Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 June 6



Category:The Radio People

 * 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. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:54, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting the radio people


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete. Category not needed to hold a single template. Tassedethe (talk) 22:13, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * DElete as unnecessary. The category seems top have a template but no main article.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:55, 20 June 2015 (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:Irish Political Publications

 * 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 to Category:Irish political magazines and Category:Political newspapers published in Ireland. I first closed this as a merge to magazines, but moving newspapers to Category:Newspapers published in Ireland and Category:Political newspapers; but on implementing this, I found that there were sufficient newspapers to justify a new category after all. – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:23, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Irish Political Publications to Category:Irish political newspapers
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. This category duplicates some of the existing Category:Irish political magazines. What remains are newspapers so this should be moved to Category:Irish political newspapers, as part of the Category:Political newspapers tree. Any articles that are both newspapers and magazines (e.g. Republican News) can be placed in both categories. Tassedethe (talk) 21:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment -- An alternative might be to restructure this so that the presetn category (which has two "magazine" parents) became a paretn for newspaper and magazine cats. However, I rather doubt that there are enough of them to merit doing that.  Perhaps we should merge with the magazines, purging out any that are genuine newspapers into Irish newspapers.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:00, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Support alternative to merge to Category:Irish political magazines per Peterkingiron. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:35, 27 June 2015 (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:Centuries in Frankfurt

 * 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 19:59, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Centuries in Frankfurt to Category:Centuries in Germany
 * Propose merging Category:19th century in Frankfurt to Category:19th century in Germany
 * Propose merging Category:20th century in Frankfurt to Category:20th century in Germany
 * Propose merging Category:21st century in Frankfurt to Category:21st century in Germany
 * Nominator's rationale: Suggest merging to the Germany categories. In line with WP:SMALLCAT, there's no justification to have a separate history structure for individual cities within Germany at the moment. There's only seven pages here in total. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:17, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment There are 17 other "Category: Centuries in X" where X is a location in past or present Germany that are in Category:Centuries in Germany. Are you suggesting the other 17 categories and their subcategories should also be deleted? Liz  Read! Talk! 22:01, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * There's more than 200 in Category:Centuries by city but right now I'm going with Frankfurt and trying to figure out where the consensus lies. It seems like consensus has lent itself towards countries but not many of the smaller subdivision (absent US states) excluding these cities from what I can tell which is a bit odd. For example, Category:Centuries in Australia doesn't have the Australian states but various cities instead. It's possible (although I'm not sure I agree with it) that people support merging Frankfurt's history into Category:Centuries in Hesse (Frankfurt being the only centuries being upmerged) which is similarly small but is done with buildings and structures, education, geography and others sporadically. Frankfurt only having eight pages in total is the question to me at the moment. The question is whether we should upmerge these based on this situation or populate it from the Germany/Hesse category downward. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:12, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep and populate see examples sch as, . Not every city will have a century series but capitals and large metropolis can. Tim! (talk) 07:05, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Also with some extra population there are now 31 articles Tim! (talk) 07:43, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge per WP:NARROWCAT. The larger amount of articles in these categories concerns contemporary history, that doesn't make it very suitable to keep as history categories. It might be different for a city like Cologne though. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:10, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep -- The 20th century category has enough content to keep. If not kept, it should be merged to the equivalent Hesse categories, but that would not be appropriate for earlier periods (if we had categories for them) as Frankfurt was not then part of Hesse.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:05, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * A substantial part of the 20th-century content has a mere trivial relationship with the city of Frankfurt (namely all sports championships). Marcocapelle (talk) 04:39, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Upmerge I am not convinced that we need to seperate these out so finely, and in some cases whether they belong in a specific category for Frankfurt is debatable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:41, 21 June 2015 (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:15th-century architecture in the United Kingdom

