Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 June 27



Category:Video game secret characters

 * 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.  ✗  plicit  12:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting video game secret characters
 * Nominator's rationale: A non-defining category with vague and loose inclusion criteria. By current claimed definition, a random cameo "secret" appearance elsewhere instantly qualifies the character for this category even if said appearance isn't particularly important (maybe that's why Sephiroth (Final Fantasy) is in, because he has a cameo in Kingdom Hearts?  He's certainly not a secret in his home game...).  A majority of the current entries seem to merely be unlockable characters in Smash Bros. and other fighting games which is not really the same thing as a "secret" character (I'm guessing a bit here, but note that the creator of the category, since banned, was a huge Smash Bros fan, and I can't understand how else the likes of Jigglypuff would be included).  It's possible that this could be cut down to a much more strictly defined category &mdash; "characters for whom their main reason for notability was explicitly tied to an obscure / difficult way to unlock them" perhaps?  That would catch Mew (Pokemon), maybe the one good example in this category, but I'm still not sure that even a strict inclusion definition would be defining, and we don't need a one-article category just for Mew.  SnowFire (talk) 20:49, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Support per nominator. Too vague inclusion criteria, also bordering on game cruft. J I P  &#124; Talk 00:51, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support - would we basically include almost every Smash Bros. character due to Super Smash Bros. Ultimate? Totally not-defining. (Oinkers42) (talk) 13:35, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom. Not defining at all ("secret character" is overly vague).ZXCVBNM (TALK) 20:11, 28 June 2021 (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:Databases

 * 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.  ✗  plicit  12:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Databases to Category:Databases (computing)
 * Nominator's rationale: The vast majority of members of Category:Databases by country and Category:Databases by subject are unrelated to the database software; we need a parent/child relationship between Category:Databases and Category:Databases (computing), to mirror the existing one between Category:Data and Category:Data (computing). fgnievinski (talk) 07:03, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose per this failed requested move by the OP on the parent article.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 07:39, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Tagging RM Participants There was a requested move right here that closed a few days ago. I'm tagging all those participants regardless of !vote to help reach consensus in this venue: RevelationDirect (talk) 10:17, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per RM. Fgnievinski, I don't understand what distinction you're seeing here or what problem you're trying to solve.  SnowFire (talk) 20:50, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per my comment on the previous RM and per everyone else here. J I P  &#124; Talk 22:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: At the mentioned requested move, I had asked the nom to give some examples of non-computing databases from Category:Databases, and he didn't get back on that. On a casual look at the category, I see these which I would assume is what the nom wants to differentiate from the database software (or computing): Aid Worker Security Database, IPUMS, Xinjiang Victims Database, Census of Antique Works of Art and Architecture Known in the Renaissance. Would request the nom to provide a split of computing vs non-computing pages, so we know if we have a parent-child relationship.  Jay (Talk) 10:02, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I had replied twice, mentioning Category:Databases by country and Category:Databases by subject -- if only people would click in the links before they vote. Its members are mainly about the data, not so much about the software. Thanks for giving the above examples more explicitly. The child Category:Databases (computing) would hold subcats such as the following:
 * Category:Cloud databases
 * Category:Database APIs
 * Category:Database algorithms
 * Category:Database companies
 * Category:Database constraints
 * Category:Database engines
 * Category:Database management systems
 * Category:Database models
 * Category:Database normalization
 * Category:Database security
 * Category:Database servers
 * Category:Database theory
 * Category:Desktop database application development tools
 * Category:NewSQL
 * Category:NoSQL
 * Category:Query languages
 * Category:Transaction processing
 * Category:Types of databases
 * The parent Category:Databases would contain Category:Databases by country and Category:Databases by subject and their subcats, such as the following:
 * Category:Architecture databases
 * Category:Arts databases
 * Category:Bibliographic databases and indexes
 * Category:Economic databases
 * Category:Entertainment databases
 * Category:Internet databases
 * Category:Law databases
 * Category:Literature databases
 * Category:Mathematical databases
 * Category:Person databases
 * Category:Philosophical databases
 * Category:Political databases
 * Category:Religion databases
 * Category:Scholarly databases
 * Category:Scientific databases
 * Category:Security databases
 * Category:Ship databases
 * Category:Sports databases
 * Category:Statistical databases
 * Category:Translation databases
 * I'm baffled folks can't distinguish between database computer software and data-bases -- which sometimes exist physically, on paper. fgnievinski (talk) 22:56, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * We can distinguish just fine. Please read WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.  Category:Vancouver matches the article Vancouver, and it's about the main use of the term, while Category:Vancouver, Washington is disambiguated.  Yes, you can use the word "database" to refer to paper databases, but it just isn't the primary meaning of the term.  You're free to propose that all terms everywhere be disambiguated if there's any other meanings whatsoever, but I don't think you'll find consensus for it.    SnowFire (talk) 02:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * You said before: "I don't understand what distinction you're seeing here"; glad you're recognizing the distinction now. But I'm afraid WP:PRIMARYTOPIC applies only to articles, not to categories as the one under discussion here. What is more relevant is WP:EPONYMOUS:
 * "A category that covers exactly the same topic as an article is known as the eponymous category for that article (e.g. New York City and Category:New York City; Mekong and Category:Mekong River). An eponymous category should have only the categories of its article that are relevant to the category's content."
 * But the article Database doesn't cover any of the non-computing aspects of the concept, hence it cannot have an eponymous category, even if it remains the primary topic. In fact, the dictionary definition (database) recognizes the general meaning prior to the computing meanings:
 * 1. (general) A collection of (usually) organized information in a regular structure, usually but not necessarily in a machine-readable format accessible by a computer. I have a database of all my contacts in my personal organizer.
 * 2. (computing) A set of tables in a database(1). The "books" database will have three tables, and the "customers" database will have two tables.
 * 3. (computing) A software program for storing, retrieving and manipulating a database(1). Which database do you use: MySQL or Oracle?
 * 4. (computing) A combination of (1) and (2).
 * fgnievinski (talk) 02:34, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * So just to be clear here: you're proposing that if there are any other meanings whatsoever to a word, even if those meanings don't have Wikipedia articles (List of never-digitized databases ?!), disambiguation is required? Anyway, Wikipedia is not a dictionary.  And to be clear, even when there are multiple meanings that have Wikipedia articles, even that doesn't always require disambiguation for the category - if the other terms are closely related anyway (which "database, instance of" is to Database) or if they are clearly very minor in comparison (see Category:Neptune and Neptune (disambiguation)).  But even that standard isn't met here.  Either you're proposing a radical revision of titling guidelines or one of us still doesn't understand what's going on here that causes you to think this distinction is so earth-shatterly important.  SnowFire (talk) 03:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It's not any other meaning, it's the first meaning, as per dictionary definition. The problem is Wikipedia is so dominated by geeks that computing concepts seem to always trump everything else. fgnievinski (talk) 06:49, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Category:Madonna is about a pop musician, not the first entry in the dictionary about Mary.  It's irrelevant.  SnowFire (talk) 20:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Suggestion, if we have a significant amount of articles about databases on paper, create Category:Databases on paper. That would resolve the distinction just as well, I guess. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:04, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Why would simply creating Category:Databases (computing) inside Category:Databases cause so much trouble? Why is it so damaging to segregate the specific computing meaning from the general meaning? fgnievinski (talk) 06:49, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Or a WP:TOPICCAT/WP:SETCAT for Category:Database/Category:Databases, like the existing one for Category:Opera/Category:Operas. fgnievinski (talk) 07:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It is not damaging, but creating Category:Databases on paper would make a clearer distinction within the general topic than Category:Databases (computing) would. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:39, 30 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose. This is not needed. I do not think there are any useful and notable databases only on paper right now. Any examples? And even if there are such, they can be included to the same category. My very best wishes (talk) 01:52, 15 July 2021 (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:Stellar physics

