Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 February 14

February 14

Sects in the Latter Day Saint movement

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. Merger proposals may be presented separately. – Fayenatic London 09:29, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Sect" can carry with it a slightly negative or POV connotation that the group is somehow heretical. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) is the dominant church in the Latter Day Saint movement (claiming 98% of Latter Day Saints), and it would likely use the "sect" terminology to describe these various branches (because it regards all but itself as illegitimate), but Wikipedia should not. If renamed these will match the parent category Category:Latter Day Saint denominations and the lead article List of denominations in the Latter Day Saint movement. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:58, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I don't know if I see "sect" as negative, definitely not like "cult", but the proposed renames better match most of the religion category tree. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:40, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • In Christianity, apparently "sect" used to be more pejorative than it is today. From Sect: "While the historical usage of the term 'sect' in Christendom has had pejorative connotations, referring to a group or movement with heretical beliefs or practices that deviate from those of groups considered orthodox, its primary meaning is to indicate a community which has separated itself from the larger body from which its members came." These groups certainly are sects under the latter definition. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:17, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the additional background; perhaps my experince with the word "sect" is atypical or incomplete. All the more reason to rename them. - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:13, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename in many places "sect" is just as negative a word as "cult". We clearly should not use it if we want to be a global publication that avoids needlessly expressing points of view on issues at hand.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:11, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename most — while GOF has found a nice reference, the "main article" calls them denominations. I'm a bit concerned that many of them claim the same main article, and it is actually a list. Most of the sub-sub-categories are in more than one sub-category, making this seem more like a scheme of beliefs rather than a scheme of denominations. Therefore,
    • Upmerge Category:Monotheistic sects in the Latter Day Saint movement
    • Upmerge Category:Prairie Saints sects in the Latter Day Saint movement
    • Upmerge Category:Rocky Mountain Saints sects in the Latter Day Saint movement
    • Upmerge Category:Trinitarian sects in the Latter Day Saint movement
    • Rename Category:Latter Day Saints by denomination to Category:Latter Day Saint members by denomination
William Allen Simpson (talk) 13:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Support this merge as well (next to supporting the rename, so this is my 2nd vote). The above categories are poorly populated and partially overlapping container categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:33, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • "Prairie Saints" and "Rocky Mountain Saints" is a relatively important—if not the most fundamental—division of Latter Day Saint denominations. I would be more inclined to upmerge some of the subcategories of these two categories rather than upmerging Category:Prairie Saints sects in the Latter Day Saint movement and Category:Rocky Mountain Saints sects in the Latter Day Saint movement. But in any case, there does seem to be general overcategorization here, with a lot of the subcategory information better explained in the list and individual articles. I would leave upmerging proposals to a follow-up nomination, as it is somewhat complex. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:29, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I am not certain whether these groups are sufficiently distinct to be considered Christian denomination. But the term sect indeed has unfortunate implications in modern sociology. Per the main article: "they are described as newly formed religious groups that form to protest elements of their parent religion (generally a denomination). Their motivation tends to be situated in accusations of apostasy or heresy in the parent denomination; they are often decrying liberal trends in denominational development and advocating a return to true religion." ... "sects have, in contrast to churches, a high degree of tension with the surrounding society" ... "Some religious groups exist in tension only with co-religious groups of different ethnicities, or exist in tension with the whole of society rather than the church which the sect originated from"." Dimadick (talk) 20:02, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support "sect" has negative connotations to many. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:58, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - parent is Category:Latter Day Saint denominations so this is WP:C2C. Oculi (talk) 11:19, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse Simpson's merging proposals above. As I said though, I am unconvinced we need any subdivisions of the parent category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No view on sects/denominations, but Upmerge categories with few members, so that we eliminate small categories. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2021 (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:Executive branch of the government of Republic of Artsakh

