Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 December 28



Category:Alternative medical treatments

 * 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: keep. -- Black Falcon (talk) 06:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Propose merging Category:Alternative medical treatments to Category:Alternative medicine
 * Nominator's rationale: Alternative medicine is all about treatments. Not a useful distinction. Rathfelder (talk) 22:29, 28 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Support - Simplification and centralization is good. — Paleo  Neonate  – 13:01, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Support as there's no difference between the two. There is no medicine without treatment, so "treatment" does not need to be specified. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  13:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose – there are many articles at the top level of Category:Alternative medicine (a topic category) which are not about a treatment. The ones that are about a treatment should be placed in the subcat Category:Alternative medical treatments, a set category. The whole point of subcats is to remove a particular sort of article from the top level rather than cluttering it up with a jumble of articles of different types. Oculi (talk) 14:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * there are many articles at the top level of Category:Alternative medicine (a topic category) which are not about a treatment. So your implicit contention is that Jeanne Achterberg is medicine. Not a person, not an alt-med practitioner, but actual medicine. Because she's in the top level of the cat. And you have no problem with that, but you do have a problem with putting alternative medicines in Category:Alternative medicine? I know I sound sarcastic, but I'm not. I'm asking you in all seriousness if you're okay with having BLPs in that cat, while you're not okay with having alternative medicine in in. Because if that's not the case, then you should change your !vote and worry about sorting out those pages which aren't treatments but are still in the top-level cat.
 * The whole point of subcats is to remove a particular sort of article from the top level rather than cluttering it up with a jumble of articles of different types. That would be less of a problem if the cat system wasn't as opaque as tar. I had to click through 4 category pages (with no clue what the next options would be, and already knowing that I had to scroll to the bottom of each page to find what categories it was a part of; something most readers and many editors don't know) to find out that Vaginal steaming, which is alternative medicine without question, is actually somewhere in Category:Alternative medicine. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  14:39, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * There is no implicit assumption that Jeanne Achterberg is medicine. First of all this particular doesn't belong here anyway, I've moved it to Category:People in alternative medicine. But taking a better example, Alternative medicine degrees does not belong in any of the subcategories so should be kept at the top level, without implicitly assuming that Alternative medicine degrees is medicine - while Craniosacral therapy is a treatment and should be moved down to Category:Alternative medical treatments. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I've given up trying to discuss anything with you cat people; 9/10 of you refuse to consider the possibility that you've ever made a mistake or been wrong about anything while simultaneously misrepresenting everything I've tried to tell you in a way that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You guys are less easy to work with than the gnomes over at commons, so I'm not even going to bother. Yall can fuck up the cat system to your hearts content and I'm just going to ignore you from now on. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  13:19, 12 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid some of the WP:FTN fringe theories group don't really accept the idea that the categorisation system is heirarchical. Rathfelder (talk) 20:57, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I do. I'm just not 100% convinced it's the best method of sorting. I'm sure some others there would agree, though I won't presume to name names. That being said, it's the one we have, so we should make it work, IMHO. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  21:08, 29 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Alternative medicine treatments are described in the medical literature as being distinct from the things related to Alternative medicine. This is a valuable distinction for those readers that use the category system to find the content that they are looking for. In project medicine, there are many articles that describe treatment. This is not an endorsement for alternative medicine, btw. I believe in providing npov content for readers. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉  21:13, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose the nom's assertion that alternative medicine is all about treatments misrepresents the contents of Category:Alternative medicine. Many of the subcats of Category:Alternative medicine are not about treatments, e.g Category:Concepts in alternative medicine, Category:Alternative medicine publications, Category:People in alternative medicine, Category:Alternative medicine organisations. Category:Alternative medicine needs more diffusion, not less. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:42, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * My attempts to diffuse it have not all been welcomed, but I dont think these subcats are very helpful.Rathfelder (talk) 13:24, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose, one is a set category, the other a topic category. If this distinction is insufficiently clear then rename - but I doubt if that is really necessary. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:17, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose based in part on the fact that the scimagojr.com website includes different subject area listings for "complementary and alternative medicine" and "complementary and manual therapy", and I assume the latter is roughly equivalent to treatments. It is also probably worth noting to the closing administrator the discussion at WP:FTN that this discussion more or less started there, a page which I think probably gets fewer of the real alt-med topical editors than comparative outsiders like me who are probably most likely looking to somewhat suppress fringeniness, which doesn't necessarily require much real knowledge of the field itself. John Carter (talk) 18:06, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note as no one seems to have done so before I have just now placed a notice at Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Alternative medicine regarding these discussions. It might make sense to ho!d them open longer to allow for responses from any editors there. John Carter (talk) 22:18, 9 January 2018 (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:Alternative medical systems

