Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 August 17

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. MER-C 18:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Slavery treaties to Category:Anti-slavery treaties

Nominator's rationale: rename, per actual category content, the treaties are meant to prevent or abolish slavery. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:49, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support agree with renaming per reasons of nom. SJK (talk) 13:38, 24 August 2020 (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.

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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 02:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Mythology of Patras (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: delete, as far as I can see there has never been a specific mythology of the city of Patras. The source mentioned in both articles of this category is a book by Pausanias (geographer) about all of Greece, not about Patras in particular. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, Delete -- since both articles are already in Mythology of Achaea, which would be the appropriate merge target. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:03, 22 August 2020 (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.

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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 02:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Jessi (musician) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEPON. Not enough related content for an eponymous category. The subcats already sufficiently link to and from one another. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:41, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:20, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 20:48, 17 August 2020 (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.

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 to Category:Abolitionism. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:05, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Abolitionist conventions to Category:Abolitionist meetings

Nominator's rationale: The term "convention" is ambiguous, in that it could mean either a meeting, or an agreement under international law. Currently the category contains three instances of the former, and one of the later (1926 Slavery Convention). While you could argue the later is out of place and should be removed, the naming of the category makes unclear what actually belongs in it, and it is likely someone is going to re-add that article sooner or later. So I think the category needs to be renamed to clearly exclude the international law meaning of the term, and replacing the word "conventions" with "meetings" seems to be the clearest way of doing that. SJK (talk) 19:38, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Category:Abolitionism. As the intention of nominator is to reduce this subcategory size from 4 to 3 articles, there is no longer a need for a separate subcategory at all. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:33, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't mind either way, merge and delete are both equally fine by me. SJK (talk)
• Merge for Now/Rename if Kept to Category:Abolitionism per WP:SMALLCAT until we get up to 5 articles. If kept/recreated, by all means use the proposed name. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:41, 2 November 2020 (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.

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. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:06, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Endangered Indian languages to Category:Endangered languages of India

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:PRECISE. The current name is ambiguous. There is no associated page Endangered Indian languages that would disambiguate the scope, while Indian languages is a dab which points to Languages of India, Languages of South Asia and Indigenous languages of the Americas. From the entries in the category I assume that "Indian languages" refers to the first meaning. Austronesier (talk) 14:37, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, this is part of an unusual category tree, as we normally do not categorize by fluctuating characteristics. According to the header of Category:Endangered languages this category tree is based on a list from the year 1994. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:55, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is pretty similar to the tree of Category:Endangered species. But agree, dynamic criteria are quite a maintenance nightmare. –Austronesier (talk) 15:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per conventions of Category:Languages by country and Category:Endangered languages by country (C2C). Oculi (talk) 20:39, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment These are identical categories and the target is a cat-redirect to the subject. If this nom is successful leave cat-redirect for the subject, as this is a credible search term. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:07, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to match the other subcategories of Category:Endangered languages by country, per WP:C2C. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:36, 2 November 2020 (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.

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: do not merge, though it's clear that the nominated category is not populated to the extent that it could be. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:07, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Universities in China to Category:Universities and colleges in China

Nominator's rationale: "Universities in China" is set up as incomplete and only had a few universities. It seems "Universities and colleges in China" should encompass everything. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:36, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Category:Universities by country; this is standard. Oculi (talk) 09:15, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• rename to match category content Hmains (talk) 05:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep' per Oculi. The category content meanwhile only covers universities. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:31, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• cmt correction to my entry above; should be keep Hmains (talk) 17:02, 10 October 2020 (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.

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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 01:58, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:TikTok songs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: I highly doubt the statement "This category contains songs that have gained significant international popularity thanks to TikTok" is right, and I'm sure these articles don't mention the TikTok-related popularity. © Tbhotch^™ (en-3). 03:17, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple of these articles to reference how the song rose to popularity with the TikTok app. It also helps to better subdivide the Music memes category into relevant apps where many popular music meme songs came from.HighlandFacts (talk) 03:21, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, gaining significant international popularity thanks to TikTok is a too subjective inclusion criterion and (based on a sample of articles) also does not seem to be a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:33, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There is a confusion and variance with the main category, which would be for artist songs i.e. Taylor Swift songs, so at least this category should have its name changed. Secondly, is the means a song became famous notable? Which radio station picked up a song? Which TV program first broadcast a song? No it is not notable, it does not define the song. Thirdly, this is another example of categories being added to articles when the category is not always supported by the text. --Richhoncho (talk) 08:44, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral. Several of the songs that you find on the charts nowadays gained their success after gaining popularity on TikTok. I created this category with the intention of having only those "massive" songs that gained "massive" popularity because of their TikTok beginnings (e.g. Old Town Road, Say So, Roxanne, etc.). However, I've noticed that this category has grown to the point that songs with simply a presence on TikTok are being tagged with it. Although the app now has a vital effect on the modern pop music industry, this category has become too vague and I don't think anyone would have the time and effort to monitor what can and can't be included... HeyitsBen ^talk 10:37, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:CATDEF. Like American Bandstand or MTV, this is just another promotional tool for songs, simply social word-of-mouth advertising. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 06:45, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not sourced in the text of these articles. Dimadick (talk) 15:00, 18 August 2020 (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.

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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 01:58, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Vine songs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: I highly doubt the statement "This category contains songs that have gained significant international popularity thanks to Vine" is right, and I'm sure these articles don't mention the Vine-related popularity. © Tbhotch^™ (en-3). 03:16, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple of these articles to reference how the song, or the artist in conjunction with the song, rose to popularity with the Vine app. It also helps to better subdivide the Music memes category into relevant apps where many popular music meme songs came from. HighlandFacts (talk) 03:22, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, gaining significant international popularity thanks to Vine is a too subjective inclusion criterion and (based on a sample of articles) also does not seem to be a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:36, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There is a confusion and variance with the main category, which would be for artist songs i.e. Taylor Swift songs, so at least this category should have its name changed. Secondly, is the means a song became famous notable? Which radio station picked up a song? Which TV program first broadcast a song? No it is not notable, it does not define the song. Thirdly, this is another example of categories being added to articles when the category is not always supported by the text. --Richhoncho (talk) 08:45, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the same reasons stated by Marcocapelle. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:35, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not sourced in the text of these articles. Dimadick (talk) 15:00, 18 August 2020 (UTC) Dimadick (talk) 15:01, 18 August 2020 (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.