Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 May 6

May 6

Category:Category:Reform synagogues in the United States Virgin Islands

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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:34, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Reform synagogues in the United States Virgin Islands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary category with 1 entry which is also in parent category. Zerach (talk) 23:32, 6 May 2019 (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:LBEF alumni

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. MER-C 17:06, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No relevant content. Just one, unreferenced, article, about LBEF. Rathfelder (talk) 06:42, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 23:29, 6 May 2019 (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:Montenegrin American

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. – Fayenatic London 16:39, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Complete overlap. Only one, eponymous article. Rathfelder (talk) 06:11, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 23:28, 6 May 2019 (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:Montenegrin Canadian

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. MER-C 18:58, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Complete overlap. Only one, eponymous, article. Rathfelder (talk) 06:08, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 23:28, 6 May 2019 (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:Albums produced by Casey Bates

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. Producers of albums is not a characteristic that is automatically WP:defining. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Album_article_style_advice#Categorization states that if an album is defined by a particular characteristic, then it is likely that the object of the characteristic (e.g. "albums produced by X") will be notable in that capacity and qualify (per WP:NOTABLE and WP:MUSIC) for its own Wikipedia article: if such an article does not exist, then the characteristic is probably not defining. This leaves me free to follow the majority view expressed below. As for listifying, that would in essence recreate the discography part of the deleted article, but I do not find that that is warranted. – Fayenatic London 19:14, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I have nominated Casey Bates at AFD thus am also nominating the category as GNG fail b/c no WP:RS. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casey Bates Theredproject (talk) 13:36, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 23:28, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, and now deleted main article. Jayjg (talk) 19:11, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest listification. While there is apparently not enough content to create an article about the person behind this category, can we at least create a List of albums produced by Casey Bates. [Conversely, if lists of albums by producer are not allowed, we should certainly not categorize albums by producer.] Marcocapelle (talk) 11:04, 25 May 2019 (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:Golden Age of Hollywood actors

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. MER-C 10:16, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 February 10#Category:Golden Age of Hollywood: too subjective and vague. The decades in film and actors by nationality categories have clearer scope and should be used instead. DrKay (talk) 22:07, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:14, 6 May 2019 (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:Seasons in Macedonian football

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: option A: merge Category:Seasons in Macedonian football to Category:Seasons in North Macedonia football (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 00:51, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging either:
or
Nominator's rationale: Regardless of what decisions are made at WP:Naming conventions (Macedonia)/2019 RFC#Adjective, there doesn't seem to be any distinction in scope between these two categories, and they each have the same two parent categories: Category:Association football seasons by country and Category:Football in North Macedonia.
So I don't see any purpose in retaining both. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 11:54, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, but there is a great deal of controversy about whether 'Macedonian' is the denonym (cf 'Northern Irish' - Category:Seasons in Northern Irish football has somehow survived so far). Oculi (talk) 12:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename/merge all to Category:Seasons in North Macedonian football with a headnote to the effect that it includes the period before the country was renamed. This is standard practice with merged and renamed entities, a principle originally developed for alumni categories for renamed or merged colleges. The individual seasons should not be renamed, because they reflect the name of the time. This is all about the same place, a renamed country not a new one. We have also applied this to colonies/republics that have changed names, such as Upper Volta/Burkino Faso. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:18, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That is why I proposed one other of the two existing names, both of which appear to be acceptable. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:36, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further Comment -- The present name of the country is North Macedonia. That change is not controversial. As I stated, this is a renamed country, not a new one. As a matter of precedent, categories since the change of name should use the current name. Those for older periods should use the former one. But they should share a parent with the current name. In this case a demonym is appropriate which is obviously North Macedonian. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:11, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Seeing as Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia)/2019 RFC is now closed
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge anyway (in either direction); and prefer option A. The RFC closed as no consensus with respect to this specific issue, personally I would prefer mirroring to the new country name. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:53, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:Seasons in North Macedonia football (option A). The updated version of WP:MOSMAC (adopted on 7 May 2019) is very specific thatArticle names, categories, and templates should avoid adjectival use altogether. The use of neutral formulations such as "of North Macedonia", "in North Macedonia," etc. is preferred. Place Clichy (talk) 17:38, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:Seasons in North Macedonia football per Place Clichy. Jayjg (talk) 19:13, 22 May 2019 (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:Indian supercentenarians