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 Category:Executive branch of the government of the Republic of Artsakh (hoping to get it right this time). Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:30, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, fixing a typo (missing "the"), the proposed rename was an alternative variant that came up in the speedy discussion below. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:36, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion
@William Allen Simpson, Oculi, and Laurel Lodged: pinging contributors to speedy discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. This is not the parent Government by country.
  2. This is Category:Executive branches of government (trailing), where its main subcategories with the word "government" are:
    1. Category:Heads of government (trailing), and
    2. Category:National governments (trailing).
  3. In my speedy nomination and my argument here, I'm only concerned with those with the before the (usually compound) country pattern. I've listed such others above.
  4. Oculi is correct that Category:Welsh Government is an outlier, yet it doesn't mention executive in its name. Moreover, it is an outlier in this trailing direction.
  5. Also, another outlier Category:Executive branch of the government of Arkansas probably doesn't belong here at all, as no other US state government is included directly.
  6. Finally, most of the articles don't belong here either, as they are not about executive branches. For example, article Government of the United Kingdom does not belong here; it is already represented by sub-Category:Ministerial departments of the United Kingdom Government (that I'd rename Category:Executive branch of the United Kingdom government later).
Therefore, the counts given by Oculi are tendentious, as they include things that do not belong, or are duplicative.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 12:57, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Quite a tetchy response. By the way, I've added Category:Executive branch of the government of California. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Now there's a word I've not seen in a long time! However, my response was not intended to be bad tempered. It is a dry, numbered, recitation of facts, concisely responding to each of the previous points. When so many disparate arguments are floated, it is my preference to number them (rather than an impenetrable wall of text). That makes the discussion easier to read.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:14, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
'Executive branch' is not a UK term. I can't see the relevance of any of these carefully numbered points. All the 'fooian government' and 'foo government' are wrong. 'United Kingdom government' is grammatically wrong as 'United Kingdom' is a noun, as is 'Republic of Artsakh'. (All this verbiage is because Good Olfactory missed out a 'the' when implementing the entirely routine cfd 2021 January 27#Category:Executive branch of the Republic of Artsakh.) Oculi (talk) 11:39, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Content relative to subnational entities should probably be moved to a subcategory. There is currently a Category:Cabinets of country subdivisions, itself a child of Category:Governments of country subdivisions . There may or not be an additional layer for executive branches besides the cabinet. However there is currently quite a mess here, I large part due to the fact that many countries use the words cabinet, government and executive interchangeably with a very similar meaning, while for some other countries the exact same words refer to a different reality. There is also confusion between categories for articles about the successive executives in a country vs. general articles on this executive's functions or the detailed system of government. In this regard, Category:National cabinets and Category:Governments by country serve an almost identical purpose. Place Clichy (talk) 14:21, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's true. For another day though. In the British isles, "Government" usually covers the 3 branches of government(executive, legislative & judicial). In other parts of the world, it means only the executive function. There needs to be a weeding out of those governments that only cater for the executive branch alone. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:49, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We should categorize these topics for the substance of what they are, not by the name they have, especially since for most non-English-speaking countries the foreign name will be alternatively translated as cabinet, government and executive depending on the personal preference or culture of the translator. Place Clichy (talk) 15:00, 18 February 2021 (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:Urdu encyclopedias

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) 00:53, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per WP:C2C, parent category is Category:Urdu-language books. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:22, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion
@Gjs238, Armbrust, and Fayenatic london: pinging contributors to speedy discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:24, 14 February 2021 (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:Russian Empire agnostics

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 per the strong consensus here. – Fayenatic London 14:20, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Russian Empire agnostics to Category:Agnostics of the Russian Empire
  • Propose renaming Category:Russian Empire Buddhists to Category:Buddhists of the Russian Empire
Nominator's rationale: rename per precedent in this previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion
@Oculi, Johnpacklambert, and Good Olfactory: pinging contributors to speedy discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:20, 14 February 2021 (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:Congolese independence activists

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 March 3#Category:Congolese independence activists

Category:Freemen of Wolverhampton

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:51, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Freemen of Wolverhampton
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)
The Freedom of the City of Wolverhampton was originally like a medieval business license for members of livery companies but later it became like an individual business licnese. Later, though, it became a municipal award like a key to the city given out to already prominent people. Locals tend to mention this award in passing with other honours while national officials seem to go from town to town collecting freedoms: Field Marshal Douglas Haig has 7 while Prime Minister David Lloyd George has a whopping 20, and is certainly not defined by this 1! I created a shortcut for categorization and the contents are already listified right here in a section of the Wolverhampton city article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 17:42, 14 February 2021 (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:Dizengoff Prize recipients

