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:Leaders of American trade unions
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: Many American trade unions operate outside of the United States as internationals and are not strictly "American trade unions." To clear this up, I recommend renaming and purging this category of unionists who are American nationals.
User:Namiba17:15, 18 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose -- The present name is clear. The target is not. The important thing is the main location of the union, not the nationality of its leader. Even if it has international operations too, it is still an "American" Union.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:02, 19 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Most of these are by definition international unions. Some of the leaders are in fact not even US nationals. Sorting people by the location of the organization they work for is not typical as far as I can tell. We sort individuals based on their nationality. The other option is to delete this category altogether, which is also acceptable to me.--
User:Namiba12:42, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Surely this category for the person who actually leads the trade union. As opposed to ordinary trade unionists, which includes trade union officials and activists who do not actually lead it, who are categorised as trade unionists if it's a major part of their life. It's therefore not a fork, but a subcat. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
12:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment. Many American trade unions operate outside of the United States as internationals and are not strictly "American trade unions." Actually, most of them are only "international" inasmuch as they may also have branches in Canada. "International" is just a common fiction used in American trade union titles to imply they're more important than they really are. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
12:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Agree with that, the question whether this about nationality of the leader or about the location of the organization is a non-discussion.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
15:21, 15 May 2022 (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:City councillors
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.
Oppose the article "councillor" covers various different types of councillor. If these categories are to be not a grabbag of various kinds of councillor, they should keep "city" in their names. Or if you want to broaden it a little, it could be called "municipal". But there are other forms of councillor that are not related to urban or settle areas, like county councillors, which would include rural regions. --
65.92.246.142 (
talk)
17:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)reply
They are already "a grabbag of various kinds of councillor", including plenty of county councillors. If we want to differentiate them that needs to be done on a country basis. What counts as a city varies from country to country and over time as does the structure of local government. Or possibly the whole thing should be merged into
Category:Local political office-holders by country.
Rathfelder (
talk)
10:34, 18 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Alt rename to "municipal councillors" per anon and per several of the subcategories. Municipal is broad enough for the content that is currently in the category.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
12:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)reply
I do not object against merging per se, but then all country subcategories should be merged too. Otherwise we will have one merged top category with two subcategories per country.Marcocapelle (
talk)
17:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)reply
I am striking my previous comment as I realize that in every country city councillors may become or remain a subcategory of local office-holders.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
02:45, 26 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge to
Category:Local political office-holders by country. Not only if there a problem with the city/town/borough/whatever else it is called issue, but in some places the people are not members of a council, they are aldermen, or commissioners, and there are other titles used. We should focus on the general position, not break out by specific title.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
18:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Just purge Australia and UK categories which are not specifically for city/municipal councillors. Oppose merge unless all the national sub-categories are also nominated, and the parentCategory:City councils. However, I would support upmerging of all the national sub-categories with only one or two members, to both parents. –
FayenaticLondon08:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Support as nom -- This avoids the difficulty as to what is a city and what only a town. This ought to be a container only. When UK had aldermen, they were part of the council, but the term is now largely obsolete.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge to
Category:Local political office-holders by country. A city vs. town vs. other type of local government distinction isn't useful here — different countries define the status of local communities and even the job titles of local government office-holders in different ways, so it's not particularly helpful to group "city" councillors to the exclusion of "town" councillors or "local authority" councillors or whatever else local politicians might be called. But since
Category:Local political office-holders by country already exists, there isn't really a pressing need to rename this — that can already serve as the overall parent, while each country under it can do its own subcategorizing based on its own circumstances and needs.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:38, 3 June 2022 (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:Music memes
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. I have checked the contents that were not already categorised in Internet memes, see talk page. –
FayenaticLondon21:12, 20 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: This seems to be a
non-defining categorization with its current name. An attempt
in 2018 to rename the category to something more defining resulted in no consensus.
I think "Songs in internet memes" or "Songs in memes" makes the defining characteristic less ambiguous and more exact. However, if going into anything more specific is not advisable, I would not be against
blowing it up and starting over as the cat has existed for 8 years. –
The Grid (
talk)
17:29, 7 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting to clarify whether the category should be renamed or deleted. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
JBchrchtalk18:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment: Unfortunately, there are actual music memes (not heavily memed songs) such as
The Lick and
Weird SoundCloud, meaning that there may be some need for a "music memes" category. However, heavily memed songs are purely original research and should not be included.
