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:Bor (Niğde) District
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:Wikipedians willing to provide fourth opinions
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:Wikipedians who participate in Spanish Translation of the Week
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:Wikipedians who participate in Science Collaboration of the Month
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:Wikipedia Connection 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.
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:Wikipedia backlog cleaners
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:TWiT.tv podcasts
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 category was created in 2006 and there has not been a significant increase in TWiT.tv podcasts. Based on a quick Google search for
"TWiT.tv podcast" it would be quite difficult to create any more articles about TWiT.tv podcasts. I believe that means the category would be considered a
WP:SMALLCAT with no or very little potential for growth. I'm suggesting that it be merged with it's parent category
Category:Technology podcasts.
TipsyElephant (
talk)
18:25, 27 February 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:Linux audio podcasts
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 category was created in 2007 and there has not been a significant increase of podcasts dedicated to the topic of Linux. Based on a quick Google search for
"Linux podcast" it would be quite difficult to create any more articles about Linux podcasts. I believe that means the category would be considered a
WP:SMALLCAT with no or very little potential for growth. I'm suggesting that it be merged with it's parent category
Category:Technology podcasts.
TipsyElephant (
talk)
18:21, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
I've been taking a look at the different articles in this category and I'm not sure any of them present sources that would suggest they are notable. The only two that might meet Wikipedia's standards of
WP:GNG are
LugRadio and
Linux Voice. I'll look into potentially finding some reliable sources for these podcasts, but if I can't I'll open AfDs. If only a couple are notable enough for articles I would assume the category would no longer be a borderline case of
WP:SMALLCAT.
TipsyElephant (
talk)
15:09, 1 March 2021 (UTC)reply
I looked through the articles and I think they are all just barely notable enough for Wikipedia, but they all need a lot of work. I think instead of deleting the category perhaps we should just rename it to
Category:Linux podcasts. I don't see any reason to limit the category to
Category:Audio podcasts when none of the sources take the time to differentiate and having other formats like
Category:Video podcasts would increase the scope of the category (albeit a very small increase) so that it's less likely to continue being a
WP:SMALLCAT. What do you think of this proposal
Marcocapelle?
TipsyElephant (
talk)
02:45, 4 March 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.
Parallel Britannia and United Kingdom trees
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:Welsh-speaking academics
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:WP:NONDEFININGWP:OCTRIVIA Academics are not usually categorized by the languages they speak; indeed the norm in
Category:People by language and occupation is to classify occupations utilizing the language itself, such as grammarians, lexicographers, singers, translators, and writers. This seems to be the only "-speaking academics" among the occupations.
Moreover, the headnote states:
This category includes academics who speak the Welsh language, regardless of whether they lecture or write in the Welsh language.
Oppose. Common sense dictates that the reader wants this information. I agree with what Deb says. Also: 80 lecturers at the Coleg Cymraeg teach only through the medium of Welsh. Or is this a part of a wider, more sinister attempt to wipe out all references to Wales and the Welsh language from the English Wikipedia?
Llywelyn2000 (
talk)
16:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Grutness I'm surprised as an experienced categorizer that you consider these
WP:DEFINING: "reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having." That is, we should categorize all mathematics professors in every country around the world by all languages they speak? All engineering professors? All geography professors? All philosophy professors? Note that these are not languages used in teaching or writing by these professors. William Allen Simpson (
talk)
12:27, 28 February 2021 (UTC)reply
@
William Allen Simpson: In order to assess this category, I looked at ten of the articles in it at random. Seven of those articles were about academics for whom the majority of published works were in Welsh (i.e., yes, they are used in writing). Another was for a linguist whose specialist area was the Welsh language. Another was for a collector and collator of traditional welsh folk music. The last was for a holder of the Oxford Chair in Celtic studies whose most important published work was translations of medieval Welsh poetry and prose. Seems pretty defining to me. These are not engineering or mathematics professors who simply happen to speak a language -they are academics for whom knowledge of the Welsh language is integral to their studies and publications.
Grutness...wha?15:33, 28 February 2021 (UTC)reply
This discussion is about whether language is defining for this occupation everywhere in every language. I've looked at them trying to discern whether the reliable sources mentioned the language in passing, or it was a reason they were notable. I've concluded the former. You've merely shown that some are miscategorized. William Allen Simpson (
talk)
18:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)reply
No, that is not what this discussion is about - how can it be, since not every language is a minority language?
Deb (
talk)
10:34, 1 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep, and it's looking like a snowstorm. This is a defining characteristic. The "Welsh institutes in Wales vs Dutch institutes in the Netherlands" comparison doesn't stand, as Welsh is a minority language, while Dutch is not.
Vaticidalprophet (
talk)
01:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)reply
For all Welsh-speaking people, their language is a defining characteristic. You can ask any of them. It's even got a section in the current UK census.
