Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 August 18

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 18:31, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nominator's rationale: Category is based on a WP:NONDEFINING characteristic. It was previously deleted in 2013 for this reason. 1857a (talk) 21:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - re-creation of deleted category. Oculi (talk) 21:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete recreation and non-defining. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:30, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete oer G4. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete per WP:G4. Place Clichy (talk) 08:04, 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. MER-C 17:08, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:LGBT voice actors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  
• Propose deleting Category:LGBT voice actresses (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization of just two actors (one per category) based on a non-defining intersection of unrelated traits. In the Category:LGBT actors tree, we do not subcategorize the actors by the question of whether they acted in film, television, stage or voice roles -- we categorize by gender where appropriate, and/or by which quadrant of the community they belong to where known, but chunking out the voice actors for their own category isn't a necessary or useful separation in this context. No upmerging necessary, as both of the two people filed here are already in other appropriate subcategories of the parent. Bearcat (talk) 18:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. This is actually a WP:DEFINING intersection for trans people, esp trans women, for whom vocal range is a significant issue. It might be helpful to narrow the categories to trans-only, but outright deletion is not warranted. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:37, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Pace BHG I'm not really convinced that this is defining for trans actors either. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:56, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and per WP:OCEGRS. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:32, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. The voice is not intrinsic to their LGBTness; the LGBTness is not intrinsic to their voice. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:03, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and WP:OCEGRS. I doubt that academic research would focus on the intersection of LGBT and dubbing, even for transgender, even for porn. (That's a good question though: can LGBT voice actors dub straight porn films, and vice versa?) Place Clichy (talk) 08:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another interesting question is whether "LGBT vice actors" would be defining if it existed? (Hiberno English needed to make that pun work). Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:33, 25 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. MER-C 17:09, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting

• Category:Television episodes in multiple parts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Category:British television episodes in multiple parts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Category:American television episodes in multiple parts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEF. Including the national subcategories. Sandstein 16:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Procedural oppose. If Sandstein wants the subcats to be deleted, then they need to be tagged and listed here. Since they haven't been tagged and listed, all this nomination can do is to remove the container category, while leaving in place Category:American television episodes in multiple parts etc. That's pointless. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:37, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have struck my procedural oppose now that Sandstein has listed the subcats. I haven't yet taken a substantive view on whether these categories are non-defining. Maybe someone from WP:TV can offer some insights. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:23, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've now also tagged and listed the British and American subcats. The sub-subcats (e.g. Category:Star Trek: Voyager episodes in multiple parts) can be nominated if consensus is to delete the parent categories. Sandstein 16:48, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Notification: WikiProject Television has been notified[1]. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have also notified[2] the Television Episode coverage task force. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:33, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete non-defining. Many shows leave cliff-hangers to be resolved at the next installment of the show, whether deemed the same or next episode is in the eyes of the author. As defining as categorizing books on how many chapters they have. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:35, 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: rename. MER-C 18:15, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Satellite meteorology and remote sensing to Category:Satellite meteorology

Nominator's rationale: Current naming competes with that of parent Category:Remote sensing. fgnievinski (talk) 15:33, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename, the phrase "and remote sensing" is a redundant addition. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:24, 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: rename to "Articles with text in FOOian languages". Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:12, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Articles with text from the Afro-Asiatic languages collective to [[:Category:Articles with text from in Afro-Asiatic languages]]

Nominator's rationale:

