Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 4

January 4

Category:Pages with misplaced templates

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 19#Category:Pages with misplaced templates

Category:Fiction narrated by a dead person

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) 04:28, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining category that does not define the films themself. This type of categorization is poor as it weakly connects the films in the category by the use of a deceased character narration in the film. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 21:20, 4 January 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:Comic book characters in other media

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) 04:27, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It's unclear what excludes something from one category or the other, making this redundant. Appears that the user has since received a topic ban from category creation. -- 2pou (talk) 20:30, 4 January 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.

Scientists and descent

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) 03:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEGRS. Following this discussion about the Italian descent category and together with discussions below #Category:American scientists of Pakistani descent and #Category:Canadian scientists by descent, scientists are defined by their nationality (and of course their field of study), but categories of scientists by country of their ancestors without a reference to their actual nationality serve little apparent purpose. Place Clichy (talk) 18:32, 4 January 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:Canadian scientists by descent

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, but I am merging the contents to the appropriate "Canadian people of FOOian descent" as a default. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:21, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEGRS. Following this discussion about the Italian descent category, like the other discussion below, there seems to be consensus that the mere country of descent is not a defining factor for scientists that would justify these category intersections. Also note that in most cases these categories seem to be used for expatriates rather than descent. Place Clichy (talk) 18:16, 4 January 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.

Asian-American film directors

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) 04:23, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename category:Asian-American film directors to Category:American film directors of Asian descent
  • Nominator's rationale This category has 13 subcategories (including Category:American film directors of Afghan descent) which use the American x of y descent. Does anyone actually think people from Afghanistan and people from Japan are part of one ethnic group? the guidelines say we categorize by ethnic group, not by race (although for that matter, does anyone consider those from Afghanistan and those from Japan to be the same race?). For now though the biggest problem is this category not conforming. It goes against its parents Category:American people of Asian descent, Category:American people of Asian descent by occupation, the majority of its sister cats under that cat use the form American [occupation] of Asian descent or American people of Asian descent in [occupation]. The fact that it uses a different for than all 13 of its daughter categories does not seem justified. It also remains unclear to me why we moved this from the broader filmmakers category to this narrow one. Especially because of non-diffusing rules, I really feel a move to Category:American filmmakers of Asian descent would be very justified, but that is secondary to the need to get this to conform to all sides of the category tree in using the American [Occupation] of y descent form.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:31, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename and containerize per this discussion. Place Clichy (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also containerize, per Place Clichy. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:54, 10 January 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.

American-Indian businesspeople

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) 04:20, 12 January 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.

Asian-American businesspeople

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 and containerize. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:18, 12 January 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.

American aviators of Asian descent

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: no conseusus to delete/merge, so rename as nominated. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:48, 19 January 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.

Asian-American female aviators

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:American female aviators and Category:American aviators of Asian descent, the latter of which was created as result of this discussion, which was discussed concurrently. The two discussions were read together. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:48, 19 January 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.

Indigenous American female aviators

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: no consensus to delete/merge, so rename as nominated. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:25, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename Category:Indigenous American female aviators to Category:Native American female aviators
  • Nominator's rationale This is the only sub-cat of Category:Native American women that does not use the Native American form in the name. It is also the only sub-cat of Category:Native American people by occuation to use this form. All other categories either use Native American, or use a specific ethnic designation (such as Category:Navajo judges). Well there are some sub-cats of Category:Native American sportspeople that refer to a specific institution, but that is a different issue). There is very good reason for this. 1-the standard usage in the United States is Native American. 2-this is a specific ethnic group, we categorize by ethnic group, and usually assume one limit to an ethnic group is residing in a specific country. 3-the current name is more ambiguous, and could in theory by some be thought to refer to an Otavalo involved in aviation, who never even flew his plane within the airpspace of the United States of America, let alone set food on the ground in that country. Even if our Otavalo friend had infact flown on occasion to the US (which would be not a surprise), he would only be maybe part of this intended category if he became a permanent resident of the US. I will leave it to others to debate whether an immigrants from the highlands of Peru who speaks at best broken Spanish as a second language and becomes a permanent resident in the United States qualifies as "Native American" or weather he should be classed as "Hispanic and Latino American". My sister-in-law is an even more confounding individual. This is not just a hypothetical question, although I do not know there are many Otavalo in the US, I do know there are huge numbers of Nahuatl and people from various Mayan ethnic groups, as well as from other ethnic groups indigenous to Mexico and I am certain that the number of people throughout the US who are ethniclly part of groups indigenous to South American is in the thousands, far less than the millions of Americans who are ethnically linked to Spain, Portugal, or somewhere in Latin America. That number is about 40 million total (I could be off by a few million, but that is close enough for this discussion). The clear fact is we want to this unambiguously link the people to the United States and be clear to editors that is the meaning and intended scope. The target does this, this name does not. It is also the lone outlyier against over 30 other categories using the Native American form.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Place Clichy (talk) 15:30, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to parent categories as a double violation of WP:OCEGRS for gender and ethnicity (or if kept, rename per WP:C2C). Marcocapelle (talk) 18:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete suffers the same problems all "descent" categories do (see User:Carlossuarez46/Descent categories). Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:55, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Dimadick (talk) 16:34, 5 January 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.

Chinese-American aviators

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: no consensus to delete/merge, so rename as nominated. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:21, 19 January 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.

Odia Diaspora

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/merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:15, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but ensure that all articles end off with an Indian descent category. India is a big place, but (except where there are very clear sub-ethnicities, we do not normally have descent categories below country. Carlossuarez46 always opposes the existence of descetn categories, so that his vote should be discounted. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:41, 10 January 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:Political organizations of minorities

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) 04:12, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant with its only child, Category:Political parties of minorities, which is already correctly categorized. This near-empty intermediate level does not bring much value. Place Clichy (talk) 14:01, 4 January 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.

