Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 8

• Propose deleting Category:Society of Ukrainian Progressors members (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Emptied: no refs. No such society. Mistranslation? --Altenmann >talk 21:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment This is an empty category, it doesn't need a discussion. Next time, consider tagging it CSD C1. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Next time, consider not emptying the category beforehand. Discussion can be useful when you know which articles were in there. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Altenmann, I'm going to say it more bluntly. Please don't empty categories like this. We can't tell if there's a mistranslation or if the category has sources in another language, if we don't know who was in it. Mason (talk) 22:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I support the comments of Marcocapelle and Mason. For the record, the six biographies removed out-of-process by Altenmann are here: [1]. Maybe the last word should be "progressionists" like [2]. – Fayenatic London 10:39, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's this "out-of-process" nonsense? The removed categories in bios were not supported by sources. Aren't we forgetting our most fundamental rule? --Altenmann >talk 16:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You really need to consider the feedback you're getting here. "The removed categories in bios were not supported by sources." That's the problem. You removed them so how do you expect the CFD to go? I've rolled back the removal so other people can actually evaluate the category contents. Mason (talk) 20:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    "how do you expect the CFD to go?" - easily. Check in Wikipedia or in the internets whether such society exists or existed. --Altenmann >talk 20:38, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Your reversal is a blatant violation of Wikipedia rules: WP:AGF and WP:V unreferenced information can be deleted at any time. Here are the bios in question, if someone questions my senses:

13:16 Smasongarrison talk contribs (Dmytro Doroshenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist

      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Mykhailo Hrushevsky added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Mykola Vasylenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Symon Petliura added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Serhiy Yefremov added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Volodymyr Vynnychenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist

• • Meanwhile I am restoring my deletions done in total agreement with Wikipedia rules. --Altenmann >talk 20:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't understand why you even brought this up for CFD if you are just going to make it difficult for wikipedians to temporarily evaluate the category. I've reverted the change and ask that you be patient. You're the one who made the nomination. Mason (talk) 00:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The last word should be "Progressives", see User_talk:Aleksandr_Grigoryev#Category:Society_of_Ukrainian_Progressors_members. But in the same discussion, the category's creator accepts deletion. – Fayenatic London 11:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That's helpful to know. From that conversation it seems like merge to Category:Ukrainian_Democratic_Party_(1904)_politicians is a viable solution. Mason (talk) 00:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Subatomic particle symbol templates to Category:Physics formatting templates

Nominator's rationale: Bot-created single-page cat. Looks like it just contains a helper for Template:Subatomic particle? Dunno if should merge into that cat, no opinion whatsoever, just listing bit of botcruft for cleanup. Slowking Man (talk) 20:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:5th-century abbots
• Propose deleting Category:6th-century abbots
• Propose deleting Category:7th-century abbots
• Propose deleting Category:8th-century abbots
• Propose deleting Category:9th-century abbots
• Propose deleting Category:10th-century abbots
• Propose deleting Category:11th-century abbots
• Propose deleting Category:12th-century abbots

Nominator's rationale: the earliest non-Christian (Buddhist) abbot that we have an article about is Yishan Yining who lived in the 13th century. These categories don't contribute to navigation until we have articles about earlier Buddhist abbots. All Irish abbots of this period were Christian abbots and can be added as subcategories thereof. It would be naieve to state that these Irish abbots do not belong in Christian abbots just because the Irish category name does not specify "Christian". Wikipedia should reflect the real world and not get stuck too much in its internal organization. The real world is that there weren't Buddhist abbots in medieval Ireland, they were all Christian. This nomination is of course without objection to recreation once we have articles about earlier Buddhist abbots. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:07, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. > It would be naieve to state that these Irish abbots do not belong in Christian abbots just because the Irish category name does not specify "Christian".

