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.
Nominator's rationale: This is a difficult one because the category tree is so extensive, but there is no generally accepted definition in academia of the distinction between a political theorist and a political philosopher, especially in premodern contexts. (It's true that some academics today draw a distinction and describe themselves as one or the other but, again, there's no consensus on what the distinction is.) Whether an article is categorised here or in
Category:Political philosophers is largely arbitrary, and many are in both.
The current description of the category—"political philosophy is one, but only one, of the many species of political theory"—is vague and at odds with the page
political philosophy, to which
political theory redirects, and the characterisation of political philosophy as a subset of political theory is also tendentious. Notably, the original description of the category when it was created was "commentators on social and political theory who are not generally considered to have the stature of philosophers", which seems like a fairly useless distinction for categorisation purposes: "stature" is not a prerequisite at
Category:Philosophers. —
Nizolan(
talk ·
c.)11:06, 25 July 2019 (UTC)reply
I can see no obvious differences between the various categories of political theorists, philosophers, scientists, etc. so I am in favour of merging as many as possible.
Rathfelder (
talk)
14:29, 30 July 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Rathfelder: The distinction between political scientists and theorists/philosophers is a bit more straightforward fwiw: political scientists do empirical (and maybe quantitative) work; political theorists do, well, theoretical work. Compare
theoretical physics and
experimental physics in the hard sciences. People can be both ofc, you're right the line isn't easy to draw. But in the case of theorists vs philosophers there really is no obvious way to separate them. —
Nizolan(
talk ·
c.)15:14, 30 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Procedural oppose. It would be recommendable to discuss first (or in conjunction) if there is consensus to merge the American political theorists with the American political philosophers, to merge the British political theorists with the British political philosophers etc. before merging the parent categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
15:31, 3 August 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle:These arguments apply to all the categories in the tree, would you be fine with the nomination if I tagged the subcategories and relisted it under the new scope? Courtesey ping to nominator:
Nizolan --
Trialpears (
talk)
21:14, 2 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Support Arguments make sense and will aid readers in finding appropriate topics without having to check two different categories. I think converting it to a group nom would be appropriate per my comments above. --
Trialpears (
talk)
21:14, 2 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Per discussion, currently tagging subcategories for renaming as well
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DannyS712 (
talk)
23:33, 17 October 2019 (UTC)reply
Support all, I have checked a number of articles in the American and British subcategories and I could not see a difference between political theorists and political philosophers.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:27, 18 October 2019 (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:Romaniote Judaism
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.
Support, probably the category was created for articles about religious topics, but the synagogues subcategory is the only content that really fits that purpose.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:31, 18 October 2019 (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 ship captains
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 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:Women recording artists
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.
Nominator's rationale: As in other past cases of "recording artists" categories coming up at CFD, the distinction between a "recording artist" and a "musician" is not a useful or
WP:DEFINING one for the category system to curate. While musicians do exist who do not record, it's difficult at best for such a musician to become notable enough for a Wikipedia article at all, given that our basic notability criteria for musicians mostly hinge on having some kind of recordings -- so by definition, the majority of musicians who have articles at all are going to be "recording artists", yet just 14 women have been selected here out of the literally thousands who could have been. Where's Kate Bush, for example? Or Whitney Houston, Lizzo, Serena Ryder, Madonna, Janelle Monae, Shakira, Adele, Kylie Minogue, Diamanda Galas, Céline Dion, and on and so forth into infinity? It's just not a useful or maintainable distinction.
Bearcat (
talk)
02:54, 17 October 2019 (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:LGBT horror 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.
Nominator's rationale: The intersection of sexuality with a specific genre of film is not a
WP:DEFINING characteristic for the purposes of the category tree. We don't have similar categories for any other genre of film; in fact,
Category:LGBT directors isn't even subcategorized for the basic distinction between film, theatre and television directors at all, let alone for any particular genre of film, theatre or television.
Bearcat (
talk)
02:26, 17 October 2019 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. I was the original creator of the page and after looking more closely at the Wikipedia rules on overcategorization, I think it makes sense that it should be deleted. I'm working on some film studies research that relies on this intersection so I thought it might be useful, but there are other ways to get here. (
Earynleri) (
talk)
22:13, 21 October 2019 (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:1820 Michigan elections
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.
Nominator's rationale: Following precedent at
Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_December_10#1824_establishments_in_Michigan, the entity of Michigan did not exist in 1820, so it is incorrect to suggest Michigan held elections in 1820. Michigan Territory included all or parts of Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota, and its elected officials therefore had jurisdiction over all or parts of those modern states. (Note: I am not proposing renaming
Category:1835 Michigan elections or
Category:1836 Michigan elections, even though Michigan did not achieve full statehood until 1837—those categories currently only contain elections from that portion of Michigan Territory that was pending statehood, so I believe the current category names apply.)
Sarcasmboy (
talk)
01:14, 17 October 2019 (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.