Why? I Ask (
talk)
17:50, 14 May 2022 (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.
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:Bambi films
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.
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.
Comment to closer, I just left a notification of these discussions at
WT:FILM. Please wait another week before closing or relisting any of these "featuring" nominations.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:42, 6 June 2022 (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.
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:Films featuring Goopy Geer
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:Films featuring Lola Bunny
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.
@
Dimadick: you have been on Wikipedia for years now and have been told repeatedly how to and how not to use categories, we've been over this exact topic before with the similar Disney categories.
★Trekker (
talk)
10:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I have been on Wikipedia since 2001. I disagree with you on what is defining or not. I view the character's filmography as far more defining than information on a film's creators or company. And I would like to recreate the Disney categories.
Dimadick (
talk)
10:54, 29 May 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Dimadick: Doesn't matter how you personally feel, Wikipedia consensus has clearly shown repeatedly that you're in a very small minority on this topic, your insistance on keeping on creating these kinds of categories is borderline disruptive.
★Trekker (
talk)
10:57, 29 May 2022 (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.
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.
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:Wes Craven 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 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 characters in Quentin Tarantino films
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:Kingdom Hearts 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. Rather than lose or tinker with the links to parents & interwikis, I'm going to implement this by purging the nominated category of everything except the list
Characters of Kingdom Hearts and the two sub-cats, and invite the participants to nominate the main sub-cat for renaming/merging.
–
FayenaticLondon22:25, 9 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining, the child category "Kingdom Hearts original characters" already covers the characters that are defing by this game.
★Trekker (
talk)
09:39, 29 May 2022 (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:Middle-earth films
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: More appropriate name, these films are not direct parts of a franchise but adaptations of the legendarium by Tolkien.
★Trekker (
talk)
09:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose. You cannot base a film on a fictional place. You can set a film in a fictional place or base it on a book or series. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
15:01, 30 May 2022 (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:History teachers
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.
Anti-white racism
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: Whether or not anti-white sentiment / anti-white prejudice should be referred to as "racist" is controversial. Many scholars, intellectuals, academics, activists, etc. do not consider prejudice against whites to amount to racism because there is no structural oppression of white people. Furthermore, the notion of "anti-white racism" is often used by white nationalist and white supremacist circles to promote racism. I think "Anti-white sentiment" is a less loaded term for this phenomenon. There are other categories with similar titles, such as
Category:Anti-European sentiment and
Category:Anti-Western sentiment.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
09:43, 18 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The concept that one cannot be racist against a particular ethnic group is in itself inherently racist and is based on purely subjective views of what is and is not racism, usually motivated by a particular political agenda. Most people without a political agenda would consider any anti-ethnic group sentiment to be racist so this clearly meets
WP:COMMONNAME. Keep current category titles. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
15:31, 21 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose:If white people are to be considered a race, it is possible to be racist against them. I don't see why some carefully selected sources should change that because they have decided that racism has more to do with power structure than it has to do with race, espescially considering there are plenty of sources/scholars who do say you can be racist towards white people. --
TylerBurden (
talk)
22:45, 21 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Well, for a start British law considers that racist hate crime can be directed by people of any race towards people of any other race.
[1] --
Necrothesp (
talk)
14:48, 25 April 2022 (UTC)reply
So, let me get this straight, you think "scholars" should take precedence over common usage? That makes a nonsense of such fundamental Wikipedia principles as
WP:COMMONNAME does it not? --
Necrothesp (
talk)
15:09, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
No it does not. Common usage is the concern of a dictionary, not an encyclopedia. Per
WP:COMMONNAME, The term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred. Per
WP:V, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources in topics such as history, medicine, and science. --
Sangdeboeuf (
talk)
09:29, 26 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment:The words Racism, Prejudice, and Sentiment all have different meanings but are used interchangibly, which ruins the catagory since we seem to have a different opinion on what qualifies as racism depending on the victim or perpetrator. Many articles with these tags were tagged when the victim of a crime commited by a BIPOC suspect so happened to be white, but plenty of other articles that actually showcase anti-white racism are precisely that, racism. Unless you plan on changing the other racism tags I don't see why this should change.
June Parker (
talk)
01:28, 22 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Support per nom, neutral on alternate proposal by Marcocapelle. Of course anti-white racism is theoretically possible, but broadly speaking it's not an accurate description for the articles categorized as such right now. ezlev (
user/
tlk/
ctrbs)
20:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Support. Racism, in sociological terms, is not simply prejudice against members of a different race but a structure of systemic oppression. There isn't the equivalency among all races of people as some editors here seem to personally believe. I think we need to rely on reliable sources, not editor's opinion on whether animosity against the class of people in a society who hold power can be termed as "racist". Note, I'm saying "class of people" and "systemic", this is not a matter of individual actions and beliefs, at least sociologically. It's not a matter of morality but of inequality of different groups in power and social resources. LizRead!Talk!04:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)reply
But we're not just talking in "sociological terms". Racism is prejudice by any ethnic group against any other ethnic group in common usage and also, as I have pointed out above, often defined as such in legal terms. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
16:09, 21 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Because the existence of "racism" against white people is rather contentious among people who actually know about such things, i.e. reliable, published sources. The term "sentiment" is much more precise. --
Sangdeboeuf (
talk)
09:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Support The suggested title does not involve discussions over the scope of racism, and could include works expressing anti-white sentiment.
Dimadick (
talk)
10:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Support or delete. WP doesn't have an article on
Anti-white racism; the term redirects to Reverse racism, which is about a specific concept relating to backlash against anti-racism efforts such as affirmative action. In general, category names should reflect usage in reliable sources. The top Google Scholar results for
"'anti-white' racism" are sources describing perceptions—especially right-wing perceptions—of anti-white bias, not anti-white racism as a reality. Most the pages about anti-white violence—which is most of the pages in the category—don't say anything about anti-white "racism". The various pages on
Black supremacist/
Black separatist subjects only mention racism by way of
attribution to specific authors. Therefore it's misleading to have a category name that suggests "anti-white racism" is a significant topic in its own right. Agnostic on the alternative merge proposals. --
Sangdeboeuf (
talk)
05:05, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Necrothesp and TylerBurden's rationales, and the nominator's rationale is disingenuous as "European" and "Western" are not ethnicities.
Cat's Tuxedo (
talk)
16:43, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Neceothesp, TylerBurdern, Cat Tuxedo, Yuotort, and June Parker. Acting hatefully towards white people for being white is just racism, plain and simple. As an asian american, the idea that acting hatefully towards white people for being white isn't considered racist is an extremely harmful double standard and practically encourages the action. As for Marcoappelle's proposed alternatives, they do get across the point that these actions are not okay, but at that point "racially motivated violence" is just the broader definition of racism that has nothing to do with systemic power that some fringe editors disagree counts as racism. I would much rather take Marcoappelle's alternative over the initial proposal, but I also see very flimsy reasons for any name changes.
Unnamed anon (
talk)
21:47, 31 May 2022 (UTC)reply
WP users' personal beliefs about what is or isn't harmful or okay are, once again, irrelevant. We leave it up to reliable sources to determine what racism is and isn't. --
Sangdeboeuf (
talk)
09:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)reply
A single online essay (not peer-reviewed?) is hardly enough to establish
due weight for the views contained therein. It may be more productive to check the first page of
Google Scholar results before cherry-picking sources that seem to agree with a given position. --
Sangdeboeuf (
talk)
11:57, 27 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment The whole "anti-white racism isn't noteworthy because of power difference" is a nonsense statement because it doesn't aknowlege that there are times when white people can be and have been in the weaker end of the power spectrum. With that being said, I really question why categories alternate between "anti-Foo sentiment", "anti-Foo racism" and "prejudice against", to me it seems like there should be more consistency among category and article naming.
★Trekker (
talk)
09:28, 1 June 2022 (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.
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: Generally people should not be categorized by the franchises/series they have worked on. It is rarely defining.
★Trekker (
talk)
08:30, 29 May 2022 (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:History of Argentina by city
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.
Vladivostok
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:Non-Indian Gandhians
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 an unnecessary category, sources define people as Gandhians only, not as "Non-Indian Gandhians". I believe all articles in this are already in the upper level
Category:Gandhians so it's safe to delete this. —
SpacemanSpiff04:42, 29 May 2022 (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.