1. Category:Articles with text from the Afro-Asiatic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Afro-Asiatic languages
2. Category:Articles with text from the Albanian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Albanian languages
3. Category:Articles with text from the Algonquian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Algonquian languages
4. Category:Articles with text from the Altaic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Altaic languages
5. Category:Articles with text from the Apache languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Apache languages
6. Category:Articles with text from the Arawakan languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Arawakan languages
7. Category:Articles with text from the Artificial languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Artificial languages
8. Category:Articles with text from the Athapascan languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Athapascan languages
9. Category:Articles with text from the Austronesian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Austronesian languages
10. Category:Articles with text from the Baltic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Baltic languages
11. Category:Articles with text from the Bamileke languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Bamileke languages
12. Category:Articles with text from the Bantu languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Bantu languages
13. Category:Articles with text from the Batak languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Batak languages
14. Category:Articles with text from the Berber languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Berber languages
15. Category:Articles with text from the Bihari languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Bihari languages
16. Category:Articles with text from the Celtic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Celtic languages
17. Category:Articles with text from the Chibchan languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Chibchan languages
18. Category:Articles with text from the Dravidian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Dravidian languages
19. Category:Articles with text from the East Slavic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Slavic languages
20. Category:Articles with text from the Eskimo-Aleut languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Eskimo-Aleut languages
21. Category:Articles with text from the Finno-Ugrian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Finno-Ugrian languages
22. Category:Articles with text from the Germanic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Germanic languages
23. Category:Articles with text from the Greek languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Greek languages
24. Category:Articles with text from the Himachali languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Himachali languages
25. Category:Articles with text from the Indic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Indic languages
26. Category:Articles with text from the Indo-European languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Indo-European languages
27. Category:Articles with text from the Indo-Iranian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Indo-Iranian languages
28. Category:Articles with text from the Iranian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Iranian languages
29. Category:Articles with text from the Iroquoian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Iroquoian languages
30. Category:Articles with text from the Italic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Italic languages
31. Category:Articles with text from the Malayo-Polynesian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Malayo-Polynesian languages
32. Category:Articles with text from the Mayan languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Mayan languages
33. Category:Articles with text from the Mongolian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Mongolian languages
34. Category:Articles with text from the Multiple languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Multiple languages
35. Category:Articles with text from the Nahuatl languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Nahuatl languages
36. Category:Articles with text from the North American Indian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Indian languages
37. Category:Articles with text from the North Germanic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Germanic languages
38. Category:Articles with text from the Nubian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Nubian languages
39. Category:Articles with text from the Otomian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Otomian languages
40. Category:Articles with text from the Philippine languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Philippine languages
41. Category:Articles with text from the Prakrit languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Prakrit languages
42. Category:Articles with text from the Romance languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Romance languages
43. Category:Articles with text from the Salishan languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Salishan languages
44. Category:Articles with text from the Sami languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Sami languages
45. Category:Articles with text from the Semitic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Semitic languages
46. Category:Articles with text from the Siouan languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Siouan languages
47. Category:Articles with text from the Slavic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Slavic languages
48. Category:Articles with text from the Sorbian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Sorbian languages
49. Category:Articles with text from the South Slavic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Slavic languages
50. Category:Articles with text from the Tai languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Tai languages
51. Category:Articles with text from the Tungus languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Tungus languages
52. Category:Articles with text from the Tupi languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Tupi languages
53. Category:Articles with text from the Turkic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Turkic languages
54. Category:Articles with text from the Uncoded languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Uncoded languages
55. Category:Articles with text from the Uralic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Uralic languages
56. Category:Articles with text from the West Germanic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Germanic languages
57. Category:Articles with text from the West Slavic languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Slavic languages
58. Category:Articles with text from the Western Malayo-Polynesian languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Malayo-Polynesian languages
59. Category:Articles with text from the Yupik languages collective -> Category:Articles with text from Yupik languages

There is no such thing as a "language collective" - it's not used on Wikipedia and its not a term of art. I think this may have come from "collective language code" - it is the code that has collective application here, not the grouping of languages.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough 13:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC).[reply]

• Support as nominator. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:48, 18 August 2020 (UTC).[reply]
  
• Oppose, for several reasons:

1. These are not content categories. They are tracking categories used for en.wp administration, and they are hidden categories ... so readers don't see them. Polishing the terminology of maintenance categories is helpful only to resolve ambiguity or other imprecision, but in this case there is no confusion about scope or purpose ... so this is just a makework.
2. These categories are populated automatically by {{lang}}, and possibly by other templates. The CFD bots can not recategorise the contents of these cats.
   To make those templates populate the renamed categories, all these means of automatic population needed to identified, and a mechanism created to make them use the new naming format. I see nothing in this proposal to address that.
3. None of the nominated categories has been tagged.

This should have been discussed first at WT:WikiProject Languages, which is the project that uses these tracking categories. Instead, I see that they have not even been notified.

I have created many of these non-English categories when they appear at Special:WantedCategories. In the last few years, I have made hundreds of them. Tweaking them without proper preparation is likely to flood Special:WantedCategories with yet more time-consuming maintenace work ... for zero gain.

I urge the nominator @Rich Farmbrough to withdraw this ill-considered nomination. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• pinging @Trappist the monk: who can maybe shed some light on this as the tracking is done by Module:Lang (line 518). --Gonnym (talk) 14:21, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Language collective is defined at Library of Congress (ISO 639-2 custodican) and at sil.org (ISO 639-3 custodian). With respect to category names, collectives were discussed at:

  • Template talk:Lang/Archive 3 § Category:Articles containing Semitic languages-language text
  • Template talk:Lang/Archive 6 § collective language codes
  • Template talk:Lang/Archive 8 § Old language-collective categories

  —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:15, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you, @Trappist the monk, for that very helpful and well-informed prompt response. So as well as the multiple procedural flaws of this nomination, it is substantively wrong about its core assertion.
  Rich, please can you just bring this to a close? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomenclature

Firstly we should apply WP:COMMON.

Then in Category Land we should apply the following speedy principles:

• C2C: Consistency with established category tree names - the languages category tree uses Fooian languages
• C2D: Consistency with main article's name - the articles on language groups, are named Fooian languages, as shown in the box above.

The references provided don't support the existing naming.

• Library of Congress talks about "language groups", "language collections" and "language group names", it only uses "collective" as an adjective for codes.
• SIL, similarly describes a "collective language code" but the section is called "Collections of languages" and they refer to "a group of individual languages" and "collections of language"
• In the archived discussions, only Trappist uses the term "language collective", and I think only once. Indeed this is the only use of the term I could find on Wikipedia, outside this discussion.

