Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 April 24



Category:Albums produced by Lee Thomas Miller

 * 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) 11:30, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting albums produced by lee thomas miller


 * Nominator's rationale: Miller only produced half of Brand New Girlfriend, and his only other production credits are non-notable singles by Steve Holy and Amy Dalley which were never put on an album. Precedent is that the producer should have worked on at least a couple full albums to have their own category. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:49, 24 April 2016 (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:Television series by Universal Studios

 * 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) 03:17, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting television series by universal studios


 * Nominator's rationale: Thares already a Universal TV category called Category:Television series by Universal Television, Use only one Uni TV category. 47.54.189.22 (talk) 19:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: have you already checked that the members of the nominated category are in that other one? If not, your nomination should be "merge", not "delete". – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:13, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Reply: All of the Uni Studios shows are already in the Uni TV category, so this is why it is being delated — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.54.189.22 (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - the nominator has been prematurely removing pages from Category:Television series by Universal Studios prior to the conclusion of this proposal. I recommend suspending discussion until the status quo can be restored. Ibadibam (talk) 18:14, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I have restored the pages to the category, and checked in with the nominator. Everything's copacetic. Ibadibam (talk) 18:57, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If anything, Reverse merge. TV by Uni TV is inappropriate duplication.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:13, 1 May 2016 (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:Entertainers who have performed in yellowface

 * 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) 00:45, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting entertainers who have performed in yellowface


 * Nominator's rationale: Obviously this is a sensitive subject, and one I don't know enough about. Category was created by, who joined a few weeks ago. It's possible that there is a real category to be created in this area, there's an extensive hierarchy at for instance, including . But yellowface is far less of a thing, in fact it's a redirect to Portrayal of East Asians in Hollywood which in turn is up for merger with Portrayal of Asians in American theater. Tleeditor has slapped the category on a bunch of fairly well-known actors, with little evidence to support it although I haven't looked in detail. I leave this one to the floor.... Le Deluge (talk) 20:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete for Different Reasons While Mickey Rooney's performance in Breakfast at Tiffany's was disgusting, it was a one-off acting performance not a career specialty making this a WP:PERFCAT issue. (The closest I can think of is Boris Karloff's five Detective Wong movies but he wasn't typecast afterward.) In contrast, blackface minstrel performing was often a niche career. No objection to listifying in the article space, although I suspect playing "redface" in Western movies was so common that a list would be unwieldy. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Just for clarity, I was proposing it for deletion as a non-defining WP:PERFCAT, but with the caveat that there could be some performers for whom it was defining in the same way as blackface. I just don't know enough about it - my guess would be that there may well be a handful of performers for whom it was defining, but there's so much potential for trivial mentions that it's a bad idea anyway.Le Deluge (talk) 10:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * You only have to google to find lots of incidents of this, especially heinous is 21st century incidences - Cloud Atlas (Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess), Emma Stone in Aloha, Luise Miller won an Oscar in yellowface in The Good Earth, as did the white woman who played Billy Kwan in The Year of Living Dangerously. Katherine Hepburn has done yellowface (Bad Seed), Marlon Brando has done it, Christopher Lee, Paul Muni, the list goes on and on.  Hollywood has notoriously been eager to display Asian culture without showing Asian people.  This is a very big issue if you are at all ...not white.  To dismiss its significance makes Wikipedia a "white safe" place but uninclusive of diverse people.  Recently the Calvin Trillian (sp?) poem in The New Yorker has given more credence to the "we want to experience Asian culture but not see your people" current trend.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.35.31.2 (talk) 00:36, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You're missing the point. There's no attempt by "Wikipedia" to "ignore" this area, that's why there's an article about Portrayal of East Asians in Hollywood - the argument is that there's lots of precedent for not categorising performers by performance per WP:PERFCAT.Le Deluge (talk) 10:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete performer by performance variant; next we'll have actors who swished offending LGBT sensibilities of today, actors who spoke with an accent not their own (cultural appropriation), actors who played disabled people (why didn't hollywood cast an appropriate actor), Jewish actors who played Christians, Christian actors who played Jews, Protestant actors who played Catholics, anyone not of the Roman Pagan faith who played an ancient Roman, etc. trivialities Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:55, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Though not a typical case, WP:PERFCAT clearly applies. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:10, 1 May 2016 (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:Larry Wade Carrell

 * 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) 05:10, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting larry wade carrell


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete eponymous category per WP:OCEPON. Not enough articles to justify creation, only the main article Larry Wade Carrell and a film in which he features The Ghosts of Garip. . Tassedethe (talk) 19:32, 24 April 2016 (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.

