Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 February 13: Difference between revisions

 

Line 178: Line 178:

==== Template:Ehime-railstation-stub ====

==== Template:Ehime-railstation-stub ====

:”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 [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.”

:”The result of the discussion was:” ”’delete”’. [[User:HouseBlaster|House]][[Special:Contributions/HouseBlaster|”’Blaster”’]] ([[User talk:HouseBlaster|talk]] • he/they) 04:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

:* ”’Propose deleting”’ {{lt|Ehime-railstation-stub}}

:* ”’Propose deleting”’ {{lt|Ehime-railstation-stub}}

:”’Nominator’s rationale:”’ Useless stub template, category is empty. [[User:AlphaBetaGamma|ABG]] ([[User talk:AlphaBetaGamma|Talk/Report any mistakes here]]) 05:34, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

:”’Nominator’s rationale:”’ Useless stub template, category is empty. [[User:AlphaBetaGamma|ABG]] ([[User talk:AlphaBetaGamma|Talk/Report any mistakes here]]) 05:34, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

* ”’Delete”’ per nom. [[User:Marcocapelle|Marcocapelle]] ([[User talk:Marcocapelle|talk]]) 06:28, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

* ”’Delete”’ per nom. [[User:Marcocapelle|Marcocapelle]] ([[User talk:Marcocapelle|talk]]) 06:28, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

—-

:”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 [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.”

==== Category:Authors who died by suicide ====

==== Category:Authors who died by suicide ====

Nominator’s rationale: Unnecessary duplicate of the target category. This should be merged such that it redirects to the target as well, I guess that is the status-quo. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:09, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: Non-defining. There is a rare exception for Category:Graduates of the United States Military Academy Class of 1915 because they have an article about it The class the stars fell on ^SMason_Garrison 14:21, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I think that graduates of USMA should definitely be in a category but also having categories by year would be extremely interesting to many people. 1915 has been written about as a special year but many other years are filled with historical figures and it’s interesting to see who were classmates. This can’t be done in the Alumni category. I was planning on starting other years as well and was hoping it may get other people to create other years. It doesn’t seem like their should be any issues with having these separate categories at all. DJ71park (talk) 19:41, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:49, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi. I think that graduates of USMA should definitely be in a category but also having categories by year would be extremely interesting to many people. 1915 has been written about as a special year but many other years are filled with historical figures and it’s interesting to see who were classmates. This can’t be done in the Alumni category. I was planning on starting other years as well and was hoping it may get other people to create other years. It doesn’t seem like their should be any issues with having these separate categories at all DJ71park (talk) 19:43, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • If it is “interesting” then lists are more appropriate. Categories are for defining characteristics and “classmate of” is certainly not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:52, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    It’s pretty hard to say that the class year that someone graduated from USMA isn’t a defining characteristic. Especially since they were grouped together frequently in war time based on their classmates. Also, it is completely subjective to say that the year 1915 is better than any other year and can be included as a category and not other years. If this one has to go because there is no defining characteristic to a person then 1915 should go as well. To keep one and not the other would be non neutral and biased. DJ71park (talk) 02:57, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. –Aidan721 (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: This category does not contain Plays (theatrical dramas) but notable incidents in games of sport, and seems to be a North American usage. The subcats Category:Historic baseball plays and National Football League plays may be appropriate as local WP:ENGVAR, but this parent should use a name that will be understood more widely. – Fayenatic London 11:49, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: Subcategory with just two entries. Also propose nominating-

• Category:Entertainers from Columbia, South Carolina to Category:People from Columbia, South Carolina, by occupation
• Category:Entertainers from Kansas City, Kansas to Category:People from Kansas City, Kansas, by occupation
• Category:Entertainers from Topeka, Kansas to Category:People from Topeka, Kansas, by occupation
• Category:Entertainers from Wichita, Kansas to Category:People from Wichita, Kansas, by occupation
• Category:Entertainers from Lawrence, Kansas to Category:People from Lawrence, Kansas, by occupation

All subcategories with just one or two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:52, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: Non-defining intersection between occupation and specific cause of death. If Authors not deleted, it needs to be renamed to “Writers”. Other similar cases include: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_December_28#Category:Pornographic_actors_who_died_by_suicide ^SMason_Garrison 05:33, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:27, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: Isolated category. Not useful for navigation. –Aidan721 (talk) 04:34, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: Isolated categories. Not useful for navigation. –Aidan721 (talk) 04:31, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: I think that this category needs to be renamed to match the parent United States presidential visits, and possibly purged. ^SMason_Garrison 03:39, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Alt rename to Category:Lists of presidential trips made by Donald Trump (“trip” per article titles) and purge everything that is not a list. Adding articles about summits to categories of all individual participants is overcategorization. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:35, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• The two other presidential subcategories of Category:United States presidential visits should follow the same decision made by this category. –Aidan721 (talk) 15:20, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – I did some searching. I think we’re just using whatever terms someone decided to use one day. I found this, and this, which suggests that the word we probably should be using is travel. Or this, and this, which suggests the root word should be visit. Or this and this and this, which uses the word trip. Or this, which uses visits and trips. I think we should lean towards whatever the US state department calls them (“Presidential visits abroad”, per this), but curious as to what others think. – jc37 21:53, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I can live with that too. The more important point is about restricting this to lists. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Ok. If we do that , it would then be something like: Category:Lists of presidential visits abroad by Donald Trump. – jc37 06:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: and child Category:1990s Argentine science fiction television series. The whole tree has only article. Fuddle (talk) 02:35, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: Isolated categories. Not useful for navigation. –Aidan721 (talk) 02:15, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: Isolated categories. Not useful for navigation. –Aidan721 (talk) 02:06, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: Isolated categories. Not useful for navigation. –Aidan721 (talk) 01:49, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator’s rationale: Isolated categories. Not useful for navigation. –Aidan721 (talk) 00:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]