To be clear I have no problem with the term being used in conversation, but it doesn't seem to be a good idea for category names.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:32, 18 August 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Process issues
Ok that's quite a lot of objections from BHG, all relating to Wikipedia process. I'm going to break them down a little further, for clarity

1. Not content categories - we can rename maintenance categories for sense and style. I renamed, I think, the "cleanup" categories to "clean-up" on request from other editors. Good names are a good thing even for maintenance categories.
2. CfD bots the cfd bots won't be needed, unless the cats have been applied manually.
3. all means of automatic categorisation need to be identified this is not going to be hard - there's probably only one or at the most two. As you say these are maint cats, so even if a few members hang around in the old categories for a day or so it's not a major problem.
4. a mechanism created to make them use the new naming format again not hard. Probably [this] is not far from what is needed.
5. tagging You are right, these should have been tagged, I have tagged them. I am not a regular of XfD pages, and if this is an example of CfD, I am glad of it.
6. I have made hundreds of them I'm sure you have, I made many of them myself, if one counts cut-and-paste of old categories, probably most of them, and also made the template you use to create them. But you have made over 5,000 categories in the last week alone, so I don't really have much sympathy for the idea that renaming 59 of them, some of which you created, (and some of which have been renamed already, presumably without your objection), is wasting your work. It's improving it, which is the purpose of a wiki.
7. flood
   • There are only 59 categories
   • There are only 715 articles in these categories.
   • Only 13 of them don't have an explicit Lang template, those I have examined transclude Lang via another template.
   • The average page-views of the categories is less than one per 10 days.

Nothing is going to be flooded by this change.

I thought it was fairly clear that this was a simple change, I hope that the additional information makes it so. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:47, 18 August 2020 (UTC).[reply]

• Support Clarity in names is an important feature of a good system.−Woodstone (talk) 05:20, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The correct preposition is in, not from, e.g. "Category:Articles with text in an Altaic language". –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:18, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree, I have changed the proposition accordingly. I would prefer to keep the plurals, primarily because we use plural nouns to include singular. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 20:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC).[reply]
    
• Support alternative "in" e.g. Category:Articles with text in an Altaic language as a clearer title, assuming that the rename will not cause significant technical difficulties (which I cannot judge). Marcocapelle (talk) 20:35, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Question -- Is this fulfilling a useful administrative function; if so, it should obviously be kept. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ping Peterkingiron It's a rename proposal, not a delete proposal. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 01:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC).[reply]
    
• Comment: If this does get changed, then per WP:CONSISTENCY it should be "Articles containing Afro-Asiatic languages text" to match the other language categories in the set (Category:Articles containing German-language text ). --Gonnym (talk) 17:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• That would also be perfectly fine. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I sympathise with the desire for consistency, but when we are talking about a language group the construct becomes clumsy at best, and I would say ungrammatical. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 19:32, 10 September 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. MER-C 18:16, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Conservation in Hong Kong to Category:Nature conservation in Hong Kong

Nominator's rationale: Rename and disambiguate to remove ambiguity, cf. Category:Heritage conservation in Hong Kong (thank you Underwaterbuffalo for splitting that out last week), and to be consistent with most of Category:Nature conservation by country which has been speedily renamed since the RM at Talk:Nature conservation.

Note: this category was excluded from speedy renaming following opposition at Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion#Opposing a recent category move. After this nomination, only the Rep of Ireland and UK "Conservation" categories will remain to be split. – Fayenatic London 12:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom For consistency with this category tree. Dimadick (talk) 14:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename for consistency. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename but I think the suggestion in the discussion that a parent cat should be used is good, even if it's diffusing (which I'm not convinced about). All the best: Rich Farmbrough 08:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC).[reply]
  

• A disambiguation page was suggested (which I agree with) rather than a parent category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:34, 20 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. MER-C 17:10, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Films directed by William A. Levey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: I'm not sure why this category exists when William A. Levey has no article. SL93 (talk) 06:39, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:FILMSBYDIRECTORCAT Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:25, 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: rename. bibliomaniac15 20:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming:

• Category:Higher school of coaches (Moscow) to Category:Higher School of Coaches
• Category:Higher school of coaches (Moscow) people to Category:Higher School of Coaches people
• Category:Moscow Higher School of Coaches alumni to Category:Higher School of Coaches alumni

Nominator's rationale: I moved Higher School of Coaches (Moscow) to Higher School of Coaches because no disambiguation was necessary and "(Moscow)" is not part of the name of the institution. I propose renaming the categories to match. (This is not speediable because it is based on a recent article move.) Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose as nominated. Capitalisation does remove the ambiguity, esp when using WP:HOTCAT, which will autocomplete without regard to capitalisation. I would support a rename which fixed the capitalisation but retained the disambiguator ... i.e. to Category:Higher School of Coaches (Moscow) etc. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:15, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • What in the world is it ambiguous with? Even School of coaches is not an article. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:57, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per don't reflexively disambiguate, and MOSCAPS. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 07:56, 19 August 2020 (UTC).[reply]
  
• Support, it is sufficiently clear from the capitals that this is not a generic type of school. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:34, 9 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.