Categiory:Lutheran bishops in Sweden by diocese

 * 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: speedily deleted WP:CSD. – Fayenatic  L ondon 15:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting categiory


 * Nominator's rationale: The category name contains an implausible typo ("Categiory"). It redirects to the correctly spelled category but this is unnecessary as any incoming links to the misspelled category are extremely unlikely. 97198 (talk) 09:57, 24 April 2016 (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:Notable deaths of musicians

 * 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) 00:46, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting notable deaths of musicians


 * Nominator's rationale: WP:Overcategorization; we already have Category:Deaths by person, which is enough by itself. "Notable deaths" is also a rather subjective description to begin with. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Don't encourage more deletion-worthy WP:NOTNEWS-violating articles. Softlavender (talk)


 * Delete and please stop this recent 'notable deaths' madness. Otherwise, we will soon be running out of trout to use for slapping.  -- WV ● ✉ ✓  06:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - unnecessary. (And I find that last comment rather fishy.  Ha.) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 09:13, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. We already have the appropriate category in place for this type of article, and do not need an extra layer of subcats for the deceased person's former occupation in life — and categories, as a rule, should never contain the word "notable" in their names. The standalone notability of the death incident is an inherent precondition for this kind of article to even exist at all, so "notable" does not have to be explicitly restated by the article's categories. Bearcat (talk) 14:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Rename -- Category:Deaths of musicians. All the articles are one the death of a specific musician.  If the circumstances of their death were not notable enough to require an article, we would not have one.  However the category needs to be limited to articles about the death, not merely general bio-articles that mention the death.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Support this excellent suggestion of rename Such category would allow one to read about different articles and compare and learn. An early reaction to support delete can be knee jerk but Peterkingiron's idea is outstanding! Whiskeymouth (talk) 18:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * most certainly does not need or want to be subcatted by the deceased subjects' former occupations in life. Bearcat (talk) 18:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Why not? I can well imagine subcats like Category:Deaths of heads of state and Category:Deaths of politicians (those better than musicians, actually). Marcocapelle (talk) 08:55, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Upmerge if Deleted I placed the nominated category under Category:Deaths by person. If deleted, this category should be upmerged there. RevelationDirect (talk) 19:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - serious overcategorization. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Support rename to Category:Deaths of musicians. The problem (if it's a problem at all) is the existence of separate "Death of ..." articles for these musicians. But since these articles exist, they should be categorized accordingly. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Do we really need a category stating this? I think that "Deaths by person" or other categories related to death causes should suffice. I agree that this seems simply over-categorizing.-- GD uwen    Tell me!   20:29, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Not overcharacterization because this category allows the readers to read about big deaths among musicians. Whiskeymouth (talk) 03:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:Overcategorization....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 01:47, 26 April 2016 (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:Scottish lochs with reported cryptids

 * 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) 18:45, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Propose Deleting Category:Scottish lochs with reported cryptids
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:V, WP:FRINGE, WP:OCLOCATION
 * According to a majority of the Yelp reviews, Loch Lomond is "romantic" (source) but, despite those reports, we don't have a category for Category:Reportedly romantic Scottish lochs. Inserting "reported" into the category name is a tacit acknowledgement that the presence of monsters can't be verified. I have not objection to categorizing actual cryptid articles in this tree (which is why we have a Scottish cryptozoology and a Scottish mythical creature categories along with a whole Nessie tree) but the intersection of monsters and geography is not defining. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: The creator, RafikiSykes, is blocked indefinitely but this discussion has been included in WikiProject Lakes. – RevelationDirect (talk) 00:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per above, Category:Scottish loch cryptids would suffice. Brandmeistertalk  09:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * DElete as above: Category:Scottish loch cryptids is sufficient. Cryptids refers to lake monsters, whether suspected, mythical, or whatever.  The present category is in the nature of a performance category.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Oppose but rename (unless its subcategory can be kept if the category is deleted). Category:Scottish loch cryptids is a subcategory of Category:Scottish lochs with reported cryptids, so the subcategory would be deleted if the category was deleted, yes? I think the main category needs to be renamed to Scottish loch cryptids and the subcategory deleted. WP:V, WP:FRINGE, WP:OCLOCATION do not seem relevant: it is a category to contain existing articles and the main category is Category:Lake cryptids. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 18:37, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Clarification If this nomination passes, Category:Scottish loch cryptids will not be deleted. That subcategory is also under Category:Scottish cryptids and Category:Lochs of Scotland so it wouldn't be orphaned. Sorry if I wasn't clear. RevelationDirect (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the clarification. I will change my opinion to delete then, on the grounds of duplication. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 23:15, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete anyone can claim a cryptoid in any loch; I'll claim one in each so now the category would be duplicative of its parent. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:57, 25 April 2016 (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.