Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 18

 &lt; July 17 July 19 &gt;

Category:Fictional characters who use magic

 * Propose renaming:
 * Category:Fictional characters who use magic to Category:Fictional magicians and sorcerers
 * Category:Fictional characters who use magic by franchise to Category:Fictional magicians by franchise
 * Category:Buffyverse characters who use magic to Category:Buffyverse magicians
 * Category:DC Comics characters who use magic to Category:DC Comics magicians
 * Category:Marvel Comics characters who use magic to Category:Marvel Comics magicians
 * Category:Oz (franchise) characters who use magic to Category:Oz (franchise) magicians
 * Category:Fictional characters who use magic by medium to Category:Fictional magicians by medium
 * Category:Anime and manga characters who use magic to Category:Fictional magicians in anime and manga
 * Category:Comics characters who use magic to Category:Fictional magicians in comics
 * Category:Video game characters who use magic to Category:Fictional magicians in video games
 * Nominator's rationale: I think this is long overdue. The reason I'm suggesting this is because of the precedent established by the renaming of multiple other categories about characters with various superpowers, including:
 * Category:Fictional superhumans (formerly Category:Fictional characters with superhuman features or abilities)
 * Category:Fictional immortals (formerly Category:Fictional characters with immortality)
 * Category:Fictional psychics (formerly Category:Fictional characters who have mental powers)
 * So you get where I'm going with this right? "Fictional magicians" just sounds better than "Fictional characters who use magic", and for these renamed subcategories the new names will be shorter and more concise. AHI-3000 (talk) 01:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Just a question: how would we distinguish fictional magicians from fictional wizards and witches? According to the main article these are very similar concepts. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:16, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Come to think of it, the lines between terms like mage, magician, sorcerer, warlock, witch, wizard, etc are all rather blurry, many of them are often interchangeable synonyms of each other. AHI-3000 (talk) 20:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is my worry too. When would articles be added to Category:Fictional magicians and sorcerers and when would they be added to Category:Fictional wizards? Marcocapelle (talk) 20:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose The reason they are named like this is because "magician" is disambiguated between Magician (fantasy) and stage magician. It is not obvious that the proposed name indicates the character can use real magic, or just performs parlor tricks. I frankly cannot think of any better alternative than what it's named already, besides perhaps "Fictional magic-users" - so that might be a potential renaming option but in no way an urgent one. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I did consider that, which is why I went with "Fictional magicians and sorcerers" instead of just "Category:Fictional magicians" because that was already being used as a disambiguation. I don't think it's that ambiguous, clearly "Ficitonal magicians and sorcerers" already implies that all these characters have genuine magic powers and are not stage magicians. AHI-3000 (talk) 20:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * No, I think that just means it could include both stage magicians and actual mages as long as they utilize some form of magic. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Zxcvbnm. I get what nom is trying to do, but I'm afraid it's not going to be an improvement. Magician is a real-world profession where trickery and deception are used to give the audience the illusion of magic, but the laws of physics aren't actually broken. When we talk about magic in fiction, however, it's almost always breaking the laws of physics, like creating things out of nothing, telekinesis, teleportation, that kind of stuff. Cumbersome as the current catnames might sound, they are accurate and do their "job" well. NLeeuw (talk) 01:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Zxcvbnm and @Nederlandse Leeuw: We already have Category:Fictional stage magicians to differentiate entertainers from actual magic users in fiction. I added "Fictional magicians and sorcerers" for that reason. AHI-3000 (talk) 04:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose The way I see it: "Anyone can use magic, but not everyone is a magician". A magician is a lot more specific and as a result can diminish the amount of characters that would fit into this category. Many characters can use a type of magic, but they are usually classified as something else and not the title of "magician". Captain  Galaxy  12:23, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Video games about crime

 * Propose renaming Category:Video games about crime to Category:Crime video games
 * Nominator's rationale: This category is now a subcategory of Category:Video games by narrative genre. For the sake of consistency with other subcats in this category, it should be renamed with the subject up front instead of "Video games about...". This also makes it consistent with other medium subcategories listed at Category:Crime fiction (such as Category:Crime films and Category:Crime novels). AHI-3000 (talk) 00:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment, we have not only Category:Crime fiction but also Category:Fiction about crime. Also Category:Works about crime. I am unsure what to think about it. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think there should be a discussion about the overlap between the "Crime fiction", "Fiction about crime", and "Works about crime" categories. I think that's kinda redundant, and we only really need one of those categories (I personally prefer "Crime fiction" as the title). AHI-3000 (talk) 20:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment, if we rename to "Crime video games" we would have to only include games themed after crime fiction, and exclude games like Cyberpunk 2077, due to what the new title would imply. Its subcategories may also have to be moved, so just keep the original name. Also, please don't also rename "Organized crime video games." QuantumFoam66 (talk) 21:36, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Video games about the military

