Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 May 24



Category:Polish enlightenment

 * 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 as nominated.  ✗  plicit  07:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Polish enlightenment to Category:Polish Enlightenment
 * Nominator's rationale: Capitalisation. Nihil novi (talk) 17:48, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support. Capitalization seems correct. No major preference with regards to Fooian E vs E in Fooland, but per Category:French Enlightenment, Category:French Enlightenment and Category:Scottish Enlightenment, the former seems preferable. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 15:57, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: WP:INVOLVED relist to clear old CfD pages, and category tagged. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  19:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Alt rename to Category:Enlightenment in Poland, WP:C2D per Enlightenment in Poland. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 'support' alt rename. - Altenmann >talk 21:45, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * "Category:Polish Enlightenment" would be more succinct (as with the "Scottish Enlightenment" and "American Enlightenment" article titles), but "Category:Enlightenment in Poland" would be preferable to the present "Category:Polish enlightenment", with the incorrect lower-case "e".
 * Could the article "Enlightenment in Poland" first be moved to "Polish Enlightenment"?
 * How does a category get moved to a new title?
 * Thanks.
 * Nihil novi (talk) 19:19, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * for moving the article you may initiate a WP:RM procedure. If you do that then please consider my vote to be on hold pending the outcome of the RM. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:35, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've taken your very helpful advice and submitted a WP:RM.
 * Nihil novi (talk) 18:04, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * A technical move of the article means there has been no discussion and so WP:C2D no longer applies. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you. How does one now move "Category:Polish enlightenment" to "Category:Polish Enlightenment", with a capital "E"?
 * Nihil novi (talk) 23:38, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, the nomination can stay here for sure. The thing is, I am not sure that enlightenment should be capitalized and I would have preferred a discussion about that. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I have seen "Enlightenment" – in the sense of a particular national Enlightenment, or of the "Age of Enlightenment" – always capitalized.
 * Nihil novi (talk) 08:15, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
 * alt rename per Marcocapelle . &#8213; Qwerfjkl  talk  08:06, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * OOjs UI icon add-constructive.svg Support nom (main article moved). &#8213; Qwerfjkl  talk  18:09, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Rename to Category:Polish Enlightenment now that the article has been moved. For the record I don't think it was appropriate to do a WP:INVOLVED relist to clear old CfD pages - this merely hides the problem rather than solving it. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:39, 25 May 2022 (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.

Geography and place templates

 * 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 and merge as nominated. Marcocapelle's point is persuasive, especially as there is a Category:Place templates hierarchy within the nominated parent, and this remains a suitable parent for e.g. Category:Buildings and structures templates. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:35, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Geography and place templates to Category:Geography templates
 * Propose downmerging Category:Geography and place external link templates to Category:Geography external link templates
 * Propose renaming Category:Geography and place navigational boxes to Category:Geography navigational boxes
 * Propose renaming Category:Geography and place sidebar templates to Category:Geography sidebar templates
 * Propose renaming Category:Geography and place templates by continent to Category:Geography templates by continent
 * Propose renaming Category:Geography and place category header templates to Category:Geography category header templates
 * Propose renaming Category:Geography and place metatemplates to Category:Geography metatemplates
 * Propose renaming Category:Geography and place symbol templates to Category:Geography symbol templates
 * Propose renaming Category:Wikipedia geography and place award templates to Category:Wikipedia geography award templates
 * Nominator's rationale: rename, "places" are naturally a part of "geography", they do not have to be added in the name of the broader category. Likewise we have Category:Places as a subcategory of Category:Geography. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:31, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: See if there are any further suggestions about what to do...so far not really seeing any consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  bibliomaniac 1  5  04:35, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Geography and places are mentioned separately because some templates in this category are about geography, i.e. geographical divisions, mountains, rivers, etc (example: Category:United States mountains navigational boxes). But some are about not-geographical topics in relation to a specific place: politics, sports, arts, culture, people, health, etc (example: Category:United Kingdom television personality navigational boxes). The naming scheme for subcategories in Category:Wikipedia templates by topic is "foo and bar templates", where foo and bar are related, but if only one of the words was used in the name then their coverage would not be wide enough to include both foo-templates and bar-templates. —⁠andrybak (talk) 00:49, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - Naming seems unclear/confusing. That said, I'm not sure if I can think of anything better and stay within what seems to be current conventions for such cats. Maybe Geographical places and geography X templates ?  Templates about geography and places (about, concerning, listing, some such)? Better suggestions most welcome. Whatever is done, place would appear to need to be changed to plural. - jc37 01:31, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  17:55, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note that for Category:United Kingdom television personality navigational boxes nothing would change, it would keep the same parent and child categories, as it is much lower in the tree. The fact that there are categories much lower in the tree with a weak relationship to the top category is a general phenomenon of the category system. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:13, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Rename all per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:55, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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:School shootings committed by adults