 * 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. -- Black Falcon (talk) 06:24, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Propose merging Category:Alternative medical systems to Category:Alternative medicine
 * Nominator's rationale: considerable overlap. Not a useful distinction Rathfelder (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Support - Simplification and centralization is good. — Paleo Neonate  – 13:01, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Support I have no idea what differences there could possibly be between a form of alternative medicine and an alternative medicine "system". ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  13:21, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose – there are many articles at the top level of Category:Alternative medicine (a topic category) which are not about a system. The ones that are about a system should be placed in the subcat Category:Alternative medical systems, a set category. The whole point of subcats is to remove a particular sort of article from the top level rather than cluttering it up with a jumble of articles of different types. (Rathfelder has been told how to combine similar cfd noms in one section, but continues to inconvenience others rather than pay attention.) Oculi (talk) 14:31, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I think these are two separate issues. Rathfelder (talk) 20:55, 29 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose - The alternative medical systems is an appropriate category. Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉  21:16, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Rathfelder Oculi . -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:44, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I think you are mistaken here, because Rathfelder is the nominator. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:13, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * thanks. I meant Oculi.  Now fixed. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:17, 1 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Alternatively, it looks like Category:Alternative medical treatments can serve as a reasonable merge target, but I'm not an expert in this matter. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:13, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose to merger as proposed although as a basically ill-informed outsider to alt-med whose opinion ain't worth much I could support Marcocapelle's alternative if it could work. John Carter (talk) 18:52, 5 January 2018 (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:The Victorian English Gentlemens Club

 * 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 (non-admin closure) . Marcocapelle (talk) 09:24, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting the victorian english gentlemens club


 * Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category for only one subcategory containing an article for one album. WP:OCEPON. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 20:19, 28 December 2017 (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:Duplicate or hardcoded templates awaiting deletion

 * 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. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:57, 8 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Propose merging Category:Duplicate or hardcoded templates awaiting deletion to Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unused redundant templates
 * Nominator's rationale: Redundant category. Although all db-t3’d pages go into the former category, the latter has the correct name for a speedy deletion category. The latter is listed at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion and is in Category:Speedy deletion. Note that db-t3 will need to be rerouted if the former category is deleted. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 18:10, 28 December 2017 (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:Healthcare occupations in Ukraine

 * 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 (non-admin closure) . Marcocapelle (talk) 10:09, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Healthcare occupations in Ukraine to Category:Ukrainian people in health occupations
 * Nominator's rationale: Complete overlap. Fooian people in health occupations is the established category structure Rathfelder (talk) 13:30, 28 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Agree; when I created Category:Healthcare occupations in Ukraine back in 2014 I must have been unaware that naming the category Category:Ukrainian people in health occupations would have been better 🤔.... —  Yulia Romero  •  Talk to me!  15:08, 28 December 2017 (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:Humble Bundle books

 * 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. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:43, 8 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Propose deleting humble bundle books


 * Nominator's rationale: Similar to Categories for discussion/Log/2015 July 30, inclusion as part of a bundle is not a defining characteristic for these publications. czar  05:05, 28 December 2017 (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:Wikipedia-derived encyclopedias

 * 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: keep but recategorise some member pages. – Fayenatic  L ondon 23:24, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Wikipedia-derived encyclopedias to Category:Wikipedia-derived products
 * Nominator's rationale: Currently the category includes non-encyclopedia, such as Books, LLC and wikipedia readers. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:45, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯ  xplicit  00:13, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment, there is no big need for the rename. Since the products are Wikipedia-derived, they are a kind of encyclopedia by definition. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:38, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - No they are not "encyclopedia". Sloppiness is not good and the work to fix it is minimal.  Staszek Lem (talk) 23:29, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support a name change, it will give the category a broader scope, which is good. However, Category:Wikipedia-derived publications may be better. The category will no longer be a sub-category of any of the encyclopedia/website categories. Sionk (talk) 11:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. 4 of the items are indeed ":Wikipedia-derived encyclopedias", which is why the parent cats include Category:21st-century encyclopedias & Category:Online encyclopedias.  Changing the name would require removal of those parents and copying the 3 encyclopedias to those 2 cats, which seems unhelpful.
 * Better to make a new Category:Wikipedia-derived publications as a parent of this, and move and WikiReader + Books LLC to it. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:53, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The alternative to create a new parent is reasonable indeed. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per User:BrownHairedGirl, and reparent Books LLC and WikiReader to Category:Wikipedia, the main topic category. Books LLC is a publisher, not a publication, so I see no need for a separate publications category that would contain only this category and one article. -- Black Falcon (talk) 20:20, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * @Black Falcon's proposal is better than mine. So keep, but skip the new parent. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:30, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree with this alternative as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:33, 24 January 2018 (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:ASLwrite

 * 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 (non-admin closure) . Marcocapelle (talk) 10:19, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:ASLwrite to Category:American Sign Language
 * Nominator's rationale: No need for a category with one member. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:30, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯ  xplicit  00:13, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge per nom. DexDor(talk) 21:33, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete – contains 1 page (with same name as category). That page is already in category's parent category. PriceDL (talk) 00:24, 2 January 2018 (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:FIBT World Championships

 * 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. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:54, 8 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:FIBT World Championships to Category:IBSF World Championships
 * Nominator's rationale: The governing body for the sport, the Fédération International de Bobsleigh et Tobogganing (FIBT), changed its name in 2015 to the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation (IBSF), with English now being the primary language. New articles in this category will be named IBSF World Championships 20xx rather than the historic FIBT World Championships 20xx, and the category should reflect the new naming. (It is somewhat unfortunate that another international governing body also uses the same acronym, but there is no conflict in category names at this time.) 121a0012 (talk) 01:51, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯ  xplicit  00:13, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Support but leave a cat-redirect. The 2016 and 2017 sub-cats (which are not tagged) also need to be renamed, but can probably be speedied by the closing admin.  All the 2016 articles already use the IBSF format.  Nothing up to 2015 should be rename as FIBT was then the correct name.  Having them in the IBSF tree may look odd but conforms to precedent (such as alumni categories for renamed colleges).  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:40, 29 December 2017 (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.