 * 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) 04:06, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:15th-century architecture in the United Kingdom to Category:Buildings and structures completed in the United Kingdom in the 15th century
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Rename since this is what this is really about. There are more categories so this is the first with the results here dictating how the others should be treated.  A delete may also be on the table for this.  If this structure is fully implemented we would add hundreds, maybe even thousands of categories as all existing building and structure articles will also need to be added to a by century by country category.  Then someone will argue we also need by decade and by year.  So that could result in 10s of thousands of new categories. Vegaswikian (talk) 17:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. We don't have architecture by country and century or buildings by country and century and I don't think it's necessary. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:19, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Based on Liz's comments, keep. I also see Category:American architectural styles. If the articles are in the wrong category, that's not for CFD but it seems like the category itself is fine. I have no idea if every building completed in the 15th-century in the UK would constitute 15th-century architecture. For example, does Sagrada Família, designed in the 1880s but not to be completed until the 2020s, reflect 19th-century architecture of 21st century? I'm sure that's something an independent WP:RS architecture historian should be the answer for so I do understand the need for distinct articles. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:21, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Actually, we do. See Category:19th-century architecture in the United States and Category:Architecture by period by country for example. Just because these categories exist doesn't mean that every single building that exists in the world has to be categorized in one. For example, Category:American Christians exists but not every single bio of an American who has Christian beliefs is assigned to this category. Liz  Read! Talk! 21:49, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep as currently named part of a series of . exists and there are further categories such as . Tim! (talk) 07:01, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * also the nominator should not be emptying these categories and trying to preempt discussion such as here  Tim! (talk) 07:16, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom. We have been recategorising buildings by century of completion.  Since the appropriate category does not seem to exist, we should rename it accordingly.  The buildings and structures trees have been found to duplicate the architecture trees and we have opted for the other.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:10, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Split into at least England, Scotland and Ireland categories. The United Kingdom is not created until the start of the 19th-century, so the term is anachronistic here, even more so because in the 15th-century Scotland was entirely seperate from England.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:42, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom without prejudice to reinstating the architecture category if there is (going to be) content about architecture itself (so apart from the buildings). Also support splitting UK per JPL. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:48, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: for those willing to rename, any objection to a more concise name Category:15th-century buildings and structures in the United Kingdom, following the sub-cat Category:15th-century Church of England church buildings which is part of a religious buildings category tree as linked by Tim above? That form might also avoid the need to split between England etc. – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:46, 10 July 2015 (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:Bizarre wikipedians

 * 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. MER-C 12:32, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting bizarre wikipedians


 * Nominator's rationale: Seems to be a joke category. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 11:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Acceptability under WP:JOKE.
 * Delete It seems from this edit that it is a category created by one editor to apply to another's talk page. I'd feel differently if it was a self-identification but it is a joke. The category doesn't have to continue to exist after the joke has been made. Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 21:53, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * No recourse to lawyers here but I'm sure that I too would fit into the category!  <sub style="color:green;">Fortuna  <sup style="color:red;">Imperatrix Mundi  19:20, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete It's not JOKE-applicable, since it is not empty, as it is being used to categorize users. WP:NOTSOCIAL Wikipedia is not a social site, we should not be categorizing users by social status when they are not helpful in collaboration on encyclopedic content. -- 70.51.202.183 (talk) 05:08, 10 June 2015 (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:Orthodox bishops of the Cossack Hetmanate
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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) 04:08, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting Category:Orthodox bishops of the Cossack Hetmanate
 * Nominator's rationale: delete, the category is virtually empty, because the one article that is in there is not about a bishop of the Cossack Hetmanate. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:54, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Child category of Category:Eastern Orthodox bishops by nationality. Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 21:55, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you agree or disagree with the rationale of this nomination? Marcocapelle (talk) 19:28, 9 June 2015 (UTC)