 * Propose renaming Category:Video games about the military to Category:Military and war video games
 * Nominator's rationale: This category is now a subcategory of Category:Video games by narrative genre. For the sake of consistency with other subcats in this category, it should be renamed with the subject up front instead of "Video games about...". Besides, this is new name would just roll off the tongue better IMO. AHI-3000 (talk) 00:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)


 * In the previous discussion a good point was made that "military" instead of "war" makes it more managable. With a bit of exaggeration almost every video game contains elements of war, that is too broad. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think "Military and war video games" isn't too ambiguous of a title. I think that name implies exactly that, games which thematically revolve around militaries and military conflicts. It's not about any generic violent conflict, some game about a gang war belongs in Category:Organized crime video games for example. AHI-3000 (talk) 20:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Sailing simulators

 * Propose merging Category:Sailing simulators to Category:Sailing video games
 * Nominator's rationale: Practically the same thing, desired target category also only contains 2 articles. So this makes perfect sense. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per nom AHI-3000 (talk) 00:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose And merge Category:Sailing video games into Category:Video games about ships and boats instead. "Sailing simulators" is a more descriptive name for the genre and the category has been around 10 years longer without issue until now. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * In its current state, Category:Sailing video games is a redundant category layer, so I agree with Zxcvbnm on upmerging that one. I have tagged it. Maybe merge to other parent categories too, not just to Category:Video games about ships and boats. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Just delete Category:Sailing video games, and keep Category:Sailing simulators. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 21:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Dutch people of the Eighty Years' War (Spanish Empire)

 * Propose renaming Category:Dutch people of the Eighty Years' War (Spanish Empire) to Category:???
 * Nominator's rationale: From the category description this is supposed to be for Dutch people who served the Spanish Empire during the Eight Years War. The current name doesn't convey that's the relationship.

I don't have a good rename suggestion, but I think the current version is confusing. Mason (talk) 22:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Agree that it is a confusing title. Suggestion: Category:Pro-Spanish Dutch people of the Eighty Years' War or Category:Pro-Spanish people from the Netherlands of the Eighty Years' War, the latter because the term "Dutch" may not include Frisian or Flemish people.  Marcocapelle (talk) 05:41, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * What is missing here is the fact that it concerns military personnel. It is not just about opinions but on which side people fight. So technically it should become Category:Military personnel from the Netherlands in the Spanish army during the Eighty Years' War. But this is incredibly long and it is also unlike any other category. So I start wondering if we shouldn't merge this category and its sibling to the parent categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Worms (series) games

 * Propose merging Category:Worms (series) games to Category:Worms (series)
 * Nominator's rationale: I previously nominated this category but I removed for some reason, but I'm doing it again, the parent category "Worms (series)" only contains the main subject, and "Worms (series) games" contains 27 articles. So This makes the category 100% useless. We usually only categorize video game franchises like this if there is a significant amount of content related to the franchise, other than individual games.

We also have to move all subcategories in this category to the desired parent category first (I think).

QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Support per nom AHI-3000 (talk) 00:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This is not something to support. It for some reason wasn't the way I was supposed to do it. Aparently I had to do it the other way around. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 05:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose, this merge would remove the content from many other current parent categories. It is rather Category:Worms (series) that should be nominated. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose Per Marcocapelle; instead Category:Worms (series) should be deleted and the other one moved to its current name. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Fine, in face I'm doing that right now. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:33, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Aztec scholars

 * Propose renaming Category:Aztec scholars to Category:Scholars of the Aztecs
 * Nominator's rationale: Per the category description, this category is for scholars of the Aztec people, rather than Aztec people who are scholars. I think we should rename it to make that distinction clearer. Mason (talk) 22:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom. GCarty (talk) 07:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Futurama films

 * Propose deleting futurama films
 * Nominator's rationale: Redundant to its subcategory about season 5. This also categorizes categories with categories in a way that is likely better served by categorizing individual articles. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Support, this does seem rather redundant considering that the category for Season 5 covers all the exact same articles. AHI-3000 (talk) 22:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose, this would remove the content from many other current parent categories (about films). If anything, the subcategory should be nominated (and if that is kept, it shouldn't be a subcategory). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose Per Marcocapelle; delete the subcategory instead as it's less understandable and relatively pointless. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:57, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Broken Sword games