I never said that the individuals in the page don't belong in the Christian abbots category. I said that you shouldn't be conflating nationality and religion at the category level. Three things: I don't see why you're suggesting deletion, instead of merging. This deletion is going to break the abbot by nationality template. This seems premature, given that I asked you about this on your talk page. Mason (talk) 21:47, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Nederlandse Leeuw and Fayenatic london: what do you think of this? Better to have third-party input here. The discussion is in the first place about whether (medieval) Irish abbots should be a subcategory or a sibling of Christian abbots. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Well first of all, why would you delete these categories rather than upmerging them to Category:Medieval abbots? NLeeuw (talk) 05:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Since these have subcats for both Irish and Christian abbots by century, and are part of e.g. 12th-century religious leaders and 12th-century monks, it seems to me best to keep the hierarchy intact. – Fayenatic London 10:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I think that Marco's point is that everyone in the Irish abbot tree is also a Christian abbot. I'd already tried to discuss this issue, but they're intentionally ignoring me. Mason (talk) 20:24, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Jainism in India by city to Category:Jainism in India and Category:Jainism in Asia by city

Nominator's rationale: merge for now, surprisingly few articles in this categories. By all means recreate when more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename Category:Anti-indigenous racism in North America to Category:Anti-Indigenous racism in North America

Rename Category:Genocide of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Genocide of Indigenous peoples of North America

Rename Category:Anti-indigenous racism in the United States to Category:Anti-Indigenous racism in the United States

Rename Category:Assimilation of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Assimilation of Indigenous peoples of North America

Rename Category:People of indigenous North American descent to Category:People of Indigenous North American descent

Rename Category:History of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:History of Indigenous peoples of North America

Rename Category:History of indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest to Category:History of Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest

Rename Category:Treaties of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Treaties of Indigenous peoples of North America

Rename Category:Wars involving the indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Wars involving the Indigenous peoples of North America

Rename Category:American people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:American people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Puerto Rican people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Puerto Rican people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Belizean people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Belizean people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Cuban people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Cuban people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Dominica people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Dominica people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Dominican Republic people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Dominican Republic people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Guatemalan people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Guatemalan people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Haitian people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Haitian people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Honduran people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Honduran people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Mexican people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Mexican people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Panamanian people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Panamanian people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Salvadoran people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Salvadoran people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Trinidad and Tobago people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Trinidad and Tobago people of Indigenous peoples descent

Nominator's rationale: Capitalize the word "Indigenous", as capitalization is the common practice in North America and on Wikipedia when referring to the Indigenous peoples of North America. This capitalization would be in line with the recommendations of the Associated Press, APA Style, the Chicago Manual of Style, the United Nations, and the Native American Journalists Association. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 16:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support This brings categories more in line with the articles' titles, so makes perfect sense. Yuchitown (talk) 23:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Long overdue in my opinion. --Pinchme123 (talk) 00:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, and as for some of the nationality categories, simply "Indigenous descent" would roll off the tongue better than "Indigenous peoples descent". Salmoonlight (talk) 18:53, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• If carried, redirect all as this capitalisation is currently not standard within Category:People of indigenous peoples descent by nationality. – Fayenatic London 10:44, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I echo the need for a redirect. Mason (talk) 20:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Convert Category:Museums with wikis to article List of museum wikis

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining feature of a museum. It's probably interesting enough to be made into a list. Mason (talk) 12:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, possibly listify. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Addis Standard people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is the only subcategory in Category:Journalists by publication that has but a single article. Most of them have a fairly substantial number, though I did spot a couple with only 4 articles. 76.9.91.187 (talk) 09:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. There is no need to merge somewhere as far I can see, the article is already in Category:Ethiopian journalists. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:38, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. – Fayenatic London 10:51, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Majority-minority cities and towns in in McHenry County, Illinois (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is an empty category with a repeated "in" in the title, which is pretty much useless because its parent category contains two such entities and it's only gotten 16 views in its lifetime (equating to only slightly more than two every 115 days, which is really small). I'm not sure we really need it for those reasons. Regards, SONIC678 05:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, useless redirect. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:48, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Pointers to WMF tools to Category:Pointers to Toolforge tools

Nominator's rationale: None of these tools are maintained by the WMF. I suspect the creator meant "WMF Labs", but that name has been replaced by Toolforge now. Legoktm (talk) 04:23, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The category currently has four members, three of which are indeed Toolforge tools (Wikipedia:AfD stats, Wikipedia:Editor Interaction Analyzer, Wikipedia:XfD stats). Wikipedia:Quick intersection is not, but it's historical and it could probably just be upmerged to the parent (Category:Wikimedia Cloud Services) instead. I agree that this category should be called Toolforge rather than WMF.