 * REname -- before becoming Metrpolitan of Kiev, he was "bishop of Mstsislau, Orsha, and Mahiliou", that ought to have a category, even if it is only a general one for bishops by country. In a period when bishops were not habitually expatriates, the category should by by country, not nationality.  Cossack Hetmanate was a polity existing 1647-1764, so that there ought to be a national category but I think it should be Category:Orthodox bishops in the Cossack Hetmanate (based on the location of see, not nationality.  There should be other people to populate it.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:19, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Rename to use the in, so it is clear we are not saying these bishops had a jurisdiction equivalent to the Hetmanate. No reason to assume there will not be other articles on bishops who would fit this description.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:46, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I support the principle of having bishops "of" rather than by nationality, but this bishop was clearly notable only as a bishop of Kiev, in which category he already has been classified. The creation of three new bishops categories is beyond the scope of CfD anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:55, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Just to be sure, your comments imply that you do agree on the disappearance of Category:Orthodox bishops of the Cossack Hetmanate, right? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I still prefer "in", but "of" would be better than nothing, but it implies that their see was the Hetmanate, which is probably incorrect (contrast Bishop of London etc). The test should be the nation of the see, not the nationality of the bishop: that will comnmonly be the same, though not in the case of missionary bishops.  Is "Orthodox" necessary, if there were no other denominations?  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:30, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * For sure Kiev - which was the main bishopric of this one bishop - did not belong to the Cossack Hetmanate polity, Kiev was officially Russian at the time of this bishop, while the Cossack rebellion merely started and had not outgrown into a polity. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment No I oppose deletion. This is a legitimate category, nation+bishop in nation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 07:23, 9 July 2015 (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:Metropolitans and Patriarchs of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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) 04:46, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Metropolitans and Patriarchs of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church to Category:Primates of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church
 * Nominator's rationale: rename for three reasons: per actual content, C2C to its parent Category:Ukrainian Orthodox primates and in order to disambiguate more clearly from its other parent Category:Bishops of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:47, 6 June 2015 (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.

Order of White Rose
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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.  MER-C 12:10, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting commanders grand cross with collar of the order of the white rose of finland
 * Propose deleting commanders grand cross of the order of the white rose of finland‎
 * Propose deleting commanders first class of the order of the white rose of finland
 * Propose deleting commanders of the order of the white rose of finland
 * Propose deleting knights first class of the order of the white rose of finland‎
 * Propose deleting knights of the order of the white rose of finland‎
 * Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OCAWARD etc. These are child categories of Category:Recipients of the Order of the White Rose of Finland that was nominated for deletion yesterday. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:55, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Listify per WP:OCAWARD. Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 22:04, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, no objection to listification - per nom. Neutralitytalk 22:44, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete more clutter creating award categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:47, 21 June 2015 (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.

A few more award categories
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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/delete as specified. MER-C 12:15, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the cross of the eagle first class


 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the cross of the eagle (parent of the previous)
 * Propose merging Category:Order of the Cross of the Eagle to its parent Category:Orders, decorations, and medals of Estonia (parent of the previous)
 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the estonian red cross, class i


 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the estonian red cross, class ii


 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the estonian red cross, class iii


 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the estonian red cross, class iv


 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the estonian red cross, class v


 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the estonian red cross (parent of the previous 5)
 * Propose deleting recipients of the memorial medal of the winter war (1939-1940)


 * Propose deleting recipients of the memorial medal of the winter war (1939-1940) (parent of the previous)
 * Propose deleting knights second class of the order of the red eagle


 * Propose deleting knights of the order of the red eagle (parent of the previous)
 * Propose merging Category:Order of the Red Eagle to Category:Orders, decorations, and medals of Prussia (parent of the previous)
 * Propose deleting grand commanders of the order of the redeemer
 * Propose deleting commanders of the order of the redeemer‎
 * Propose deleting gold crosses of the order of the redeemer‎
 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the redeemer (parent of the previous)
 * Propose merging Category:Order of the Redeemer to Category:Orders, decorations, and medals of Greece (parent of the previous)
 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the three stars, 1st class
 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the three stars, 2nd class
 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the three stars, 3rd class
 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the three stars, 4th class
 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the three stars, 5th class
 * Propose deleting recipients of the order of the three stars (parent of the previous 5)
 * Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OCAWARD, per WP:NONDEF, per previous discussion and many discussions before. Many of these categories mainly contain heads of state, high ranked military and politicians to whom the granting of the order is merely a gesture. There are also some awards granted to people with slightly more 'ordinary' professions (like Estonian Red Cross, Class III-V) but nevertheless the award remains wholly non-defining. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, no objection to listification - per nom. Neutralitytalk 22:44, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete more clutter creating award categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:47, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment the first category on this list has one entry, an article that is in 85 categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:49, 21 June 2015 (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.