 * Propose merging Category:Broken Sword games to Category:Broken Sword
 * Nominator's rationale: Same logic with Monkey Island. The parent category currently contains only 2 articles. And if we merge, we'll get a total of just 9 articles. It makes navigation easier, but we also have to move all of this category's subcategories manually, because the bot doesn't do that. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. GLTPRE (talk) 05:10, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose, this merge would remove the content from the video games tree. It is rather Category:Broken Sword that should be nominated. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:54, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * what do you mean by "remove the content from the Video games tree" QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:28, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose Period, valid subcategorization scheme. Simple size is no longer an argument due to the deprecation of SMALLCAT, one has to prove that the parent is well and truly unnecessary and there is an article there that isn't about one of the games. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:58, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment I can't really understand what you mean, but I think you're saying when I make these kinds nominations I apparently have to do it the other way around. I guess. There are only nine articles overall anyway, so do you still want a merge to be done? QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Monkey Island games

 * Propose merging Category:Monkey Island games to Category:Monkey Island
 * Nominator's rationale: This category is small, and its parent category contains only 2 subcategories and 4 (3 now i think) articles. If we merged this with the other category it would make navigation easier, but we've got to add all categories to the parent category too, maybe I can just do that right now. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Support, there's no reason to keep this category separate, especially because this franchise only seems to have video games but no other notable works in other media. AHI-3000 (talk) 22:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I also nominated "Broken Sword games" as well as Worms series games QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. GLTPRE (talk) 05:11, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose, this merge would remove the content from the video games tree. It is rather Category:Monkey Island that should be nominated. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment What do you even mean by "remove the content from the video games tree"? QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose Valid categorization scheme; the parent contains subcategories for games and characters. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:59, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Therapy 2093

 * Propose deleting therapy 2093
 * Nominator's rationale: With one album already appropriately categorized in Category:Therapy 2093 albums and the only article related to the musician, this eponymous category is unnecessary per WP:OCEPON. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 17:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:58, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Sultans of Bijapur

 * Propose merging Category:Sultans of Bijapur to Category:Adil Shahi dynasty
 * Nominator's rationale: The article of the higher level cat, Adil Shahi dynasty, was moved to Sultanate of Bijapur, of which there is already a higher level cat for, (or will be soon when CFDS renames Category:Bijapur Sultanate to Category:Sultanate of Bijapur) so this category should be merged with Category:Adil Shahi dynasty, as right now the higher up cat serves no purpose if it does not include the members of the dynasty, which are included here. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 17:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose, this merge will remove the content from the tree of Category:Sultans and Category:Indian monarchs. If anything, Category:Adil Shahi dynasty should be nominated for upmerge. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:07, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Marcocapelle Yes, it would be removed from those trees, but an upmerge of Adil Shahi dynasty would remove that cat from the Category:Muslim dynasties of India tree; I think the dynasty name should definitely be mentioned in whatever cat holds the sultans, rather than just "Sultans of Bijapur"; a cat name for Category:Sultans of Bijapur of "Adil Shahi sultans" would allow it to be in all three cat trees of Category:Sultans, Category:Indian monarchs, and Category:Muslim dynasties of India, as is done with the cats of Category:Bahmani sultans and Category:Ghaznavid sultans, which I feel is best in light of your reasoning. (and thus Category:Adil Shahi dynasty would be merged into Category:People from the Bijapur Sultanate) Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 20:14, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The name of the dynasty is mentioned in main article List of Sultans of Bijapur which is the main article of this category. I suppose that suffices, especially considering the fact that the dynasty no longer has its own article. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:37, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Marcocapelle. -- Necrothesp (talk) 07:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Prehistory by country

 * Preliminary discussion on naming consistency for the child categories of Category:Prehistory by country (the current catname Category:Prehistory by country itself has recently been agreed, and does not need to be changed). Do we prefer:


 * A: Prehistoric Fooland, or
 * B: Prehistory of Fooland?
 * Nominator's rationale: Numerically, I do not see a major preference in catnames or main article titles, so a speedy rename per WP:C2C or WP:C2D will probably not apply, and we should have a full discussion. As this is an (indirect) follow-up to our recent CFR on Middle Ages by country (Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 11), which resulted in a Rename all to Medieval history of Fooland, this precedent would favour option B. But the almost equally high frequency of Prehistoric Fooland including in main article titles should be taken into account. (A case could even be made that a debate should be had on which way WP:TITLECON should lean in the mainspace before we make our decision here, but we didn't do that for Middle Ages by country either). Whichever option we decide, I recommend leaving a redirect for all categories that we decide to rename, just like last time, in order to ease navigation and editing, and prevent duplication. NLeeuw (talk) 09:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Courtesy ping to participants of previous discussion: for your consideration. Good day. NLeeuw (talk) 09:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * A: Prehistoric Fooland Johnbod (talk) 13:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok, why is that your preference? NLeeuw (talk) 13:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The easiest way to have a consistent naming scheme for all periods would be to have Prehistory of / Ancient history of / Medieval history of / Early modern history of / Modern history of / Contemporary history of Fooland, as I've argued previously. We've begun to move in that direction for medieval and early modern history. As NLeeuw rightly notes, though, we haven't really considered consistency with article titles in mainspace for those moves. If we did have mass RMs for the country articles in each of these categories, we might find it being argued that there should be consistency with the article titles Prehistory, Ancient history, Middle Ages, Early modern period, Modern era ( which currently has an active RM for moving the title to Modern period edit on 20 July: now closed as no consensus) and Contemporary history. (There are corresponding category names for all of these, with one exception: Category:Modern history.) That could then result in a naming scheme (for article titles at first) of Prehistory of Fooland / Ancient history of Fooland / Fooland in the Middle Ages / Fooland in the early modern period / Fooland in the modern era or Fooland in the modern period or Modern history of Fooland (only the third of these seems very satisfactory to me) / Contemporary history of Fooland. With both those possible naming schemes in mind, I'm leaning towards B: Prehistory of Fooland. But it might be better to test the waters first with a mass RM for all articles following whichever of these two styles we think it would be better to change: Prehistoric [place – not necessarily a country] (examples here) or Prehistory of [place] (examples here). If a preference emerged for Prehistoric Fooland over Prehistory of Fooland it wouldn't be a disaster for the naming schemes I've suggested above, as prehistory could be treated as being outside history, which it is. Ham II (talk) 16:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I would lean B because it matches the pattern in the previous Cfd. Both are fine, ultimately, though. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak preference for option B, ultimately they are both well acceptable and it only matters that we are consistent. But given the outcome of the previous discussion it makes sense that we continue along the same line. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Option B for consistency with the history categories, which is the only possible way I can think of distinguishing the two options. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 08:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * As nom, I should add that the rationale for the previous CfR applies even more strongly here: none of these countries existed as such in prehistoric times. Saying "Prehistoric United States" or "Prehistoric Dominican Republic" is nonsensical, as "states" and "republics" didn't exist, let alone those with the names we know them by today. But "Prehistory of United States" works perfectly well, linguistically speaking, because it literally means "the time before the United States existed", although more specifically "the time before written cultures existed on the territory of the current United States". (This was less of a problem in the previous CfR, where we could argue "Medieval France" and "Medieval England" were already a thing, though many other countries not yet, so we still went with Medieval history of Fooland to be on the safe side). This accuracy argument is more important to me than the consistency argument (but not necessarily decisive). NLeeuw (talk) 01:21, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "Prehistory of the United States", which is already the category name, but otherwise I fully agree. Ham II (talk) 06:58, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Year by category — used with year parameter(s) equals year in page title

 * 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: nomination merged to Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 13
 * Propose renaming Category:Year by category — used with year parameter(s) equals year in page title to Category:Year by category — used with year parameter(s) matching year in page title
 * Nominator's rationale: Better grammar; see . Courtesy pings to House Blaster  (talk · he/they) 01:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment The em dash is really weird. Why not rename to Category:Year by category with year parameter(s) matching year in page title?  ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  10:08, 18 July 2024 (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.

Establishments in German cities by year

 * Propose merging Category:1827 establishments in Bremen to Category:1827 establishments in Germany and Category:19th-century establishments in Bremen
 * Propose merging Category:1852 establishments in Bremen to Category:1852 establishments in Germany and Category:19th-century establishments in Bremen
 * Propose merging Category:1857 establishments in Bremen to Category:1857 establishments in Germany and Category:19th-century establishments in Bremen
 * Propose merging Category:1861 establishments in Bremen to Category:1861 establishments in Germany and Category:19th-century establishments in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:1827 in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:1852 in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:1857 in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:1861 in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:1820s establishments in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:1850s establishments in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:1860s establishments in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:Years of the 19th century in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:Years in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:Decades in Bremen
 * Propose deleting Category:Establishments in Bremen by year
 * Propose deleting Category:Establishments in Bremen by decade
 * Propose renaming Category:1858 establishments in Frankfurt to Category:19th-century establishments in Frankfurt and merging to Category:1858 establishments in Germany
 * Propose merging Category:1899 establishments in Frankfurt to Category:1899 establishments in Germany and Category:19th-century establishments in Frankfurt


 * Nominator's rationale: There is scope for growth in century categories, but year categories are not justified here. – Fayenatic  L ondon 11:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Some categories were not tagged; I will do so. If there are no further comments in a week, I would close this as merge/rename/delete as nominated. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster  (talk · he/they) 01:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per nom, but the pre-1866 "in Germany" categories should be renamed to "in the German Confederation" because Germany as a unified country did not exist yet. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:10, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Support all, and agree with pre-1866 establishments in the German Confederation. PearlyGigs (talk) 21:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.