Deb (
talk)
10:09, 28 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep -- The person who drew an analogy with Dutch clearly does not know Wales, most academic discussion in Wales takes place in English, so that it can be understood by a wide audience, but there will also be Welsh-language academic literature, which means that there are historical works about Wales that are incomprehensible to me, because i do not understand Welsh.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
00:23, 1 March 2021 (UTC)reply
RenameCategory:Academics who teach in minority languages and Category:Academics who write in minority languages if and only in they teach and write and in Welsh. Can also use Category:Welsh-language activists if speaking Welsh is part of the person's notability part from their academic career. I agree minority-languages need to be treated differently, and the mere fact of a person being an academic and also speaking that language is interesting, but it's probably not a defining part of that person's notability, unless they are also known for their language activism, or teach through the medium of Welsh. Otherwise every minority and indigenous-language speaker who gets famous for something else is likely to be categorized. --
Kevlar (
talk •
contribs)
17:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Rename per Kevlar67. An academic who publishes or teaches in Welsh is defining. But purge academics who publish or teach in other languages.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk)
19:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Query — @
Kevlar67 and
Carlossuarez46: while purging the non-notable non-teaching academics would be a good start, we don't really have a good handle on "minority" languages. If we start this new tree, wouldn't it eventually contain every teacher of foreign language in every country? After all, French and Spanish (and other modern languages) are minority languages in most of the world, but very commonly taught. We already have lists of official languages. Perhaps "non-official" languages would be a better parent? Then there are teachers of Latin (definitely minority), what should we do about them? William Allen Simpson (
talk)
14:35, 2 March 2021 (UTC)reply
I don't like the concept of majority/minority languages. People whose medium of work (be it, writing, singing, academics, etc.) is "Fooish" it matters not to me whether or not "Fooish" is the majority where those people work or not. I know WP doesn't consistently follow this convention (compare, e.g.,
Category:English-language writers with
Category:Dutch-language writers). But someone who speaks "Fooish" but writes/sings/etc. in English, the Fooish-speaking is irrelevant. Similarly, the argument about XXX-speaking politicians (apparently, Welsh being the only extant example) is misguided. One can point to many constituencies in the US where the ability to speak Spanish, Tagalog, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, etc. may be a factor in connecting with voters, but is ultimately undefining for the politico as virtually all campaign in English too, and if elected to notable positions here govern/legislate/argue/debate, whatever in English.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk)
22:06, 2 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Rename/Purge per Kevlar The current category is too broad and pulls in people where the intersection of career and language is not defining. (That's not to say they should not be categorized in stand-alone academic and Welsh categories.) -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
07:53, 3 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete I agree with
John Pack Lambert. In my local university there are plenty of academics who are capable of speaking languages other than English. It's interesting, and sometimes useful, but its not defining.
Rathfelder (
talk)
00:23, 10 March 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.
People from Islands (regional unit)
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: merge per
WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division or to island. This is follow-up on
this earlier nomination.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
09:05, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
The
Islands regional unit is one of the most preposterous Greek administrative divisions. It was fine having it as a supercategory of other, more specific, ones, but it shouldn't have direct articles as members. You could say it's a "gerrymandering" type of division. There is no real geographic, cultural, or historical connection between these areas. I can't think of a good alternative merge right now, but I think it would be better to finish with the mainland categories before dealing with the Greek islands, which require a different approach anyway. --
Antondimak (
talk)
10:38, 27 February 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.
People from Kozani (regional unit)
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: merge per
WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns, in this case except
Kozani (43,000 people),
Ptolemaida (32,000 people),
Siatista (5,500 people),
Servia, Greece (3,500 people) and
Vlasti (meanwhile depopulated). The nomination does include people from
Askio, Kozani, this is not a populated place but a handful of villages in the
Askio mountain range and its eponymous 4th level administrative division. This is follow-up on
this earlier nomination.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
09:05, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
People from Askio consists of people from
Galatini and
Eratyra, two communities in the same municipal unit which are a mere 3km apart. Independent communities with thousands of residents each, which were 30km apart, were considered to be the same settlement when all the areas of wider Athens were merged.
When it comes to Eordaia, there is also
Category:Ancient Eordaeans. I think it's useful to group modern Eordeans together with the ancient ones, and not have the settlements of modern Eordaia be scattered accross
Category:People from Kozani (regional unit) as sister categories to "Ancient Eordaians".
I don't quite understand what you mean. Are you saying it's not clear in the articles in "Ancient Eordaians" that the people they refer to were from Eordaia?
Yes I see now. There generally seem to be more "relaxed" standards for categorising ancients, given the lack of specific information. I don't this should influence how we handle the category though. --
Antondimak (
talk)
07:24, 28 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Given the lack of information they are fine as Ancient Macedonians without assignment to any particular location (to be discussed separately though).
Marcocapelle (
talk)
11:55, 28 February 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.
