Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 September 7



Category:Fictional familicides

 * 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. ℯ xplicit  05:47, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Fictional familicides to Category:Fictional characters who committed familicide
 * Nominator's rationale: The articles in this category are about the people, not the acts. 89.139.68.161 (talk) 10:53, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Support, more accurate description of current content. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:39, 14 September 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:Fear Lords

 * 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) 20:23, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting fear lords


 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT - Do we really need a category for this non-notable fictional group? Killer Moff (talk) 10:42, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge to parent Category:Marvel Comics demons, as the nominator has not explained why these pages should be removed from that hierarchy. (That's what "deleting" a category does; it is not the same as merging.) – Fayenatic  L ondon 07:57, 9 September 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:Anti-abortion organizations in Israel

 * 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 to Category:Anti-abortion organizations. ℯ xplicit  05:47, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting anti-abortion organizations in israel


 * Nominator's rationale: The only member of this category is in its parent. 89.139.68.161 (talk) 10:42, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Upmerge. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:22, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:SMALLCAT and the Austrian and Danish siblings may be merged/deleted as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:13, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:SMALLCAT exception. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:22, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge to Category:Anti-abortion organizations. It is not acceptable for a nomination to state  "The only member of this category is in its parent"  when the category has more than one parent. The member page is currently only one of the two parents, Category:Abortion in Israel, and the nominator (presumably an experienced editor but editing while not logged in) has not suggested any rationale for removing it from the hierarchy of Category:Anti-abortion organizations. – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:01, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge I created it expecting it could be populated, but given the general consensus, I agree it should be merged into Category:Anti-abortion organizations.Mistico (talk) 13:14, 9 September 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:Medieval mystics

 * 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) 05:04, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting medieval mystics


 * Nominator's rationale: This category has been superseded by Category:Christian mystics by century. I emptied the category before realizing that was contrary to procedure; before emptying it, there were only five articles (Christina of Markyate, The Cloud of Unknowing, Walter Hilton, Julian of Norwich, and Richard Rolle) in the category, all Christian mystics. If there is concern about deleting this due to the possibility of filling it with non-Christian mystics, to which use it was not being put, that can be solved on an as-needed basis by creating a "Mystics by century" category. — the Man in Question (in question)  06:34, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


 * distribute contents (if necessary) then Delete -- I would have suggested downmerging to Category:Christian mystics by century (which should be a container) and then distributing the contents to the appropriate century. Some one needs to check that all are categorised.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:38, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * If I understand you correctly, that is exactly what I did to begin with. I'm sorry I didn't express that clearly. All five articles that were in this category I moved to their appropriate categories within Category:Christian mystics by century. — the Man in Question (in question)  20:47, 8 September 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:People associated with the history of African-American civil rights

 * 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. ℯ xplicit  05:47, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting people associated with the history of african-american civil rights


 * Nominator's rationale: vague category scope, delete per WP:OCASSOC. Perhaps part of the category content might be listified, but due to its vagueness the category has for example also attracted James Bonard Fowler who should be neither in a civil rights category nor in a civil rights list. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:23, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


 * do not delete one possibly wrong member is no justification whatsoever to delete an entire category Hmains (talk) 22:03, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It is not about one possibly wrong member, that was merely an example. The problem is a lack of inclusion criteria. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:12, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


