Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< July 17
July 19 >

July 18

[edit]

Category:Fictional characters who use magic

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:08, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: I think this is long overdue. The reason I'm suggesting this is because of the precedent established by the renaming of multiple other categories about characters with various superpowers, including:
So you get where I'm going with this right? "Fictional magicians" just sounds better than "Fictional characters who use magic", and for these renamed subcategories the new names will be shorter and more concise. AHI-3000 (talk) 01:17, 19 July 2024 (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:Video games about crime

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 27#Category:Video games about crime

Category:Video games about the military

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 27#Category:Video games about the military

Category:20th-century Catalan architects

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 29#Category:20th-century Catalan architects

Category:Sailing simulators

[edit]
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: reverse upmerge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:11, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Practically the same thing, desired target category also only contains 2 articles. So this makes perfect sense. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom AHI-3000 (talk) 00:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose instead we will Just delete Category:Sailing video games and keep Category:Sailing simulators. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:42, 23 July 2024 (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:Dutch people of the Eighty Years' War (Spanish Empire)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 27#Category:Dutch people of the Eighty Years' War (Spanish Empire)

Category:Worms (series) games

[edit]
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 given Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 19#Category:Worms (series) was closed as delete. No prejudice against a fresh discussion, but relisting when the facts have changed substantially is pointless because prior comments are entirely irrelevant to the current situation. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:32, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I previously nominated this category but I removed for some reason, but I'm doing it again, the parent category "Worms (series)" only contains the main subject, and "Worms (series) games" contains 27 articles. So This makes the category 100% useless. We usually only categorize video game franchises like this if there is a significant amount of content related to the franchise, other than individual games.

We also have to move all subcategories in this category to the desired parent category first (I think).

QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom AHI-3000 (talk) 00:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not something to support. It for some reason wasn't the way I was supposed to do it. Aparently I had to do it the other way around. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 05:35, 21 July 2024 (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:Aztec scholars

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:26, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per the category description, this category is for scholars of the Aztec people, rather than Aztec people who are scholars. I think we should rename it to make that distinction clearer. Mason (talk) 22:05, 18 July 2024 (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:Futurama films

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 04:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant to its subcategory about season 5. This also categorizes categories with categories in a way that is likely better served by categorizing individual articles. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, this does seem rather redundant considering that the category for Season 5 covers all the exact same articles. AHI-3000 (talk) 22:17, 18 July 2024 (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:Broken Sword games

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 31#Category:Broken Sword games

Category:Monkey Island games

[edit]
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. As this is already a well-attended discussion, I am opting not to relist per WP:RELIST itself (If the closer feels there has been substantive discussion, and disparate opinions supported by policy have been expressed, but consensus has not been achieved, a no-consensus close may be preferable.) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:29, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is small, and its parent category contains only 2 subcategories and 4 (3 now i think) articles. If we merged this with the other category it would make navigation easier, but we've got to add all categories to the parent category too, maybe I can just do that right now. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, there's no reason to keep this category separate, especially because this franchise only seems to have video games but no other notable works in other media. AHI-3000 (talk) 22:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also nominated "Broken Sword games" as well as Worms series games QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2024 (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:Therapy 2093

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:25, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: With one album already appropriately categorized in Category:Therapy 2093 albums and the only article related to the musician, this eponymous category is unnecessary per WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:14, 18 July 2024 (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:Sultans of Bijapur

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:26, 27 July 2024 (UTC); Clarified per request 03:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The article of the higher level cat, Adil Shahi dynasty, was moved to Sultanate of Bijapur, of which there is already a higher level cat for, (or will be soon when CFDS renames Category:Bijapur Sultanate to Category:Sultanate of Bijapur) so this category should be merged with Category:Adil Shahi dynasty, as right now the higher up cat serves no purpose if it does not include the members of the dynasty, which are included here. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 17:13, 18 July 2024 (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:Prehistory by country

