Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< September 9 September 11 >

September 10

Category:Towns in Ternopil Oblast

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 19#Category:Towns in Ternopil Oblast

Category:Games with force feedback support

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 07:13, 19 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: A non-defining category for a very common game feature. Additionally, the parent article was deleted by AfD. IceWelder [ ✉] 18:21, 10 September 2022 (UTC) reply
This does not affect the category being non-defining, though. See also WP:Defining. IceWelder [ ✉] 14:26, 11 September 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.

Set indices on tropical cyclones

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 19#Set indices on tropical cyclones

Greek politics

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 sub-cats for politicians have not been nominated and are therefore not covered by this consensus. – Fayenatic London 14:01, 20 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: delete, Greek politics did not exist until 1830 when Greece became independent of the Ottoman Empire. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:04, 10 September 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.

Capital District (New York)

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 07:18, 19 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Harmonise category names with each other and with the lead article, which was recently moved (without discussion) to Capital District (New York). – Fayenatic London 12:33, 10 September 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:People fined in the Partygate scandal

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 19#Category:People fined in the Partygate scandal

Category:Association 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.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 07:22, 19 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: This category is WP:NONDEFINING, as for most of the people in the category, they are not known primarily for being a wife/girlfriend of a footballer, but are notable in their own right. In particular, many of the people in this category are footballers themselves, so being in a relationship with a footballer is not at all unusual or defining. Also, doesn't have a clear inclusion/exclusion criteria, as should it include e.g. ex-wifes and ex-girlfriends, and BLP issues around keeping this up-to-date Joseph 2302 ( talk) 11:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Having a blanket category covering only female partners of footballers, many of whom are notable in their own right, is non-defining. According to a note on the talk page, the page was originally intended only to cover WAGs, i.e. individuals who've been explicitly referred to in sources as falling under that umbrella. Well if that's the case it ought to be renamed to Category:WAGs and ruthlessly pruned so that only sourced explicitly-known WAGs are included. I'd also argue that definition is non-neutral too, but at least it would be more fitting for a category.  —  Amakuru ( talk) 12:01, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Seems to be both non-defining and a BLP gossip-mongering nightmare. Spike 'em ( talk) 12:16, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - subcat of Category:Footballers' wives and girlfriends, renamed at cfd from ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.›  Category:WAGs in 2008 or so and discussed at cfd many times. Oculi ( talk) 13:01, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • I appreciate the relevance of this category for people whose notability and media references are often/usually tied to their relationship with a footballer, but in it are overwhelmingly those being categorised on a non-defining characteristic. There's also no denying that misused in this way it's an embarrassingly sexist categorisation. Not sure what the solution to this might be, perhaps renamed in some way to make it clearer that simply dating a footballer once doesn't mean being categorised this way. The suggestion of "WAG" is along the right lines, but the problem with that is it is a term little known outside the UK. I also realise that this, and similar categorised have been discussed before here. I'd suggest that this is indication of it being a problematic categorisation. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 13:30, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Whether you like it or not, the acronym WAG and the term "wives and girlfriends" are widely used in the media. It makes no sense to delete it. Totally irrelevant whether the person is famous/notable in their own right. If they weren't, they would not have a Wiki article in the first place. Plus they are plenty of articles were the subject is included in categories that are not the main defining category. Examples would include nationality categories, year of birth and death categories and peoples occupation categories. Djln Djln ( talk) 13:52, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • It is used in the media to describe a few people, not most of the 200+ people listed in this category, and certainly has never been used for female sportspeople that are in same sex relationships with female footballers. A specific category limited only to people called WAGs in reliable sources would possibly be acceptable, but this categorisation including people who once dated a footballer 5 years ago is not- it's a BLP violation. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 14:24, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Have you actually looked at any of them? I have removed from the category today dozens of women who are notable in their own right, but have been categorised here simply because of who they married/dated once. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:59, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
A) yes, I looked at lots, B) whether they are "notable in their own right" is entirely irrelevant to whether they should be in this category. That depends on whether it is "defining" for them - a completely different thing. If you haven't grasped that you shouldn't be doing cfd. C) It is considered extremely bad form to gut categories while a discussion is ongoing. I will have to check your edits - excuse me if I use rollback when they need reverting. Johnbod ( talk) 04:09, 3 September 2022 (UTC) reply
A)Then you would have seen plenty who are not known primarily for being a wife/girlfriend of a footballer. Which you said you doubted. B) I understand the difference perfectly, if you read what I say above. C) I started removing these people before someone else raised this discussion. And I take it you didn't find any that needed reverting? -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:01, 5 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as just plain stupid. I don't care if tabloids make a big deal of this stuff, they're not by any means the paragon of establishing notability or engaging in discretion as to the significance of reality. In short, a non-defining thing that too much space is devoted to by the worst type of press in the world. And if someone is only notable for this, then their article should be outright deleted per WP:NOTINHERITED. oknazevad ( talk) 14:36, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep it obviously is defining for some celebrities in the UK (and other countries), and pretending it's not is disingenuous. The role of Wikipedia shouldn't be to pick and choose what people are famous for.-- Ortizesp ( talk) 16:10, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Not something we should see in a respectable encyclopaedia. It’s demeaning, tacky and belongs to a bygone era of drunken footballers like Gazza and Merson. Not in 2022, thanks.-- Egghead06 ( talk) 16:22, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, I checked some 15 articles at random and this was defining for none of them. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:24, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. Giant Snowman 16:35, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per Johnbod, for many of these people (Colleen Rooney a prime example) their notability first arose from them being a prominent WAG, so it is defining. Giant Snowman 16:37, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep an encyclopaedia's role is not to have a stance, but to merely document and describe. It is simply a fact many of these people under this category are notable mostly for being or having been the wife of a present or past footballer. And, let's be clear, this is not merely a UK thing - there are plenty of similar examples in Italy as well, to name one. -- Angelo ( talk) 09:34, 3 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 10:17, 10 September 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:Funeral directors of Austria

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. The target is being discussed in another discussion linked below. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 07:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: merge, ambiguous category names that may well refer to individuals rather than companies. The categories are not well populated either. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:34, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Object "Death care company" is a very ugly American euphemism. The problem is that the two categories nominated each have one member, so that an upmerge might be an appropriate solution, but I could only accept that if the target was renamed to (say) Category:Funeral companies. Looking at its content, the British and Australian subcats are Funeral directors; two others are "funeral homes", so that the target ought to contain the word funeral. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:11, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 10:08, 10 September 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:Campaigns and movements in Wales

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 19#Category:Campaigns and movements in Wales

Category:Fiction about astronomical locations

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 19#Category:Fiction about astronomical locations

Category:Consequences of wars

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: soft rename. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 07:37, 19 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Name it as a WP:topic category rather than a set category, and move the article Effects of war down into it from the parent to be its main article. – Fayenatic London 18:46, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 09:54, 10 September 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.

Moorish people

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 19#Moorish people

Moorish women

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 07:39, 19 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: delete, Moorish is an outdated and ambiguous term. There is no need to merge, the tree contains two articles, one already in Category:Women of the Emirate of Granada, the other already in Category:16th-century Moroccan women. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:40, 10 September 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.

Municipality categories in Ukraine

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 19#Municipality categories in Ukraine

Category:Cyber Ranges

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 19#Category:Cyber Ranges

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_September_10&oldid=1111341659"

Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE