Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 October 29



Category:Tennis players by religion

 * 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 and delete (non-admin closure) . Marcocapelle (talk) 06:41, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Tennis players by religion to Category:Tennis players (So as not to remove the Jewish subcategory from the category tree.)
 * Propose deleting muslim tennis players
 * Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization on the basis of a non-notable intersection of religion and occupation. A tennis player's religion has nothing to do with the sport, and we subdivide occupations by nationality, not religion. I am not nominating Category:Jewish tennis players because it categorizes by ethnicity, not religion, and is part of the larger Category:Jewish sportspeople. (Category creator notified using Template:Cfd-notify) -- Black Falcon (talk) 21:04, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * delete and I'm not that keen on keeping the Jewish category, as I don't see how ethnicity is all that relevant to tennis. Mangoe (talk) 21:55, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * In that case, we would also need to get rid of Category:Asian-American tennis players and its subcats and Category:African-American tennis players. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:35, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete categorizing sports players by religion is just a bad idea.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Their religion is irrelevant. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:35, 3 November 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:Administrative territorial entities

 * 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: relisted at Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 10. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:50, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Administrative territorial entities to ?????
 * Propose renaming Category:Protests by administrative territorial entity to ?????
 * Propose renaming Category:Establishment of administrative territorial entities to ?????
 * Propose renaming Category:Administrative territorial entities by time of establishment to Category:States and territories by time of establishment
 * Propose renaming Category:Administrative territorial entities by time of disestablishment to ????? (added on 3 Nov)
 * Propose renaming Category:Proposed administrative territorial entities to ????? (added on 3 Nov)
 * Propose renaming Category:Lists of administrative territorial entities to ????? ( " " " ")
 * Propose renaming Category:Administrative territorial entities by language to ????? (etc)
 * Propose renaming Category:Lists of administrative territorial entities by language
 * Propose renaming Category:Former administrative territorial entities
 * Propose renaming Category:Administrative territorial entities by continent
 * Propose renaming Category:Former administrative territorial entities by continent
 * Propose renaming Category:Disestablishment of administrative territorial entities
 * Propose renaming Category:Administrative territorial entities by time
 * Propose renaming Category:Administrative territorial entities by type


 * Nominator's rationale: This category holds countries, states, counties, cities etc. It was created by user:Androoox, a sockpuppet of blocked editor user:Tobias Conradi, as "humangeographic territorial entities". It was later manually renamed to "Administrative territorial entities" by user:Eldizzino, another sock of the same editor. That editor has recently been using various IP socks, see Administrators%27_noticeboard. Some of his recent work has been using the CFD Speedy page to rename various branches of the hierarchy to use the same category naming pattern. The fullest justification was "not about some physical entities (e.g. woodlands) but about Category:Administrative territorial entities". This seems fair enough, but one counter-argument is that the name is rather long and may be longer than necessary. It is high time that the naming of this hierarchy was submitted to a full CFD discussion. – Fayenatic  L ondon 17:10, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Note on category history: Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_February_2 closed with no consensus about the original name "Humangeographic_territorial_entities". Eldizzino moved it to, then made it a sub-cat of that one. That one was later merged to its parents, see Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_August_27.
 * Other parts of the hierarchy were originally created by other editors, e.g. "Territories by language", but this was progressively renamed by socks of Tobias Conradi: (speedy nomination, which was opposed);  (out of process);  (out of process again). – Fayenatic  L ondon 17:10, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment -- I suspect that the term that is needed is "polities". However, that may be too technical a word.  This is after all only a container category.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:39, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Peterkingiron - The article "Polity" starts: "A polity is any kind of political entity. It is a group of people who are collectively united by a self-reflected cohesive force". Your proposal would place "Neutral zone (territorial entity)", Military district, Exclusive economic zone, Metropolitan statistical area, Planning regions of Latvia under "Polity". 85.181.157.239 (talk) 19:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected however many of them are actually polities. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:38, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: Category:Administrative territorial entities by time of establishment contains Category:States and territories by century of establishment etc. It would be natural at least to rename that one to "States and territories..." to match the established hierarchy that it contains. See related CFD October 22. – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:32, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Fayenatic london - The page "States and territories" refers only to subdivisions of countries. It would be inconsistent and confusing to use the term differently in the category hierarchy. 85.181.157.239 (talk) 19:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Does it indeed? In that case it should be called country subdivisions. However, I have not been reading it that way, and it is not used that way. Many ancient kingdoms are categorised as "states and territories established in...", and they were in effect countries. I understood the "states and territories" hierarchy to be inclusive, embracing both countries and subdivisions. Template:Infobox former country populates it (perhaps Template:Infobox country too), and that seems fine to me. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:16, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Fayenatic london RE "Does it indeed?" How does States and territories not if you look at the content of the page
 * List of U.S. state abbreviations
 * States and territories of Australia
 * States and union territories of India
 * Political divisions of Mexico
 * And there is no Category:States and territories. But there are Category:Countries and Category:Categories by country with hundreds of subcategories and Category:Country subdivision Category:Categories by country subdivision. Australia (s,t), Canada (t), India (s,t), Malaysia (s,t), Mexico (s,t), Russia (t) and the United States (s,t): They have or had first-level country subdivisions named "state" or "territory". By which logic "states and territories" could be a better name for the top category for entities named "area, block, borough, canton, circle, city, community, county, department, district, division, hide, municipality, prefecture, protectorate, province, region, reserve, state, territory, town, township, unit, union, ward, zone" than a descriptive term like "administrative territorial entities", which avoids taking position on whether something is a country/state, a territory and the level of a country, or a country subdivision named "state" or "country"?
 * Would you put country below "states and territories"? If so, why would it be "states and territories" and not "countries and territories" if country is the overwhelmingly used term for sovereign entities? 85.179.110.23 (talk) 01:24, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The looming question is whether the hierarchy should be renamed. In that hierarchy I had understood "States and territories" as a generic term embracing empires and vassal kingdoms, countries and subdivisions, and provisional countries/subdivisions like the American pre-State territories. If other editors read that name as meaning "subdivisions" (which has not yet been demonstrated), then it should change. I would be inclined to oppose "administrative territorial entities..." as too long-winded, and prefer "countries and subdivisions".
 * I think this would work all the way to the top, i.e. rename the categories nominated here to Category:Countries and subdivisions, Category:Protests by country or subdivision, etc. – Fayenatic  L ondon 10:57, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * RE "Countries and subdivisions" VS "Protests by country or subdivision": any logic behind this, or random use of these words? 77.180.245.225 (talk) 06:52, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is standard naming. "Protests by country and subdivision" would be for categories that were by subdivision within country; compare e.g. or the many similar categories at the top of . The Protests category is not like that, but contains  and a few other locations that may not be recognised as countries. Perhaps Category:Protests by location would be better for this one. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:22, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * RE Countries/subdivisions: As what of the two do the following qualify: Neutral zone (territorial entity), International waters, the territory of the Antarctic Treaty System, entities of the United Nations geoscheme, the various Euroregions/Eurodistricts, the ITU regions, European Broadcasting Area. 77.180.245.225 (talk) 06:52, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * So IP number, what do you suggest? Marcocapelle (talk) 21:07, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to Category:Territories but keep the current parents. Much shorter without changing the meaning of the categories. And move part of the current Category:Territories to the parent Category:Types of country subdivisions. Rename Category:Establishment of administrative territorial entities to Category:Establishment of territories and Category:Administrative territorial entities by time of establishment to Category:Territories by time of establishment. Note that "state" is ambiguous and probably unneeded. Not sure if the protests category should be kept at all. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:57, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Marcocapelle - Category:Territories is placed inside Category:Types of country subdivisions and the article Territory starts "A territory is an administrative division" and the article for the latter starts "An administrative division, unit, entity, area or region, also referred to as a subnational entity, constituent unit, or  country subdivision, is a portion of a country". Your proporsal would place "country" below a portion of a country. 85.181.157.239 (talk) 19:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That is why I added "but keep the current parents". And for that matter, I don't agree with the article Territory because the word territory may have a much broader meaning (like in the current category name, Administrative territorial entities, which includes countries, but also e.g. animals may have a territory). The article should better be renamed to Territory (country subdivision). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:41, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Marcocapelle - The article was started 14 August 2006‎ as Territory (subnational entity) by User:Tobias Conradi and renamed 20 October 2006‎ to "Territory (country subdivision)" by the creator. At that time it referred only to human-made entities, not animal-territories. Later editors so far succeeded in making the distinction disappear from the article title. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Territory&offset=&limit=5000&action=history - search for "moved page" in the page shows several renames. 92.229.97.47 (talk) 20:22, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * So what is your opinion about the nomination? Do you support or oppose the nomination to rename somehow and why? Do you support or oppose any of the alternative names and why? Marcocapelle (talk) 21:11, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note on former lists by country and language: Category:Lists of administrative territorial entities by language and its contents used to be named "lists of countries" but were moved, without discussion, by Tobias Conradi's socks, e.g.  (category)  (contents). – Fayenatic  L ondon 11:32, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * RE Sock: Evidence for sock allegation? Even by WP standards not all moves were carried out by socks. 77.180.245.225 (talk) 06:52, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The first move was by User:Eldizzino which has been confirmed by a CheckUser as a sock puppet of Tobias Conradi. The second one was moved by User:Derianus which is likewise blocked as a suspected sock of the same editor. Looking at the edits by those accounts, I see no reason to doubt that conclusion. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:29, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * RE lists of countries: Can you explain to the audience how Tamil Nadu, South Tirol and Wallonia would qualify for category:Countries? 77.180.245.225 (talk) 06:52, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't say the contents were all countries. My point was that the categories were moved out-of-process. The current hierarchy using the longwinded category names has all been built by Tobias Conradi without discussion. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:29, 12 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Just summing up, we have three alternatives here and they all three have a disadvantage, but none of the disadvantages is particularly huge:
 * 1) keep current name, with a made-up term, with a long name, but it is an accurate descriptor of the content
 * Category:Countries and subdivisions, it does not cover every type of territory that is in the category, but it is aligns best with current terminology in the category tree
 * Category:Territories, with an ambiguous term (in some countries?), it is short and accurate (if you take the broader meaning of territory in mind)
 * Frankly, as they all three have their pros and cons, I wouldn't oppose any of the three. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:50, 4 November 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.

