Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 26
December 28 >

December 27

[edit]

Category:Podujevo

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I do not see the difference between these two cartegories. Robby (talk) 23:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiProject Lanka Premier League participants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The project does not exist anymore. Gonnym (talk) 09:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding sibling as suggested by Vestrian24Bio
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 18:05, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1975 establishments in Chattisgarh

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, Chhattisgarh exists since the year 2000 so nothing could have been established as early as 1975. It was part of Madhya Pradesh. If not merged, rename to Category:1975 establishments in Chhattisgarh because of a typo. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:3rd millennium auto races

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OVERCAT, this is unnecessarily specific. Motorsport has only been around for roughly a century, albeit one which happens to span a millenium change. Giraffer (talk) 13:58, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok maybe the title is wrong but the purpose was to have a cat for races instituted in last decade or millenium like a category 'races by decades'. I know there are no other cats categories yet, but if we go back, ho how can we grow? gtp (talk) 14:05, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Races by decade may be a useful category, but I think races by millenium is not (especially given that we're only talking about a ~100 year period). I have no idea what your last sentence means. Giraffer (talk) 14:45, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Corrected my previous reply). My idea was to have century categories XXI, XX and (maybe) XIX century: if we look far in the future wikipedia, it is a good beginning. For the same reason spanning milleniums seems overcat. but today it means 2 categories (2nd and 3rd) instead of 3 (centuries) so...I've been bold. The purpose of such bi-categorization would have some logic if we consider major endurance races were founded after prior '60s or after 2000s. Not in the middle. gtp (talk) 16:54, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Needed-Class articles

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is empty, and I think it always will be. No WikiProjects have Needed-Class subcategories. The way to handle needed articles is to list them at WP:Requested articles. If one is created as a draft, a redirect, a disambig or a stub (or better), then each of those have their relevant Class. That is to say, if we create a page for a needed article as a redirect, then it should be in Redirect-Class, and could only be in Needed-Class if somebody manually added it there as well.
I considered just renaming the category from articles to pages, as this is currently an exception among the non-article classes listed at WP:Assess. As soon as it's an article, then it's a stub or better. But if it's not an article, them it must be one of the other classes e.g. redirect. So, it's not needed.
WP:ASSESS gives the example of Free City Of Mainz as of 2018, but that has since been written, and was a redirect then. "Needed-Class" does not seem to have been discussed on the talk page of that project page since 2009, when talk pages were allowed in isolation.
Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_April_14#Category:Needed-Class_articles was closed as Keep, but that was when projects had Needed-Class subcats. Category:Needed-Class former country articles was deleted under WP:G6 by Explicit in Oct 2023, apparently after this template edit by MSGJ to "use standard extended scale".
Interwiki links show that 3 other Wikipedias currently have this category, but only one (Chinese) has anything within it, and that's just 3 empty topical subcats.
If deletion is approved, this should be listed on the CFD/W/Manual page, as various templates will need to be amended. – Fayenatic London 14:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Women's firsts in the film industry

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: or Merge with Category:Women film pioneers. Very vague category parameters. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:15, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Baseball players from Fayette County, Texas

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:17, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:16, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Novels by theme

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: See longer explanation at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Games#"Theme"_category_problem_started_by_Category:Games_by_genre_or_theme. This is the least controversial (if anything is). It is subcat to Category:Fiction books by topic, there is no Category:Themes or 'by themes' anywhere except in few instances I pointed out in the linked analysis; all themes should be rename to topics since we have a cat tree for topics, not themes. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:23, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • PS. I did not notice the target already exists. Well, merge instead of renaming then, I guess. Duplicate concept. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:25, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just delete, most subcategories are already in Category:Novels about interpersonal relationships which is a subcategory of Category:Novels by topic. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I'm looking at the two category trees, and at Theme (narrative), and I'm wondering if perhaps we should be looking at a reverse merge. I agree that we don't need both trees. I think the prevailing term for these is theme, rather than topic. And maybe that will help remove the inaccurate usage of "x and genre" named categories as well. All that said, having Works with X themes opens up to really broad categories, because, using novels as an example, the "theme" could be be due to a mere sentence, a paragraph, a chapter, or throughout the book. I'm not sure how to best resolve that. The difficulty, of course is that we're at the whim of the author's free usage of whatever themes they may decide to toss into a work, regardless of whether it furthers the overall plot (or narrative structure), or not. It would be nice if we could standardize all of the subcats into Works about X. At least that makes it (sort of) clear that it's about the the entire work than merely parts of it. Anyone else have any thoughts on these? Maybe we can come up with a standard for going forward. - jc37 21:09, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jc37 Are you suggesting we should rename everything in Category:Works by topic to Category:Works by theme? That would be much more work than what I suggested in the linked discussion (where I propose to rename the very few theme categories to topic categories). Might be best to discuss it there? I don't have a preference, to be honest, except I want to see standardized terminology, and it seems theme and topic mean the same thing here. But yes, I see your point that a work can have one topic but more than one theme, but is it really that clear? I am pretty sure many entities are categorized as having multiple themes. Ex. Wolfenstein 3D has cats related to 'Adolf Hitler', 'Experimental medical treatments', 'WW2' and 'Nazi Germany'. Those all seem like topics/themes to me (although the category trees are somewhat convoluted...). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:44, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_December_27&oldid=1265752574"