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: Strong and clear primary topic; furthermore, provides consistency with the main article
Sierra Nevada, which was recently moved from
Sierra Nevada (U.S.), with strong consensus, for the same reason.
In the cases of both Birmingham and Georgia, there is a 2:1 ratio in the pageviews of the primary and secondary topic. For the Sierra Nevada, it's a 5:1 ratio between the US range and the Spanish range.
CJK09 (
talk)
06:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Especially when - like in this case - the secondary topic has its own category, page views are irrelevant, there is too much risk that articles are being misclassified.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:33, 1 May 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.
Category:Black Women Photographers
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: Proper terminology in a category of this type is "African-American" rather than "Black" -- and neither "women" nor "photographers" should be capitalized either.
Bearcat (
talk)
23:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
We don't categorize people by race across nationality: there are not supposed to be any categories on Wikipedia that categorize on blackness per se, thus placing African Americans alongside people of African descent who are not American. We categorize African-Americans as African-American because they live in the specific cultural context of being Americans, with everything that implies about the historical and political and social and cultural context of the African-American community — but we do not use the category system to transnationally group African-Americans with Kenyan and Nigerian and Congolese and Rwandan citizens on the matter of their skin colour itself.
Bearcat (
talk)
14:35, 8 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete as a triple intersection of race (!), gender and occupation, ineligible per
WP:OCEGRS. If it is defining for some people to be associated with
Black Female Photographers as an organization, I suggest creating a category for photographers by studio, or members of an association, instead.
Place Clichy (
talk)
06:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment@
Bearcat,
Inter&anthro, and
Marcocapelle: in order to avoid non-consensus which could result in keeping the category as is, I'd like to raise to editors in favour of African-American women photographers that 1°) the category lists people that are not American such as
Nadine Ijewere and that 2°) what takes place of a main article,
Black Female Photographers (which actually looks like a promotional article for a non-notable online organization to me), explicitly mentions "all around the world". I therefore find the rationale for renaming weak, and the key issue remains to determine if this intersection is notable in itself. Do you have any arguments for or against it? Whichever way this goes I'm willing to search for consensus because keeping the category as is would be the worst of all outcomes.
Place Clichy (
talk)
07:22, 8 May 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.
Category:British portrait 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.
The result of the discussion was:withdrawn as a new path to keepability revealed itself.
Nominator's rationale: Across the board, all the people actually in either the British or Scottish categories are painters, so there's no useful reason to maintain an artist vs. painter distinction here when the painters categories already existed. And since these are the only "[Nationality] portrait artists" categories that exist at all -- as opposed to the much more highly developed
Category:Portrait painters by nationality tree, which again already existed -- the "by nationality" container isn't necessary either.
Bearcat (
talk)
23:04, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Update: I've decided to withdraw this, as other cleanup spelunking around the overall
Category:Portrait artists tree has revealed that there likely is a path to salvageability here, in that portrait photographers could also stand to get more subcatted by nationality — and once a
Category:British portrait photographers category exists, there's a new basis for these to be retained.
Bearcat (
talk)
23:43, 30 April 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.
Category:Ivan Aivazovsky
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:Eponymous small category for a painter without the volume of spinoff content needed to warrant one. Apart from his biographical article itself, which hasn't even actually been filed here, the only content is an art gallery that was named for him, which also makes this a
WP:SHAREDNAME violation. As always, every artist does not automatically get one of these the moment there's one related article to file in it -- he needs to have a lot of spinoff content, not just one thing, before an eponymous category serves any useful navigational purpose.
Bearcat (
talk)
22:51, 30 April 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.
Category:Russian watercolorists
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: I'm not an expert in whether "color" or "colour" would be considered more normative in a Russian context, so this can be merged the other way if that would be more idiomatic -- but either way, we certainly don't need both spellings to coexist alongside each other as separate categories grouping different selections of Russian watercolo(u)rists.
Bearcat (
talk)
22:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The decision should be based on which spelling would be more standard in Russian English, not on which category existed first.
Bearcat (
talk)
23:07, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Countries where the primary language is not English, but where English is fairly widely understood as a second language, most certainly do have specific rules around which English conventions they follow when they're using it as a second language — so even if English is not the country's own primary language, it's still entirely possible to label it as a "British spelling" or an "American spelling" country. That's what I'm talking about.
Bearcat (
talk)
04:31, 1 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Weak reverse merge. There is no hard and fast rule, though we tend to use UK spelling for Europe (including Russia) and Africa, and US spelling for the Americas and Asia when English is not a primary language (mainly, I think, because many European and African countries have French as a second language, which also uses the U in such words). As such, I'd prefer to see it with the U, but primacy is with the spelling from the colonies so if that's the consensus I've no objection.
Grutness...wha?04:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)reply
As a mainland European person, at school I have learned to write "colour" when writing to British people and "color" when writing to American people. In other words, it seems quite plausible to me that Oculi is right in that Russians do not learn either British or American English specifically.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:54, 1 May 2020 (UTC)reply
I suspect that coping with the mysteries of English spelling variants is even more of a nightmare for people learning it as a second language than it is for native speakers. I dont see any rational basis for decision. Each is as good or bad as the other. So I suggest we go with the older version and the head category.
Rathfelder (
talk)
12:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge as nom i.e. to watercolourists. In an international context not linked to any specific variant, British English should usually be the standard, at least that's the way I've been taught, growing up in a non-English-speaking European country.
Place Clichy (
talk)
07:03, 8 May 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.
Category:Coaxial connectors
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:Kurdish communities in Syria
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. It appears there may need to be a more comprehensive listing to satisfactorily rename the category. There seems to be a rough consensus to rename, but the proposed target is not clear. It may be advisable to initiate a new discussion with broader scope and a new target name type. bibliomaniac1521:46, 13 May 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.
Category:Scream spinoffs
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:Songs produced by Nis Bysted
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: Category has been redirected to Song recordings produced by Nus Bysted inline with the general naming conventions for these types of categories. Apologies if the correct procedure wasn't followed to move the category
→ Lil-℧niquԐ1 - (
Talk) -
10:33, 30 April 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.
Category:Songs produced by Mark Ralph
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: Category has been redirected to Song recordings produced by Mark Ralph (record producer) inline with the general naming conventions for these types of categories. Apologies if the correct procedure wasn't followed to move the category
→ Lil-℧niquԐ1 - (
Talk) -
10:32, 30 April 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.
Category:Deportivo Tepic F.C. players
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. It appears from the article
Luis Adalberto García that the name Deportivo Tepic was only used in 2017-18, the former name being Coras F.C., so there is no need to retain the sub-cat this time; I will redirect the old name instead. –
FayenaticLondon06:28, 15 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Question. Even if the team is no longer known by this name, shouldn't the players be categorized by whatever the team was called back when they were playing? Or are the subjects of this cat simply all carry over to play under the new name? bibliomaniac1502:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Category page was not tagged until today
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
FayenaticLondon09:52, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge and rename per nom and to match parent article name per
WP:C2D. FYI @
Bibliomaniac15 and
Oculi: it is standard to move the category name if the team changes name and categorise players by the current name; if we create sub-categories etc. then players who have played for the same team under two (and sometimes more) names are over categorised.
GiantSnowman12:29, 1 May 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.
Category:Deceased basketball players
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: Per
WP:NONDEFINING. Throughout history humans have been mortal, and unless
transhumanist get their way soon most people living nowadays will be mortal too. Therefore most if not all basketball players (and people in general, including us Wikipedians) alive today will end up deceased sooner or later. I did take into consideration
WP:BITE as
SomeBodyAnyBody05 seems fairly new to Wikipedia and has invested a lot of effort into this category, but after thinking it over for a couple of days I can't see any rational for keeping this category. We don't have
Category:Deceased politicians or
Category:Deceased actors.
Inter&anthro (
talk)
03:47, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
It is odd, but it exists for technical reasons entirely outside of reader use; as noted by Marcocapelle, it has to do with
WP:BLP, and the ability to generate technical reports on BLP-related activity. (For example, one report automatically lists people who are categorized as "living" on the English Wikipedia but as dead on other language Wikipedias, so that we can properly investigate whether that discrepancy exists because the English Wikipedia missed the report of their death or because the foreign language Wikipedia was vandalized. Without a "living people" category, however, there would be no other way for us to stay on top of that.)
Bearcat (
talk)
22:32, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. If this itself hasn't been tried before for the purposes of being speediable as a recreation of deleted content, then similar categories for deceased practitioners of other occupations certainly have. But as noted, every basketball player who has a Wikipedia article at all is either already deceased or will become deceased someday, so we have a longstanding consensus against intersecting individual occupations with the question of living or dead status.
Bearcat (
talk)
22:32, 30 April 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.
Category:Protests over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic
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. However, process-wise, the first category has been emptied, and the second category has been listed for a speedy rename just today, so it will go through the standard 48 hour wait. bibliomaniac1518:21, 8 May 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.
Category:Restaurants of the year in Finland
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.
Categories for nominees that did NOT win an award
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.
Winning these awards may or may not be defining, but we'll argue about that in future nominations. This category is about categorizing people who did NOT win an award, sometimes by themselves and sometimes comingled with actual winners. Nominees are fine for lists or mention within the actual award articles, but doesn't belong in the category space. It might be an honor just to be nominated but it's not even remotely defining. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
00:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. Some (not all) of these are awards for which we do have categories for the winners, but categorizing the non-winning nominees is not useful. Most people get nominations for a variety of awards over the course of their careers, so this would lead to extreme category bloat if it were allowed to proliferate — and, for that matter, even people who have won awards have often also had other nominations for the same award which did not translate into wins, so a person could technically have to be categorized as both a winner and a nominee of the same award.
Bearcat (
talk)
22:38, 30 April 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.