 * 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)  Qwerfjkl  talk  13:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:School shootings committed by adults to Category:School shootings
 * Propose deleting murder committed by adults
 * Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:NONDEF, there is nothing special about an adult being the murderer. It is also an odd subcategory of Category:Adult culture. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and NONDEF. No Great Shaker (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Object -- This subject has recently been discussed.  I thought we reached a consensus that we should have a split between those committed by pupils (or recent pupils) and those committed by strangers (adults).  These are frequently massacres, not single murders.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:03, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
 * After the merge the articles will still be in Category:School shootings. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:37, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  17:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge Since we end up with Columbine Massacre on here. I thought I knew a lot about that, and I did not realize Kleburn and Harris were adults. They were disgrunted high school students who were still enrolled. The age of the shooter is not defining enough to make seperate categories for.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:32, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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:19th-century Holy Roman Emperors

 * 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. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:26, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting 19th-century holy roman emperors
 * Nominator's rationale: delete, the category only contains Francis II, Holy Roman Emperor, the last Holy Roman Emperor from 1792 to 1806. He is already in the 18th-century sibling category, so this 19th-century category contributes nothing to quickly navigating between related articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Sibling categories do not place Francis II in the 19th-century category tree. Dimadick (talk) 17:48, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * He is already in the 19th-century tree as emperor of Austria. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Support no info loss is involved. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:36, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * OOjs UI icon add-constructive.svg Support &#8213;  Qwerfjkl talk  13:11, 12 June 2022 (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:Parodies of conspiracy theories
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 June 2%23Category:Parodies of conspiracy theories