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. MER-C 10:17, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There were only two people there. I moved them to appropriate parent categories Category:Indian centenarians and Category:Male supercentenarians. — JFG talk 18:37, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete- category has already been emptied, and was an overly narrow overcategorisation. Deletion would just be uncontroversial maintenance. Reyk YO! 14:32, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that was what I was saying. Liz Read! Talk! 02:57, 9 May 2019 (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:Amusement rides introduced in 2020

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: relisted, see here (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:41, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Propose deleting:
Nominator's rationale: It can't have been introduced in 2020, we're not there yet! Ditto Category:Amusement rides introduced in 2021. Proposed to open in... might work. Doug Weller talk 18:36, 6 May 2019 (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.

Official documents

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. Last category will be renamed to Category:State archives. MER-C 09:57, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename for more clarity on the scope of these categories. "Official" is rather vague, "government" is more to the point. See also this earlier discussion from 2010, closed as no consensus. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:37, 6 May 2019 (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:2009–09 in Romanian football

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: speedy deleted per WP:G7. Created by me to fill a redlink in Special:WantedCategories, without spotting misnaming. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:23, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: same year on both sides of hyphen Naraht (talk) 02:54, 6 May 2019 (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:Round cities

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. MER-C 10:07, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting Category:Round cities
Nominator's rationale: Per either WP:TRIVIALCAT or WP:V/WP:OR
We don't have a main article on a round city but the header of the category itself offers the following explanation:
"Cities that were designed as circle, notably those of Mesopotamia and Persia. This does not include cities like Ctesiphon, the round-ness of which was due to natural growth of the city rather than deliberate design from the beginning."
The Round city of Baghdad is a promising start but from there the "round"-ness of articles in this category quickly become less defining: Moscow mentions transport "ring" roads, Darab had earthworks arranged in a "circle", while Erbil has a citadel shaped in an "oval". Maybe there was a trend with "roundness" in urban planning at some point but we need more verifiable content before start a category. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:20, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per nom. Bondegezou (talk) 11:55, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- In a period when cities were walled, they were often round or polygonal, unless their boundary was dictated by other physical features, such as a river or the shape of the hill on which they were built. A circular city will have the shortest possible wall, compared to the area enclosed, thus limiting the length of wall to be defended against enemies. This is thus not trivial. Cities with a circular ring road may have this because it was built along the line of the city walls. This is thus not TRIVIAL. I do not see this as a case of WP:OR in its usual context of invented facts. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:39, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The geometric shape that a city's original plan (or development growth) happen to take on is not a defining characteristic of the city — even if a city started out round in ancient times, it didn't necessarily always stay round. Yes, the Round City of Baghdad is a different matter, because it's actually called that — but that does not mean we need a category for every city on earth that happens to be roughly circular in shape, but whose articles feature no content about why the shape might be significant at all. And a city having a ring road doesn't prove a damn thing about its planned or actual shape, either, because the ring road doesn't necessarily follow the shape of the city itself — cities that are square, rectangular, and/or irregularly-shaped because of a lake or river can still have ring roads too. Bearcat (talk) 16:27, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not a defining characteristic (the Round City of Baghdad is an exception). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:10, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Gor, Darab and Veh-Ardashir are similarly named as "Round City of X". --Z 14:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is not a question whether roundness is attested, it is a question whether roundness is a defining characteristic of those cities. Listification based on Creswell is a better idea. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:38, 9 May 2019 (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/2019_May_6&oldid=905835529"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 May 6, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.