People from Laconia
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: merge per
WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns, in this case
Sparta, Peloponnese (17,000 people, ancient city). The nomination includes
East Mani with 9 articles, since East Mani is not a populated place but a collection of different villages. This is follow-up on
this earlier nomination.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
09:05, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep East Mani East Mani has existed since before I started working on the categories. The area is culturally significant, as any other Greek discussant could confirm (see also
Maniots). Mani in general has its own culture, which is significantly distinct from the rest of the Peloponnese, and its own dialect, which is more similar to that of Crete (it was even closer to the old dialect of Athens, before it went extinct due to it being made the capital) than the rest of Laconia. Despite the East/West distinction being significant in Mani, East Mani is also part of Laconia, while Mani as a whole is divided between Laconia and Messenia. Therefore it makes sense for it to be a subcategory of "People from Laconia". --
Antondimak (
talk)
10:12, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
We would then need to upmerge to "Maniots" and include this category in both Laconia and Messenia (which would be inaccurate). This category is for the Maniots from Laconia, and "West Mani" is for those from Messenia, so they should probably be kept (apart from the cultural distinctions between East and West Mani being significant anyway). --
Antondimak (
talk)
18:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
You accidentally included Molaoi in the list, despite it having 5 articles and you not tagging it for merging (similar to what happened with Karditsa). --
Antondimak (
talk)
10:15, 27 February 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:Books about Buddhism in the Heian period
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:Australian rules footballers' wives and girlfriends
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: Weird mix of lesbian footballers married to other footballers, sportspeople married to (some very low profile) footballers and only 1 or 2 women who fit the English celebrity stereotype of a WAG. Use wikidata to find spousal connections if you need to. Not this cat. Poorly defined qualifications, no parent article exists, not even a mention in
WAGs#Other sports.
WP:NONDEFINING for most of these women.
The-Pope (
talk)
01:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete as completely
WP:NONDEFINING. This category seems to includes someone who were once in a relationship with an Australian rules footballer, but is married to someone else. This is not an encyclopedic category.
Joseph2302 (
talk)01:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep Nominators very first line is homophobic, sexist and offensive in my opinion. Should not be tolerated on Wiki. Category was created as a subcategory of Category:Footballers' wives and girlfriends(
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs). How is that a category allowed and this not ? Needs to be some consistency. Plus your main object seems to be that the WAGs are more famous then their partners.
DjlnDjln (
talk)
15:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
No, they're saying the category is not a defining characteristic, because it has a mix of many different sets of unrelated people. Nothing homophobic at all about that. The "weird mix" comment clearly refers to the rest of the comment i.e. it doesn't use the standard definition of
WAGs.
Joseph2302 (
talk)18:09, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
I demand that
Djln retract's that
personal attack on me. Absolutely nothing homophobic or sexist in my nomination statement. It's purely descriptive. I found this cat when the captain of my favourite team was added to it. She's married to another one of the players. But neither of them are notable for being a wife to a footballer. They are notable because they ARE footballers. The "weird mix" is referencing the multiple reasons for being placed in the cat. For only a few, it is defining. For most, it may be factually correct, but not at all defining, and definitely not with the WAG connotations that the parent cat/English centric article focuses on.
The-Pope (
talk)
14:27, 28 February 2021 (UTC)reply
You can demand all you like. There will be no retraction on my part until you withdraw opening statement. There are plenty of articles about people who are in categories for which they are not famous. See teachers, doctors, lawyers etc.
DjlnDjln (
talk)
14:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)reply
The English WAGs are indeed famous for being WAGs. These Australian women seem to be mostly sportswomen in their own right and not really notable for being WAGs. The same seems to be true of the Gaelic footballers' wives and girlfriends, so that should go too.
Rathfelder (
talk)
10:45, 28 February 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:Perpetual travellers
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.
A
Perpetual traveler (PT) is a term for someone who intentionally lives in multiple countries. The category only has two articles, none of which mention this term, but there is certainly expansion potential. The problem here is that this term has strong connotations of borderline legal tax avoidance schemes. Indeed, "Prior taxpayer" is an alternate name for the concept. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
00:32, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. No objection against the category per se, but articles in here should contain adequate sourcing to qualify as a perpetual traveler.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
07:01, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete our article seems to imply that this label is for people in certain tax avoidance schemes (as per nom), neither of the articles in the category mention this alleged aspect of the individual. I'm not sure that engaging in tax avoidance schemes (short of convictions for such) is defining but it certainly is a BLP issues and an
WP:OPINIONCAT, where someone (a wikipedian?) has an opinion of someone who is doing such behavior.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk)
19:05, 1 March 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:Stroke survivors
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.
We have a category for
Category:Deaths from stroke so this is for people that survived
strokes. There are 300+ articles in the category which generally mention having a stroke later in their lives. That could be just the beginning though: according to the
main article strokes are the 2nd leading reason for death globally and about 17 million survive them per year. During the course of lifetime, people will have multiple non-fatal health issues and this seems too common to be defining. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
00:32, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete -- Stroke is too common to be defining. It might be possible to have a category for people such as
Andrew Marr who go back to work, though disabled by a stroke. This is clearly defining for them, but my feeling is that such as category would be a subjective one.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
00:27, 1 March 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.