Years in Kievan Rus'

 * 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 and delete. – Fayenatic  L ondon 15:31, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting Category:907 in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:941 in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:968 in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:971 in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:1024 in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:1043 in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:1067 in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:1068 in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:900s in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:940s in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:960s in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:970s in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:1020s in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:1040s in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:1060s in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:Years of the 10th century in Russia‎
 * Propose deleting Category:Years of the 11th century in Russia‎
 * Nominator's rationale: delete, these are military events in the polity of Kievan Rus' so if these categories should be kept then at least they should be renamed to a year in Kievan Rus' category. However, all categories only contain one or two articles so per WP:SMALLCAT they should be upmerged to a year category of Europe and a century category of Kievan Rus'. And it happens to be the case that all articles are already there, which means that the nominated categories can simply be deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:27, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge most to Category:10th century in Kievan Rus' or Category:11th century in Kievan Rus', as appropriate. It is appropriate to have such targets.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:43, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to Category:10th century in Kievan Rus' or Category:11th century in Kievan Rus' per Peterkingiron.GreyShark (dibra) 09:48, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete All the articles seem to be children of Category:Rus'–Byzantine wars. That's sufficient. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:29, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to the century categories, per Peterkingiron's suggestion. Dimadick (talk) 18:44, 2 November 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.

