Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 July 8

< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Peterkingiron (talk | contribs) at 18:02, 15 July 2018 (→Category:Toy companies). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
< July 7 July 9 >

July 8

Category:Czech Lion Awards winners (people)

Nominator's rationale: Match the style of other categories, for instance Category:Recipients of the Distinguished Service Order and all other award categories that I know of. Catrìona (talk) 23:25, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Toy companies

Nominator's rationale: There is huge overlap. Most of the model makers also make toys. Many of the toy makers make models. The distinction between the two is unhelpful. Rathfelder (talk) 21:05, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Philosophy and thinking infobox templates

Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT. Only one member.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  20:03, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Giant coal excavators

Nominator's rationale: These machines are not only used in the coal industry. Rathfelder (talk) 16:41, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Athletics clubs in the United States

Nominator's rationale: It is unclear how one can distinguish an "athletics club" from a general "sports club". This naming also presents ambiguity over whether the category relates to the sport of athletics, which is already covered at Category:Track and field clubs in the United States. SFB 15:11, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Underground mines in the Isle of Man

Nominator's rationale: All the Manx mines are underground Rathfelder (talk) 13:00, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Underground mines by country

Nominator's rationale: Unneccessary. The categories for individual countries - where there is categorisation by surface/underground is useful. This intermediate category isnt. Rathfelder (talk) 09:46, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many mines are both surface and underground, and change over time. The distinction between a quarry and a surface mine is also a bit vague. "A quarry is the same thing as an open-pit mine from which minerals are extracted." Category:Quarries Only a minority of articles about mines are characterised as surface or underground, and I doubt if the categorisation is useful to many readers. Rathfelder (talk) 16:43, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is definitely a fair question, but in any case we can't merge the nominated category without also merging all country categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Definitely an issue about the subcats. But if this were approved, couldn't we just assume that the tree merges all the way down. Procedurally, someone would need to tag them all, but if we have duplicate categories for a short duration of both "mines" and "underground mines" cats for every country while awaiting their merger isn't an untenable situation. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:52, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Underground mines

Nominator's rationale: Superfluous category. There is a category Category:Surface mines‎ to distinguish the minority of mines which are not underground. Rathfelder (talk) 09:40, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's disappointing when long-term contributors such as Oculi resort to abuse rather than discussing the merits of proposals. In reality many mines and mining companies operate both underground and on the surface, and very few of the articles are characterised in this way. I prefer to look at the content of the articles rather than coming with presuppositions about the usual formation of category trees. It doesnt appear that this distinction is terribly important in the mining industry. Rathfelder (talk) 15:27, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment while I'm willing to buy the argument that we do not need an underground tree because mines are usually underground (so that only surface mines should be categorized as exceptions), Oculi has a point, this should have been one nomination with a few dozens of categories (all country categories) being nominated at once. The trade-off when nominating is: little effort and zero effect, or more effort and actually reaching something. Or if you are too unsure about a nomination and do not want to spend that much effort to begin with, you might first want to start a non-committal discussion at the relevant WikiProject talk page and/or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:13, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not planning to nominate all the country subcategories. In some countries the surface/underground distinction is useful. I think they should be considered individually. Rathfelder (talk) 20:57, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Steel Mills in Sindh

Nominator's rationale: unnecessary intermediate category. Only one sub cat Rathfelder (talk) 07:13, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "If you think something needs to be upmerged, make sure that all parent categories are included in the nomination as merge targets (or make sure you have a good reason not to include all of the parents)." This advice can be found, not made long ago and buried in some obscure place far from Rathfelder's gaze, but on their own talk page in April 2018. I would be grateful if Rathfelder could commit either to heeding such advice or avoiding cfd and category space altogether. Oculi (talk) 14:27, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • We havent broken down steel companies to any other regions. Even in the USA they are not broken down into states. There doesnt seem to be any good reason for this particular subdivision. The only entry is for companies in Karachi. The articles both seem to be about companies, not about the mills themselves, as is the case with many of the articles about steel mills.. Rathfelder (talk) 14:48, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Papal States (until 1500)

more nominated categories
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, hardly any of the nominated categories contains more than 1 article. The second part of the listed categories, which are nominated for deletion, are container categories which naturally become empty after the proposed mergers have been implemented. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:10, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dimadick, well at least there were Papal States in the Middle Ages; there was certainly no Italy (modern Republic of Italy). When you think of Italy - you consider borders of modern Italian Republic, but there was no such a thing until 19th century. If you like - you can propose rename of all Italy year categories at the Middle Ages period into Italian Peninsula year categories.GreyShark (dibra) 12:58, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The nomination certainly does not intend to get rid of Papal States categories, the only intention is to create more robust categories for the Papal States, i.e. at century level. At the same time the articles should remain somewhere in the year trees as well. My preference would have been to have "year in Europe" as the second merge target, but that proposal didn't make it (see earlier link) so that is why I am defaulting to "year in Italy" as the second merge target. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:18, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cancelled projects and events by country‎

Nominator's rationale: split projects from events, then upmerge in the projects tree or in the events tree as a natural consequence of this earlier discussion. The amount of content per country is too small to create separate cancelled projects categories per country and separate cancelled events categories per country, therefore the split is now combined with a merge. Some countries currently do not have any cancelled event, others do not have any cancelled project, in that case an immediate merge is proposed. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_July_8&oldid=850411106"