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: option B (Prehistory of Fooland). HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:34, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A: Prehistoric Fooland, or
  • B: Prehistory of Fooland?
Nominator's rationale: Numerically, I do not see a major preference in catnames or main article titles, so a speedy rename per WP:C2C or WP:C2D will probably not apply, and we should have a full discussion. As this is an (indirect) follow-up to our recent CFR on Middle Ages by country (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 11#Middle Ages by country), which resulted in a Rename all to Medieval history of Fooland, this precedent would favour option B. But the almost equally high frequency of Prehistoric Fooland including in main article titles should be taken into account. (A case could even be made that a debate should be had on which way WP:TITLECON should lean in the mainspace before we make our decision here, but we didn't do that for Middle Ages by country either). Whichever option we decide, I recommend leaving a redirect for all categories that we decide to rename, just like last time, in order to ease navigation and editing, and prevent duplication. NLeeuw (talk) 09:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping to participants of previous discussion: @Marcocapelle, Smasongarrison, Ham II, Omnis Scientia, and HouseBlaster: for your consideration. Good day. NLeeuw (talk) 09:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A: Prehistoric Fooland Johnbod (talk) 13:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, why is that your preference? NLeeuw (talk) 13:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The easiest way to have a consistent naming scheme for all periods would be to have Prehistory of / Ancient history of / Medieval history of / Early modern history of / Modern history of / Contemporary history of Fooland, as I've argued previously. We've begun to move in that direction for medieval and early modern history.

    As NLeeuw rightly notes, though, we haven't really considered consistency with article titles in mainspace for those moves. If we did have mass RMs for the country articles in each of these categories, we might find it being argued that there should be consistency with the article titles Prehistory, Ancient history, Middle Ages, Early modern period, Modern era (which currently has an active RM for moving the title to Modern period edit on 20 July: now closed as no consensus) and Contemporary history. (There are corresponding category names for all of these, with one exception: Category:Modern history.) That could then result in a naming scheme (for article titles at first) of Prehistory of Fooland / Ancient history of Fooland / Fooland in the Middle Ages / Fooland in the early modern period / Fooland in the modern era or Fooland in the modern period or Modern history of Fooland (only the third of these seems very satisfactory to me) / Contemporary history of Fooland.

    With both those possible naming schemes in mind, I'm leaning towards B: Prehistory of Fooland. But it might be better to test the waters first with a mass RM for all articles following whichever of these two styles we think it would be better to change: Prehistoric [place – not necessarily a country] (examples here) or Prehistory of [place] (examples here). If a preference emerged for Prehistoric Fooland over Prehistory of Fooland it wouldn't be a disaster for the naming schemes I've suggested above, as prehistory could be treated as being outside history, which it is. Ham II (talk) 16:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I would lean B because it matches the pattern in the previous Cfd. Both are fine, ultimately, though. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak preference for option B, ultimately they are both well acceptable and it only matters that we are consistent. But given the outcome of the previous discussion it makes sense that we continue along the same line. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option B for consistency with the history categories, which is the only possible way I can think of distinguishing the two options. – Joe (talk) 08:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • As nom, I should add that the rationale for the previous CfR applies even more strongly here: none of these countries existed as such in prehistoric times. Saying "Prehistoric United States" or "Prehistoric Dominican Republic" is nonsensical, as "states" and "republics" didn't exist, let alone those with the names we know them by today. But "Prehistory of United States" works perfectly well, linguistically speaking, because it literally means "the time before the United States existed", although more specifically "the time before written cultures existed on the territory of the current United States". (This was less of a problem in the previous CfR, where we could argue "Medieval France" and "Medieval England" were already a thing, though many other countries not yet, so we still went with Medieval history of Fooland to be on the safe side). This accuracy argument is more important to me than the consistency argument (but not necessarily decisive). NLeeuw (talk) 01:21, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Prehistory of the United States", which is already the category name, but otherwise I fully agree. Ham II (talk) 06:58, 20 July 2024 (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:Year by category — used with year parameter(s) equals year in page title

[edit]
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: nomination merged to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 13#Category:Year by category — used with year parameter(s) ≠ year in page title
Nominator's rationale: Better grammar; see . Courtesy pings to @Fayenatic london and LaundryPizza03. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:47, 18 July 2024 (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.


Establishments in German cities by year

[edit]
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/rename/delete as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:10, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is scope for growth in century categories, but year categories are not justified here. – Fayenatic London 11:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Some categories were not tagged; I will do so. If there are no further comments in a week, I would close this as merge/rename/delete as nominated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:35, 18 July 2024 (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/2024_July_18&oldid=1242958702"