 * 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. Nothing to merge.  ✗  plicit  12:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Stellar physics to Category:Astrophysics
 * Nominator's rationale: Stellar physics already redirects to Astrophysics, where no distinction is made. fgnievinski (talk) 00:53, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge Per nom. Without a separate main article to ground the inclusion criteria, the difference becomes subjective. - RevelationDirect (talk) 09:56, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom, but delete because articles are already in relevant subcategories of Category:Astrophysics if applicable. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:37, 5 July 2021 (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:Branches of meteorology
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 July 5%23Category:Branches of meteorology

Category:Roosevelt Institute

 * 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.  ✗  plicit  12:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Roosevelt Institute
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:TRIVIALCAT, WP:PERFCAT & WP:OCASSOC)
 * The Roosevelt Institute is an American think tank founded in 1987 to carry on the legacy of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt. The category contains namesake Eleanor Roosevelt and founder William vanden Heuvel but the vast majority of the contents are prominent people who were on the board of directors. Ben Barnes and Katrina vanden Heuvel do mention being on the board but only in passing with other roles while the remaining 7 articles don't even mention the association so it doesn't seem defining. The category contents are already listfied right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:05, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:22, 27 June 2021 (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:International Stability Operations Association

 * 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.  ✗  plicit  12:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:International Stability Operations Association
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:TRIVIALCAT & WP:OVERLAPCAT)
 * The International Stability Operations Association is an industry trade association representing private military contractors, what we used to call "mercenaries". That's why all of these articles are in Category:Private military contractors, which is under Category:Mercenaries. The type of company is defining; paying dues to a trade association is not. I just listified the category contents right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:05, 27 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Background We previously deleted other categories for corporate members of trade associations here, here, here, here, and here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:05, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:24, 27 June 2021 (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.