an actor who formed part of Shakespeare's first troupe" or "X was a writer and contemporary of Shakespeare" etc. None of them say "X is noted as one of the few people in the world who actually met Shakespeare". We should not use categories to write an article.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 19:13, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete – the category is even less tenable if this is Shakespeare as opposed to 'Shakespeare'. Oculi (talk) 16:45, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. This looks a lot like WP:OC. Kennethaw88 • talk 18:24, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep I created the cat to differentiate the entries from those in Category:People associated with Shakespeare, which contains mostly non-contemporaries of Shakespeare. If anybody could tell me what to rename it I would be happy to move it. Tom Reedy (talk) 19:38, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, even that category is problematic - X associated with Y is usually discouraged.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 19:53, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Rename to Category:People who are known to have met William Shakespeare, which provides a clear, unambiguous criterion. --NSH002 (talk) 20:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. Tom Reedy (talk) 20:22, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Tom... While you have technical permissions to be able to move categories, it is generally frowned upon, and especially when the category itself is under discussion. Can you revert and allow proper consensus to arise first?--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:28, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I reverted the move since it required the ability to delete the originally nominated category. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:54, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm away from home and don't check WP everyday or even my email. Tom Reedy (talk) 19:05, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Question Would this be acceptable as a list instead of a category? Tom Reedy (talk) 11:55, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think it has the potential to be a half-decent article, with prose and context.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 18:23, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest starting by embedding into the prose at Shakespeare_authorship_question.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 18:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete notability is neither inherited nor conferred by mere contact. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:37, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Despite Shakespear's importance, there must be too much uncertainty as to who should and should not be included. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:15, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete/Rename better suited for a list, if kept rename to Category:People who are known to have met William Shakespeare. RevelationDirect (talk) 04:16, 21 June 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:Ditto51's Continuum Project

 * 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) 22:56, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting ditto51's continuum project


 * Nominator's rationale: Inappropriate use of (article space) categorization. DexDor (talk) 05:58, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete -- WE do not allow users to categorise theri articles (or sandboxes). Peterkingiron (talk) 18:17, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom -- Lenticel ( talk ) 01:29, 20 June 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:Super-Secret BAD Cabal

 * 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) 22:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting super-secret bad cabal


 * Nominator's rationale: Doesn't appear to be a very useful category. If kept then a rename may be appropriate. DexDor (talk) 05:55, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * delete single member user category of no clear utility. Mangoe (talk) 15:17, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom -- Lenticel ( talk ) 01:30, 20 June 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:Keynote speaker

 * 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) 22:54, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting keynote speaker


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete This is not a defining feature and the membership criterion ("those famous for being a Keynote Speaker") is very imprecise, almost subjective. I think this will cause clutter without a clear benefit in terms of meaningful categorization and browsing. Pichpich (talk) 00:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * delete there are already two reasonable parents, which I added this to, that are much more defining - Tony Robbins for example I think is defined as a motivational speaker. That he is sometimes invited to give a keynote somewhere is not defining however. I"m not sure how many of these people could fit into public orators, which seems like a more specific job, but I added it as a parent anyway just in case - so selective up merge to parents, on a case by case basis, and delete.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 03:43, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * See keynote to see the difference between that and motivation speaker or orator.  D r e a m Focus  06:56, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * A number of the contents are described as "motivational speakers" in the lede. I think that works as a defining category - however someone who is known for giving keynotes? Not really.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:32, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Steve Jobs isn't a motivational speaker. Keynote is about the event of the company or institution.  Motivational speaker is about the person.   D r e a m Focus  20:52, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Looking through the rest, most of them seem to be motivational speakers. Looking at definition for "keynote speaker" elsewhere, I find it is different than that in the article keynote.  So never mind.   D r e a m Focus  21:01, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Ashunigam added things to this category.  All I did after looking into it, was create the actual page so it wasn't a red link, and instead linked to keynote speaker.  Reliable sources do note Steve Jobs was famous for being a keynote speaker. See this article about that at Forbes.  Search for the name of anyone on the list and the word "keynote".  This is a valid category.   D r e a m Focus  03:54, 16 June 2014 (UTC) Changed to don't care.   D r e a m Focus  21:01, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: Another one of these categories with no objective criteria. Very few people derive their primary (or any) notability from being a keynote speaker rather than a motivational one.  It's unclear how many keynote speeches you have to give to be in this category...does President Clinton qualify for all the post-presidency speechifying he does?  If so, the category is hopelessly broad, as anybody of a certain repute has delivered dozens of keynotes.  If not, who does?  Objectively putting people into this category is hampered by no definitive reference that tracks all keynotes.  The creator's keep rationale is unconvincing.  p  b  p  04:48, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The inclusion criteria is clear. "A category for those who reliable sources state are well known for being a Keynote Speaker." Did the Forbes article I linked to not prove Steve Jobs was famous for that?  His article even goes on about his famous Keynote speeches, which became known as Stevenotes.   D r e a m Focus  04:58, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You don't see the problem with that? Anybody who received coverage for giving a keynote speech could be in that category.  None of the people in the category, then or now, derive their notability primarily from being keynote speakers and not something else  p  b  p  17:05, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete not a notable concept. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:37, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete (1) it is too like a performance by performer category. (2) It is too vague to make a useful category: many conferneces have a keynote speaker.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:19, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as too vague.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 01:37, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per Peterkingiron's analysis. RevelationDirect (talk) 04:17, 21 June 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.