 *  Empty manually then delete like many ASSOC categories this is a hotchpotch, with little coherence and no clear boundary. I sampled several articles and found a woman who achieved tenure in a university, a civil rights milestone; an opponent of Black civil rights; and victims of persecution (news of which stimulated the campaign).  These all need more specific categories, some of which probably exist.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:34, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, and Fowler fits this category because it is about the history of the movement, not about movement participants and activists. Bull Connor fits here as well. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:08, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete I was expecting a bunch of historians rather than participants given its title. Removing the "history of" wording, that would leave anyone "associated" with African-American civil rights, it would seem to mean everyone who did anything with regard to the subject to be included: everyone who attended or spoke at any of the rallies or wrote on the subject whether in the 1760s, 1860s, 1960s, to today. And of course, those who beat them, enslaved them, or otherwise took the contrary position. Does Colin Kaepernik get included? What about those who are organizing boycotts of Nike? Too attenuated, like most "associated with" categories. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 02:28, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * , I think I see the problem and agree - this category should include the word "movement" after "civil rights", so a simple rename would solve your concern. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:45, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * actually it wouldn't, if we had a category Category:Historians of the African-American civil rights movement and purged the participants rather than the recounters of such participation that would fix things. Merely being a "associated with" some nebulously-defined thing doesn't sufficiently narrow the category to not include virtually everyone regardless of what role they may have played and which side they participated. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:00, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I see your point, and a good idea. This one does actually include everyone who, say, sent in a donation, or wrote a printed letter-to-the editor. There should probably be new categories, as you suggest, with appropriate names, so that Bull Connor would, if the category under discussion is deleted, at least be listed in a category pertaining to his most notable topic. Categories such as historians, as you suggest, and maybe 'Opponents of the 1950s and 1960s Civil Rights Movement' (but notice that the name is now Civil rights movement). I personally will not create and name something which includes the proper noun 'Civil Rights Movement' and purposely use the incorrect lower-casing (although this is where the name sits now on Wikipedia except for the correctly named WikiProject:Civil Rights Movement). And again, a good idea, Carlossuarez46, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:19, 14 September 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:Turkey in the Roman era

 * 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: withdrawn. – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:14, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting turkey in the roman era


 * Nominator's rationale: delete, this category strongly overlaps with Category:Roman Anatolia. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:14, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge to Category:Roman Anatolia, which is much the same place. The inclusion of Istambul (then Byzantium) would be inappropriate.  Purge if necessary.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:25, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * In fact everything of the nominated category that belongs in Category:Roman Anatolia is already in that tree, so there is no need to merge. However for example Category:Roman Syria and Category:Roman Mesopotamia are not in that tree, but they do not belong there anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:18, 8 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose I created this as part of a scheme to cater for "by country". A scheme already exists for "by Roman province" and "by region". With the exception of Cyprus, no modern state is co-terminous with a Roman province or region. Anatolia only covers two thirds of Turkey. Modern Turkey, apart from the many provinces in Anatolia, also encompasses provinces in Roman Syria, Roman Mesopotamia and Roman Armenia. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:17, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Currently the whole Category:Roman Mesopotamia and Category:Roman Syria are incorporated in Category:Turkey in the Roman era, that is incorrect anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:44, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * OK then. I'll manually put articles relating to sites of Category:Roman Mesopotamia and Category:Roman Syria that are located in modern Turkey into Category:Turkey in the Roman era. Would that solve the matter and permit this to be retained? Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:21, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Probably it suffices to have Category:Roman sites in Turkey as a subcategory. That, together with Category:Roman Anatolia, could remain as content of this category (note that the other subcategories of Category:Turkey in the Roman era are already in Category:Roman provinces in Anatolia). Alternatively it can also be solved with a "see also" note in the header of these both subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:40, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * By the time that I saw the above, I had already moved the articles and removed the category parentage. I think that Category:Roman fortifications in Turkey should also remain. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:48, 9 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Rename to Category:Classical Turkey to match similar Category:Classical Syria and Category:Classical Greece.GreyShark (dibra) 05:11, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * is not well-populated. Why is it needed in addition to and ? Should it be in between those two? – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:28, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * includes things that are not Roman related. For example, Greece in the 5th century BC. These schemes cover both ancient Greece and ancient Rome so are not suitable parent IMHO. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:52, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * (as nominator) withdraw nomination after changes made. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand that the nomination is withdrawn, but I would prefer a wording along the line of what I proposed for Israel (since, Turkey, too, didn't exist in the Roman era), perhaps a rename to something like Category:History of Turkey during the Roman era, so we understand that it's part of the history of Turkey (the currently defined area of land) during a period that it didn't participate in as a the modern polity. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 02:31, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * In this respect it should be treated like the sibling categories that are nominated here. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:15, 11 September 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:CS50

 * 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) 05:08, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting cs50


 * Nominator's rationale: Category is for a single course. The  non-eponymous article is better suited under Category:Harvard University faculty. Fuddle (talk) 01:22, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


 * DElete too specific for a useful category. Do we really even need an article on a particular university course?  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:27, 8 September 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.