Category:Articles with WikiMiniAtlas displaying incorrectly: not displayed on top of page
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 in the absence of any objections to the stated rationale, and in light of the empty state of the cat. bibliomaniac1503:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: This is not a bug, but a feature of {{coord}}. This category is used on pages where WikiMiniAtlas is displayed inline, but not in the title. In the cases I have checked, this was done on purpose by specifying |display=inline or by not specifying |display= at all.
epicgenius (
talk)
14:51, 24 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:Teaching hospitals in Zambia
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.
Dual merge per
WP:SMALLCAT. I do not consider it part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme, since the scheme contains a massive amount of categoties with only 1-3 articles.
I support this. Inherently there are not a lot of teaching hospitals (though there may be disputes about which ones count) , and I cant see much point in loads of categories with only one article.
Rathfelder (
talk)
13:32, 6 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Propose merging Looking at other countries with a small number of hospitals, no other country has a separate category for just one teaching hospital. There is only one Zambian hospital in Wikipedia. --
Talk to G Moore
21:32, 19 June 2020 (UTC) see
Wikipedia:WikiProject Hospitalsreply
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:Alydar offspring
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 with just one entry. There is no other 'offspring' category for American horses.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof?18:42, 5 June 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.
Nazi Party members
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: rename to a consistent format. For now, I have taken the format of the nobility category as the default (except I changed "in" to "of" for politicians) but I am open to any other format as long as it is consistently applied. However, explicit usage of "Nazi Party" is recommendable to avoid ambiguity.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
16:48, 5 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge/delete (except keep/rename the Politicians category) per Namiba. This is non-defining (if not just wrong) for people such as
Charlotte Ander. DexDor(talk) 21:33, 5 June 2020 (UTC) Oppose rename unless the categories are also purged as many of the articles (e.g.
Franz Ruff) don't mention Nazi Party membership. DexDor(talk)13:56, 6 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose per
WP:COMMONNAME, people are refereed to as "Nazis" not "members of the Nazi party". The same could be said for other parties, such as Democrats instead of members of the Democrat party, or Republicans instead of Republican party.
Inter&anthro (
talk)
22:16, 5 June 2020 (UTC)reply
True, but the term Nazi is used more generally, not just to members of the Nazi Party. As such, some clarification is needed.
Grutness...wha?04:25, 6 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Most of these categories are defining, and should be kept - though I cant see why we need to divide actors by gender - and Nazi Party makes it clearer that we are not including any sort of Nazi revivalists.
Rathfelder (
talk)
13:37, 6 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom, and oppose merge as per Rathfelder's comments. Many of these characteristics are defining (eg actors / actresses, architects, physicians and policitians). --
Tom (LT) (
talk)
10:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)reply
There are very many articles about NSDAP members which are not included in any of these categories. Do we want them to be more comprehensive? Should they be subdivided? Do we include everyone who was a member, given that membership for many people was unavoidable, or that some people were infiltrators? NB I dont think Neo-nazis and the like should be included in any of these. They are a very different proposition.
Rathfelder (
talk)
15:30, 20 June 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:Demographics of the Western Balkans
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: These new creations only gather Demographics of Foo articles for what the creator estimates are (Western) Balkan countries. These country articles are otherwise correctly categorized, and are even also found in ‹The
templateCategory link is being
considered for merging.›Category:Demographics of Yugoslavia. I'm not sure that it is necesary to break down Demographics of... articles in regional categories, and even then if (Western) Balkans are the right region to consider.
Place Clichy (
talk)
14:30, 5 June 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:Unanimous votes of the United States Supreme Court
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 question whether unanimity is a defining characteristic (
WP:NONDEF). In a random sample, only about half of the articles mentioned the unanimity of the decision in the lead. If kept, the category should be called "Unanimous decisions of the United States Supreme Court". Sandstein 09:45, 5 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Support According to the Washington Post (
source) unanimous votes are the most common outcome and represent 36% of all cases. (The controversial 5-4 ones get more coverage though.) If I had to pick one court vote that was defining, I'd say 5-4 since there is a controversy but I don't think this approach is defining.
RevelationDirect (
talk)
00:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete (or upmerge if necessary, possibly listify) as this is not a good way to categorize court cases. It would be much better to subcat
Category:United States Supreme Court cases (which currently contains over 3000 articles) by century or by topic (e.g. employment, health, transport ...). DexDor(talk)20:42, 7 June 2020 (UTC)reply
"The vote of the Justices can be significant in assessing the weight of precedent given to a decision." is a good reason for the text of the article covering it. Categorizing (grouping articles about similar topics) is not quite the same thing. DexDor(talk)20:37, 9 June 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:Super Smash Bros. guest characters
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. The main argument to be given weight here is that being a guest character is not a
defining characteristic for subjects of the articles. This may be a topic to talk about in articlespace. bibliomaniac1517:31, 11 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Redundant with
Category:Super Smash Bros. fighters. The scope is also lacking, as what even makes a "guest" character anyway? Third-party? DLC? All of the playable characters in the franchise originated elsewhere, so they are all guest characters by the standard definition. ~
Dissident93(
talk)09:39, 5 June 2020 (UTC)reply
If that’s the case, at the very least, we need a re-name. What you are saying is not readily apparent, as categories should be. Not intuitive at all.
Sergecross73msg me23:25, 6 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is a existing category because some of these characters are not own by
Nintendo and are in partnership with companies such as
Sega,
Capcom and
Rare. This falls under the guidelines of
WP:SUBCAT, And I quote "If logical membership of one category implies logical membership of a second (an is-a relationship), then the first category should be made a subcategory (directly or indirectly) of the second". There's also a lot of characters in
Category:Super Smash Bros. fighters and we want it to be easy to
WP:DIFFUSE as it is a rather massive category that is likely to grow with new released games.
ֆօʍɛɮօɖʏǟռʏɮօɖʏ05 (
talk)
19:53, 5 June 2020 (UTC)reply
SomeBodyAnyBody05, but why do we need a category of only third-party characters? Your argument of it being "likely to grow with new released games" is just
WP:CRYSTALBALLing. If that does happen, then we would simply react when/if that time comes. At the very least the category should be renamed to clearly state its scope, because "guest character" is too ambiguous per what I said in the OP. ~
Dissident93(
talk)00:30, 6 June 2020 (UTC)reply
@Dissident93, I understand your opinion but why not have the category set in place before that time comes, We already have a stable amount in the category at 14 and with constant online updates and it's third party involvement it's not like it's not going to grow at all. If we delete this then it would be feasible to delete it's parent category as well. I do agree with changing the name of the category.
ֆօʍɛɮօɖʏǟռʏɮօɖʏ05 (
talk)
13:49, 9 June 2020 (UTC)reply
He already told you why -
WP:CRYSTAL. Also, category creation is very fast and easy, there’s no reason we need it on standby like you’re suggesting. I agree that the patent category should be deleted as well, on the same grounds.
Sergecross73msg me15:59, 9 June 2020 (UTC)reply
I agree with the parent category being nominated too for the same reasoning, but I'm waiting for resolution on this before I do that. ~
Dissident93(
talk)19:34, 10 June 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:The Pinball Arcade
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:Grand Order of Water Rats members
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.
Delete -- I would have said listify, but we have a list. I am not sure that the list needs British royalty, who are presumably honorary members, or patrons or supporters, not performers.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
19:42, 7 June 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.