Category:Women beekeepers

 * 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. – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:21, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * * Propose merging Category:Women beekeepers to Category:Beekeepers
 * Nominator's rationale: Would seem to be a classic example of an occupation where gender is irrelevant per Categorization/Ethnicity,_gender,_religion_and_sexuality (in fact I have a vague memory of beekeepers being used as a specific example in one of the guidelines???) Le Deluge (talk) 10:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't know which previous discussions were had on this subject, but the article you linked specifically mentions Category:Ice dancers shouldn't have gendered subcategories. Not arguing that those subcategories should be merged as being against Wikipedia's guidelines, I just thought it was funny that not even the guidelines you linked to are internally consistent. ReneeWrites (talk) 22:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Several of the women (as well as men) included in this category are scientists who studied bees as a subset of entomology. See Annie Betts, Eva Crane, Dorothy Galton, and Ellen Smith Tupper. Admittedly this is not true for all of them, right now the category makes no distinction between different kinds of beekeepers. But as apiculture both as a profession and as a scientific pursuit is typically a male-dominated field, I don't think having a category for women is irrelevant or superfluous any more than Category:Women farmers or Category:Women entomologists is. ReneeWrites (talk) 11:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is no argument, it has to be on its own merits. The entomology argument is irrelevant - they're separate things, in the same way that a zoologist is not a zookeeper. If they're entomologists, then categorise them as such. As an aside, having worked alongside bee entomologists, it fits the general pattern these days that biology is if anything more weighted to women, even if that was less true in the past. If being a women beekeeper is so unusual, then there will be media coverage specifically relating to the fact that they are women - I should know, I've had two relatives with national media coverage specifically relating to them being the first women to do their jobs - as in the actual title of the article. Good luck finding an equivalent for beekeeping, given that women have been involved with bees since the Minoans at least. Le Deluge (talk) 19:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not saying "other stuff exists" so much as pointing out there's a lot of predecent for this in how similar/related categories are, well, categorized. Pointing out consistency is not an irrelevant argument, nor does simply saying my argument is irrelevant make it as such. ReneeWrites (talk) 22:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep. Women beekeepers are a topic of special encyclopedic interest and meet the criteria set out at WP:EGRS and WP:CATGENDER. A search on Google Scholar reveals dozens of papers addressing the topic. Beekeeping has often had a gendered history, with women in some cultures filling the role of primary beekeepeers ("A Hive of Her Own: Early Modern Women Beekeepers", Medieval Feminist Forum) even while beekeeping clubs had separate women's auxillaries. Women beekeepers are studied as a facet of feminist economics, and numerous initiatives to train women beekeepers exist around the world, including some few in India, Tanzania, Cameroon and Guyana.  UNESCO's Women for Bees programme trains women beekeepers and its coverage in reliable sources (Vogue, National Geographic, Harper's Bazaar) further demonstrate that women beekeepers are a topic of encyclopedic interest with gender roles that vary widely throughout the world.  gobonobo  + c 12:28, 25 May 2022 (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:Films scored by Manabendra Mukhopadhyay

 * 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. – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:22, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting films scored by manabendra mukhopadhyay
 * Nominator's rationale: These films are already listed in the article for the person. There is no need for a category  ~XyNq tc 07:34, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep - there's thousand of such categories which lists composer's films in one place simultaneously having the same films enlisted in his discography as well. Check Anand–Milind discography and Category:Films scored by Anand-Milind; R. D. Burman filmography and Category:Films scored by R. D. Burman for example. Abbasulu (talk) 08:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose delete - There is a whole category tree for such film entries, see Category:Film scores by composer, in which most of them might satisfy the nominator's rationale that all the entries in the category are listed in the article for the person. The nomination should either deal with all of them or none, not just a single one — DaxServer (t · m · c) 09:11, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Need convincing not to delete, not knowing the notability of the composer. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is no argument. The argument would be if such categorisation is WP:OVERCATEGORISATION on the grounds of not being WP:DEFINING - I can sort of see the composer being WP:DEFINING for a film in a small, small handful of cases such as Ennio Morricone but in general nobody says "oh, that's a film with an XXXX score", at least not in English-language films. And just from a Special:WantedCategories perspective, these categories are a pain in the butt because the kind of people who add the links tend not to create the categories, there's a bunch of them at SWC at the moment.Le Deluge (talk) 10:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose, as per DaxServer's rationale. ReneeWrites (talk) 13:26, 24 May 2022 (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:Forza (series)

 * 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 to Category:Forza. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Forza (series) to Category:Forza
 * Nominator's rationale: Speedy move was opposed, therefore I am nominating this category for a move. There is no other topic that could be called this so it is relatively unambiguous. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 04:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Rename - per nom. Abbasulu (talk) 09:11, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Rename - matching the article name, Forza, is a good thing. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:15, 24 May 2022 (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:Barbie Sheroes
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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. – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:23, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting barbie sheroes
 * Nominator's rationale: Not defining Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:29, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete - per nom. Abbasulu (talk) 09:11, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete – agree this isn't defining. A stand-alone list might be appropriate if there's enough sourcing, but I don't think WP:CATDEF's "commonly and consistently" threshold is met. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:22, 1 June 2022 (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.