English-language television programs by country

 * 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) 06:47, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:English-language American television programs‎ to Category:English-language television programs
 * Category:English-language Australian television programs‎‎ to Category:English-language television programs
 * Category:English-language British television programs‎‎ to Category:English-language television programs
 * Category:English-language Canadian television programs‎‎ to Category:English-language television programs
 * Nominator's rationale: Most English-language television programs will be linked to English-speaking countries, and the same principle applies to most other languages, so this is an unnecessary intersection of language and country. (Category creator notified using Template:Cfd-notify) -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:45, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge When the vast majority of programming in a country is in a given language, categorizing by that is just overcategorization.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:51, 2 November 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:Videos of dancing children

 * 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) 06:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting videos of dancing children


 * Nominator's rationale: Categories should group articles by "defining characteristics of a subject of the article". Dancing baby is a viral video and Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. is a lawsuit; the fact that one is and the other relates to a video that features a dancing child is not a central facet of either topic. This sort of literal description is more in line with how media is categorized on Wikimedia Commons than how articles are categorized here. (Category creator notified using Template:Cfd-notify) -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:17, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * delete per nom. Two unlike things does not a category make. Mangoe (talk) 10:20, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. This is not even particularly accurate to everything in the category. bd2412  T 13:02, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The title definitely suggests a Commons category, and the content just doesn't match. postdlf (talk) 16:50, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:31, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete only one article would actually belong, we do not need one article categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:52, 2 November 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:Paulo Coelho

 * 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 (non-admin closure) . Marcocapelle (talk) 21:00, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting paulo coelho


 * Nominator's rationale: Too little content for an eponymous category: three articles and one subcat. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:08, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:07, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Four (now) articles and subcat seems like plenty to me. I've even been skeptical of various three-articles nominations I'm seeing lately.  I skeptical we should go the deletion route with those unless there is no possibility for future expansion.  Four+ is plenty, especially given that Coelho is still living and may produce more output.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ &gt;ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ&lt;  18:42, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - populated well enough for a category about a living person. Inter&#38;anthro (talk) 02:45, 6 November 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:Insufficient Catipedians

 * 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) 06:57, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting insufficient catipedians
 * Nominator's rationale: This category is populated by two substituted instances of a userbox which states, This page does not contain enough cat pictures. As such, it is an all-inclusive user category... or you know, one of the other types of inappropriate user categories that do not facilitate collaborate. Editors can, of course, continue to display the userbox, but the associated category code should be removed and this category deleted since enjoyment of cat pictures is not a useful basis for grouping users. I suspect the category code was just left in inadvertently when the userbox were subst'ed. Plus, if sheep don't get a category, it would be unfair to have one for cats. -- Black Falcon (talk) 00:06, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. 09:57, 29 October 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lugnuts (talk • contribs)
 * Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:31, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as a pointless joke category that is redundant with one or another keepable one about an interest in cats. However, part of the nom's rationale is bogus. It is not even faintly tenable that this is an all-inclusive category (i.e., in that most pages, including user pages, don't have cat pictures); the obvious and only meaning of this is that whoever puts this on their user page is really into cats.  So I'm adding it to my userpage while it lasts, in protest of disingenuous deletion rationales.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ &gt;ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ&lt;  18:46, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * It appears my joke, that all user pages do not and could never contain enough cat pictures, fell flat. Oh, well... :) I'd say about 2/3 of my nom was non-frivolous, specifically the reference to User categories and the part on userboxes versus categories. Cheers, -- Black Falcon (talk) 21:43, 5 November 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:Wikipedians too apathetic to bother making 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: delete (non-admin closure) . Marcocapelle (talk) 07:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting wikipedians too apathetic to bother making categories
 * Nominator's rationale: This is a joke/nonsense category that does not contribute to collaboration in any manner. The lone user in the category has been indefinitely blocked since 2012. -- Black Falcon (talk) 00:04, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. 09:58, 29 October 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lugnuts (talk • contribs)
 * Delete as routine cleanup. bd2412  T 13:51, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:31, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete this category goes against guildelines for user categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:52, 2 November 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:Wikipedians with personal announcements

 * 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) 07:07, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting wikipedians with personal announcements
 * Nominator's rationale: Most user pages contain some type of personal announcement or statement, so this category is broadly or vaguely defined and not a helpful basis for grouping users. It is currently populated by a single transclusion of User:Zzarch/Personal announcement, and the lone user in the category has been inactive since 2012. -- Black Falcon (talk) 00:03, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. 09:58, 29 October 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lugnuts (talk • contribs)
 * Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:31, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:53, 2 November 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.