Japanese-American theologians

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: purge and merge to Category:American theologians and Category:American people of Japanese descent/Category:American people of Korean descent, as discussed. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:11, 12 January 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.

Asian-American theologians

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, mainly because it was the parent category for categories (discussed concurrently with this one) that were deleted. See here and here. It was difficult to read a consensus here, but I took these other discussions into account. This close does not preclude someone from creating some sort of category for theologians of Asian theology. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:42, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This and its subcategories include individuals who would be considered scholars of Asian theology, as well as scholars of Asian American theology (which are, if it is not obvious, not the same, albeit overlapping). Kwok Pui-lan and Peter Phan have written in both discourses, Chung Hyun Kyung has written primarily in terms of Asian theology, and Grace Ji-Sun Kim has written in Asian American theology. Then you have others who have not touched these topics and are simply American theologians of Asian descent (e.g. Seyoon Kim). So it is quite an entangled category if you are wanting to get rid of descent categories.--Caorongjin (talk) 09:49, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Precisely, the topic of interesting value for an encyclopedia here is Asian theology (or Asian-American theology). The ascendancy of theologians is quite irrelevant, and some Western or African Sinologists probably gave more important contributions to this topic than, say, Danny Yamashiro, the Hawaiian accident survivor turned televangelist. I am note sure that a category placed at the intersection of Asia and theology should be based on descent. Place Clichy (talk) 16:28, 6 January 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.

Chinese-American theologians

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: purge and merge to Category:American theologians and Category:American people of Chinese descent, as discussed. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:06, 12 January 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:Murdered sportspeople

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) 04:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Trivial intersection. No notable WP:DEFINING link between the occupation and the manner of death. Not expected as a professional qualification. There may have been many years between the occupation and the death, making the link even weaker.
Note: Sources about the death of a person will often discuss both their occupation and their cause of death. This doesn't make this intersection any more notable than a combination with other aspects often discussed in such notices, such as their number of children.
See also: related rationale about suicides by occupation:
William Allen Simpson (talk) 12:04, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:07, 5 January 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:Art Nouveau architecture in Bangkok

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) 03:57, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: While Category:Art Nouveau architecture by city is fairly established, none of the architecture-by-style-in-Thailand categories are subdivided as such, and the suggested parent isn't so large as to need subcategorisation. All the members are already otherwise categorised under Category:Buildings and structures in Bangkok. Paul_012 (talk) 11:52, 4 January 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:American scientists of Pakistani descent

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. I have also taken into account the comments in the other related discussions on this page, here and here. I have not discounted Carlossuarez46's !vote, as was suggested. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:27, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEGRS. Following this discussion about the Italian descent category, there seems to be consensus that the mere country of descent is not a defining factor for scientists that would justify these category intersections. Also note that in most cases these categories seem to be used for expatriates rather than descent. @AleatoryPonderings, William Allen Simpson, Marcocapelle, Justus Nussbaum, and Good Olfactory: pinging contributors in the previous discussion. Place Clichy (talk) 09:56, 4 January 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:Operations Near Cache River, Arkansas

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) 23:05, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge as WP:SMALLCAT, as there is only one article in each of these. These are sub-cats within "Campaigns" categories, but a single page about a battle does not deserve a Campaign category. – Fayenatic London 08:09, 4 January 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:Fictional LGBT characters by occupation

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; Category:LGBT villains and Category:LGBT superheroes moved to Category:Fictional LGBT characters. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:03, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEF. It could be argued that the two categories inside of this category, superheroes and villains, are not occupations, merely lifestyles of the character. – DarkGlow (✉) 02:29, 4 January 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:Education missionaries

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 as nominated, primarily because Category:Missionary educators was not nominated. I will redirect Category:Education missionaries to Category:Missionary educators. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:31, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Seems to duplicate Category:Missionary educators unless I'm missing something? Le Deluge (talk) 01:14, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge or reverse merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:11, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom These are missionaries who engage in education. They are missionaries because of their specific connection to a specific religion. The target is the order that represents who and what these people actually are.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:49, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reverse Merge more logical. Not all education missionaries who support education are educators but all missionary educators are working as education missionaries. An education missionary category would include someone who builds schools but does not teach or lead teachers. They are not an educator. Education missionaries is more accurate and inclusive of the two.Breamk (talk) 14:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge somehow -- Reverse merge for preference as they were probably primarily missionaries, though they fulfilled that role through teaching. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:30, 10 January 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:Recipients of the Royal Order of the Engabu

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) 23:02, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/"Listifying" Category:Recipients of the Royal Order of the Engabu
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD & WP:SMALLCAT)
The Royal Order of the Engabu was established in 2010 by the Bunyoro kingdom within Uganda. The only article in the category, Muedzul Lail Tan Kiram, is a local royal from the Philippines with no clear connection to Uganda or Africa in general so I'm not sure why he received it. I don't know if I can say the category is "listified" since there is only 1 article but it is now linked here in the main article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:08, 4 January 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:Honorary graduates of Keele University

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) 23:01, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD and WP:SMALLCAT)
The only article in this category is Neil Baldwin (Keele University), a person with learning disabilities who was "adopted by the student body over the last 50 years as something of a mascot for Keele". Mr. Baldwin is definitely defined by his association with the school and received other awards like an honorary membership into the student body and a testimonial match, but these honours don't seem individually defining. There is no 2nd person with learning disabilities who became a Keele school mascot so this category has no growth potential, unless we add people who received honorary degrees for donating money which we've consistently found non-defining. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:08, 4 January 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_January_4&oldid=1001316835"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 4, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.