Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 24

< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Warren (talk | contribs) at 13:31, 26 January 2018 (→Category:Music writers: cm). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
< January 23 January 25 >

January 24

Category:Music writers

Nominator's rationale: This category is intended for people who write non-fiction prose works about music, but its name is ambiguous enough that I just had to clean it up for the erroneous addition of several songwriters and/or composers. While it's true that the majority of its sibling categories are named in the format "[Subject] writers", we do have precedent (e.g. "Film writers") for switching to "Writers on [subject]" in cases where the standard name carries this kind of "writers about subject, or writers of individual pieces of subject?" ambiguity. Bearcat (talk) 21:19, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Biblical art by medium

Nominator's rationale: upmerge, redundant category layer, the two container categories together contain only five subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:14, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Music lending libraries

Nominator's rationale: Not a useful distinction. Most of the music libraries lend material. Rathfelder (talk) 19:33, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional bullies

Nominator's rationale: As noted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional bullies, bully is a subjective term. 108.210.218.199 (talk) 02:30, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep It is a very safe bet that most of the membership of this category can be cited to reliable sources as being bullying characters, and fictional characters, after all, are created to fill certain positions. So I am not accepting the assertion of subjectivity; I suspect that literary critics do not. Of course those for whom citation cannot be found ought to be removed, but I'm not buying the idea that we can judge those critics to be wrong.
As a for instance, Ghits for "biff tannen bully" number 83,000. I sure that there are plenty of others that get similar numbers. Mangoe (talk) 14:46, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. WP:OC#SUBJECTIVE. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:49, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as overly subjective. This is especially true because some villains in especially the Superhero genre, will have been portrayed in multiple ways often over long periods of time. A few connected with Batman and Superman have been portrayed almost constantly in comics for over 70 years, plus appeared in many TV, film and novel depictions. While these characters are generally clearly the villain in all appearances, whether they are bullies is hard to say, and will at times depend on their specific portrayal.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:02, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment None of the characters included so far seem to be super-villains, and the only one who is from the superhero genre is Flash Thompson (an early Spider-Man foe, turned into a long-running supporting character and eventually a hero in his own right). Most of the ones I recognize are children or teenagers, often in a school setting. I am not certain why Joffrey Baratheon is included. The character is a particularly sadistic monarch in a war-time setting, but rarely gets his own hands dirty. He mostly commands others to kill, torture, or humiliate whoever he wants to target. Dimadick (talk) 17:35, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 13:41, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Queens regnant of Hungary

Nominator's rationale: upmerge per WP:SMALLCAT, only two articles in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films whose cinematographer won the Best Cinematography Guldbagge Award

Nominator's rationale: WP:NOTDEFINING. Films are not primarily known for winning Best Cinematography at the Guldbagge Awards, the field is not as important as directing or writing and, argh, I hate to say it because of the America-centrism in the film industry, but the Guldbagge aren't as big as the Oscars. Sadly, this seems like overcategorization. Ribbet32 (talk) 01:02, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_24&oldid=822454425"