However, Category:Toolforge tools already exists, with three members: User:Guy Keogh/verify is a soft redirect, Wikipedia:Tools/RAMP editor is historical, and Wikipedia:NPP Browser is a normal page. I don't think there's a significant difference between these two categories, or enough members that we need to subcategorize the "pointers". Therefore, instead of renaming, I propose to merge Category:Pointers to WMF tools into Category:Toolforge tools. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds good to me, thanks. Legoktm (talk) 15:24, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Government organizations of Indonesia to Category:Government of Indonesia

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layer. This category doesn't help navigation Mason (talk) 03:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I have added three subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support merging was created by a since blocked Indonesian editor who was creating a curious range of red link and since contested categories JarrahTree 06:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge, non-standard and unnecessary layer. – Fayenatic London 10:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Second ladies and gentlemen of the Philippines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:NEOLOGISM, Second Ladies are not a thing in Philippine politics. We are not like the United States which uses such term. Second Ladies/Gentlemen at best are just a synonym for the Vice President's spouse, unlike the First Lady/Gentlemen who actually serves a role for being the host at the Malacanang Palace and is distinct from the Spouse of the President of the Philippines Hariboneagle927 (talk) 02:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Unfortunately, this category has been emptied by the nominator, Hariboneagle927. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:14, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  For full disclosure, there were four entries under it Mans Carpio, Elenita Binay, Celia Díaz Laurel, and Loi Ejercito Hariboneagle927 (talk) 06:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Oppose. This category is spouses of the vice president, that's a defining feature regardless of whether the role is official. Please don't remove pages from categories like this. I've reverted you removals. Mason (talk) 13:08, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment this is plain neologism. You would be hard pressed to see consistent/sustained usage of the term "Second Lady/Gentleman" by Philippine national broadsheets or government agencies. First Lady and Gentlemen are likewise not a formalized institution but unlike Second Lady, the term (Second Lady) is not used by the media or the government.

  The argument is "Second Ladies" as a role does not exist in the Philippine context. Sure the category could be renamed as Category:Spouses of vice presidents of the Philippines to accurately portray its member pages. We do not created fictitious roles and present it as fact, regardless if official or not. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  To re-emphasis the role of First Lady and Second Lady is distinct from the President's and the Vice president spouses. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Local circumstances, both with respect to the question whether it is a defining characteristic, as well as with respect to the name of the category, should play an important role in the discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:44, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Two of the four entries are notable for being elected politicians, one is a theater actress and Mans Carpio is noted for being involved in a smuggling scandal and his membership in the wider Duterte family who had Rodrigo Duterte, his father-in-law. None of the given citation asserts they held the role of "second lady/gentleman". Again we are talking about the fictitious role. I understand in some context such as the US context its synonymous to the vice president's spouse.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I do not know anything about Philippine politics myself but I think your arguments are good and this should only be opposed if spouse of vice president is a defining characteristic in the Philippines after all. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Nuclear weapons and the Russian invasion of Ukraine to Category:Nuclear technology and the Russian invasion of Ukraine

Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories. Upmerge. Mason (talk) 02:13, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom, but purge Nuclear Orthodoxy isn't really about Ukraine. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  fine with me Mason (talk) 13:09, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Pro–nuclear weapons activists to Category:Nuclear weapons

Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category that's not helpful for navigation. There's only one page in here. Mason (talk) 02:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Just delete, I don't think we should put a biography in Category:Nuclear weapons based on one stupid remark of the subject of the article. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Totally fine with me Mason (talk) 13:09, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Blackpink members albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There is no scheme for categorizing individual members solo albums by albums by members of groups, and each is already linked from the group's albums category Category:Blackpink albums (which appears to be the standard). For precedent, I found Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 February 19#Category:The Cars' solo albums. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, in the spirit of WP:OCASSOC. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete; the subcats are all already correctly linked directly from Category:Blackpink albums. – Fayenatic London 10:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]