Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 21

< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log
< June 20
June 22 >

June 21

edit

Category:South Korean LGBTQ military personnel

edit
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 04:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category. Please, Giovanni 0331, populate the categories you create with more than one person SMasonGarrison 23:55, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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:Precursors of electronic literature

edit
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 04:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary and overly broad category that could theoretically be a parent category for all literature prior to electronics. Gjs238 (talk) 19:37, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Hi @Gis238! The intention of the category is to include works that reliable, independent sources have identified as precursors to electronic literature - so non-linear print literature of various kinds, like Nabokov's Pale Fire or Queneau's A Hundred Thousand Billion Poems. This is a very, very small subset of print literature. Perhaps changing the category name to something more easy for non-experts to understand is appropriate, or changing the description? Also - wouldn't it be better to start this kind of discussion on the talk page of the category rather than going straight to a CfD? Lijil (talk) 20:32, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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:Rajiv Gandhi Manav Seva Award

edit
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 04:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category newly created for a single person, based on their being given an award that doesn't have a Wikipedia article. (There is a draft about it at Draft:Rajiv Gandhi Manav Seva Award, but it's been rejected at AFC for lacking reliable sourcing, and absolutely none of the recipients named in it have been wikilinked, so I have no way to even figure out if there are any other potential additions to this category.)
As always, every award does not automatically get a dedicated category the moment one recipient of that award has an article to file in it -- and awards aren't all equally defining of their recipients, so even if there were many recipients with Wikipedia articles it still wouldn't be automatically guaranteed a category for them without substantial evidence that the award met a much higher bar of significance than just existing.
So it might or might not be justifiable if there were a lot of people here, but it absolutely isn't warranted at all for just one person. Bearcat (talk) 16:52, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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:20th-century Slovak engravers

edit
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: Per Fayenatic london * Pppery * it has begun... 04:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category. Instead of merging, I think we should repurpose it to a general artists category. SMasonGarrison 13:39, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: adding parent category
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 16:46, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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:Real Book Song

edit
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: Closing this discussion as invalid since the same category is already being discussed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 18#Category:Real Book Song * Pppery * it has begun... 17:35, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category for songs included in an individual songbook. The songs here are virtually all jazz standards that have potentially been included in dozens or even hundreds of songbooks, thus leading to extreme category bloat if we categorized them for every individual songbook they had been reprinted in -- so for the same reason that we don't categorize songs for every individual album that a recording of them has appeared on, they shouldn't be categorized for individual songbooks that their sheet music appears in either. And even if it were to be kept, it's incorrectly named and would have to be moved to Category:Real Book songs anyway. Bearcat (talk) 16:37, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This discussion already took place and the consensus was to keep it. Trumpetrep (talk) 16:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, precisely how do you claim that categorizing songs for their inclusion in individual songbooks is any different from categorizing songs for their inclusion on individual albums, a thing we have an explicit consensus to not do?
Secondly, this category is incorrectly named according to our naming conventions — singular rather than plural class noun, categorization of "Song" — and thus would have to be renamed to a properly NC-compliant name even if it is kept, so a discussion would still be necessary to get it moved to an appropriate new name regardless. Bearcat (talk) 16:56, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You should consult the previous discussion on this issue.Trumpetrep (talk) 17:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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:Former Meredith Corporation subsidiaries

edit
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 04:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEF; per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 May 23#Category:Former subsidiaries of The Walt Disney Company Mvcg66b3r (talk) 16:35, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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:Orders, decorations, and medals created by Asprey

edit
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 04:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Two newly-created categories for orders, decorations and medals on the matter of who designed and manufactured the actual physical thing that the award recipients are given. This is not defining of the awards, and is not how the word "created" would normally be understood in this context -- we would say that the Academy Awards were created by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, not that they were created by George Stanley or Cedric Gibbons, because "created" is about who launched the overarching concept of the awards program, not who the creator then commissioned to design or manufacture the trophy or medal or plaque or certificate.
As well, we don't have a single other category for any kind of award by the identity of the award's hardware designers, meaning there isn't even an "Awards by designer" tree for them to be filed in. Bearcat (talk) 16:28, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.
edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 July 2#Macau film-related categories

Category:AEW Title Tuesday

edit
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 04:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with a single member after the merging/redirection of other events into the article. Sceptre (talk) 14:13, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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:14th-century Spanish Jews

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 July 2#Category:14th-century Spanish Jews

Category:Defunct towns in Russia

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 July 2#Category:Defunct towns in Russia

Category:Former cities in Russia

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 July 2#Category:Former cities in Russia

Category:People from Sandleford, Berkshire

edit
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 04:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge to parent category. After renaming and purging (see earlier discussion) there are only two articles left. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:45, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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:Ambassadors of Iran to Switzerland and Liechtenstein

edit
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 04:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:44, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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:European traditionalist Catholics

edit
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 04:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: redundant category layers. there are only a handful of country categories in each one. SMasonGarrison 04:23, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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:Classical Wikifauna

edit
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. Sohom (talk) 03:00, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Correct capitalization as used at Wikipedia:WikiFauna. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 02:05, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support rename. lgtm, consistency and all that. Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:16, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support for consistency Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 04:27, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support for consistency. -- Just N. (talk) 09:43, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_June_21&oldid=1298363681"