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:49, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Dizengoff Prize recipients
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)
The city government of Tel Aviv, Israel gives a sculpting and painting award called the Dizengoff Prize and often there is one winner per year in sculpting and several in painting, although it varies a lot over time. (The top Isreali award for sculpting and painting is the Israel Prize which is why we also have Category:Israel Prize in sculpture and painting recipients.) This award is typically listed in passing with other honours so it doesn't seem defining in articles like Michal Na'aman and Pinchas Cohen Gan. The category contents are already listified right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 17:42, 14 February 2021 (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:Slovak Catholic bishops

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:20, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary intermediate category. Only content is Category:Slovak Greek Catholic bishops and Category:Slovak Roman Catholic bishops, both already properly categorised. Rathfelder (talk) 15:52, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah this raises that other head scratcher: Bishops in Slovakia vs Slovak bishops: Juan Čobrda would be in the latter but not the former. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I say those who emigrate before taking an office should be classed with their new country. The only people who should be in {x county bishops} and {bishops in y county}, are those who were either in the first country and then sent to the second one, or those who are clearly expatriate missionaries advanced to being bishops.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:38, 19 February 2021 (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:NBA G League players from Serbia

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:46, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Nominate for deletion. There is no need for categories looking at players of certain nationalities for a lower level league such as the NBA G League. The player will already be in the category “Serbian expatriate basketball people in the United States” as well as any relevant NBA G League team categories. This is WP:OVERCATEGORIZATION as this intersection is not defining. Rikster2 (talk) 14:57, 14 February 2021 (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.

Hermitages

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) 00:41, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not all hermitages are Christian. Need to disambiguate at a global level. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:23, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I had checked that all entries in the nominated categories contain only Christian hermitages. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:52, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Most commendable. Oculi (talk) 11:56, 15 February 2021 (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.

People from Drama (regional unit)

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:38, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns, in this case except Drama, Greece (45,000 people). This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:50, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Some one-thousand-people places in Greece are more notable than some one-million-people places in the U.S. (or, say, China), like Delphi, Ithaca, Cythera, Sparta or Olympia. Place Clichy (talk) 21:56, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Probably not to the US or Chinese. These aren't categories about ancient places. These are categories about people who notably populated the modern location, who are not otherwise categorized as "FOOian Fooers". (For example, notable governors of the location.) That needs a large well-documented location.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:18, 18 February 2021 (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.

People from East Attica

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:34, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns. In this case there is no such exception at all. This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:50, 14 February 2021 (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.

People from Euboea (regional unit)

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. There were individual calls to keep certain of these, but none garnered a consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:58, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns, in this case except Chalcis (59,000 people) and Karystos (5,000 people). This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:50, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Maybe we should follow a different procedure for islands? It doesn't make much sense to upmerge their members to the mainland that each island is tied to administratively. Skyros, specifically, is a "weird" case as it's geographically considered part of Thessaly, but administratively is part of Euboea (see Sporades). We can discuss this now, or maybe we should leave them for the moment and finish with the mainland first. --Antondimak (talk) 13:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would probably be better to keep the consistency with the rest of the tree. If we are also going to delete the island categories, then yes, the second merge target solves the issue in this case. --Antondimak (talk) 18:29, 14 February 2021 (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:Pope Pius XII appointments

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:41, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is the only category like this. We also have Category:Pope Pius XII advisers, Category:Bishops appointed by Pope Pius XII and Category:Cardinals created by Pope Pius XII. They all fit into trees of similar categories. Its not clear to me what purpose this category serves. Rathfelder (talk) 11:25, 14 February 2021 (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:Period films

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 contents to appropriate subcategories of Category:Historical films. Note that there is also Category:Period pieces, Category:Period horror films, Category:Period action films, and Category:Period television series, all of which were not nominated in this discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:44, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Period films are the exact same as historical films. The sub-categories may be renamed Historical action films‎ and Historical horror films for consistency with historical drama and historical fiction. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:16, 14 February 2021 (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:DuMont News & DuMont Sports

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) 00:26, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The DuMont Television Network never actually had a dedicated news or sports divisions, so there shouldn't be categories for things that never existed. 2600:1700:C960:2270:446F:23ED:BD33:29E4 (talk) 04:47, 14 February 2021 (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/2021_February_14&oldid=1013380006"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 February 14, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.