< September 11 September 13 >

September 12

Category:City (TV network)

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. Timrollpickering 09:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:City (TV network) to Category:Citytv
  • Propose renaming Category:City (TV network) shows to Category:Citytv shows
Nominator's rationale: Network has recently rebranded back to Citytv, category should be renamed for consistency with updated Citytv article. Requesting here because naming of related parent article was changed too recently to allow for speedy renaming. Add: Expanded nomination to include shows category. RA0808 talkcontribs 20:01, 12 September 2018 (UTC); edited 18:58, 13 September 2018 (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:Elves in film

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. There was insufficient support for deletion. xplicit 02:59, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: As per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 July 18#Foo in films --> Films about foo, better to make it clear that categories of this nature are to be applied when a subject is the primary focus of a work of fiction, not an incidental element. DonIago (talk) 17:16, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most likely, though it looks like a delete is becoming more likely than a rename in any case. DonIago (talk) 13:24, 13 September 2018 (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:Archaeologists appearing on Time Team

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. In normal cases PERFCAT is such a strong policy guideline that it would override objections, but participants here have given rationales for treating this as an exception. I will add "regularly" into the category explanation, as that is necessary for the claim that this is WP:DEFINING for the category members. – Fayenatic London 19:53, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: As a category containing appearances on a television programme, this fails WP:PERFCAT. Could perhaps be converted to Category:Television archaeologists to satisfy the "PERF" part of the guideline. --woodensuperman 14:37, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can I ask you to reconsider that, Johnbod? Just looking at the opening sentences of the articles currently in the category, we have:
  • Stewart Ainsworth ... "a British archaeological investigator who was regularly seen on Time Team,"
  • Victor Ambrus ... "became known from his appearances on the Channel 4 television archaeology series Time Team"
  • Robin Bush ... "was the resident historian for the first nine series of Channel 4's archaeology series Time Team"
  • John Gater ... "a British archaeological geophysicist, who has regularly featured on Time Team – the Channel 4 archaeological television series – since 1993"
  • Helen Geake ... "an archaeologist who was one of the key members of Channel 4's popular and long-running archaeology series Time Team"
  • Beric Morley ... "became a familiar face on the Channel 4 television series Time Team"
  • Francis Pryor ... "best known [...] for his frequent appearances on the Channel 4 television series Time Team"
With the exception of Ambrus, Bush and Pryor, I don't think any of them would be notable at all had they not appeared on the programme. – Joe (talk) 16:30, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but for example I doubt it is defining (now) for Alice Roberts, though no doubt very handy for her career. Where's Guy de la Bédoyère anyway? Johnbod (talk) 19:02, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If the category fails WP:PERFCAT, then it should not be upmerged per the guideline: "Note also that performers should not be categorized into a general category which groups topics about a particular performance venue or production (e.g. Category:Star Trek), when the specific performance category would be deleted (e.g. Category:Star Trek script writers)." --woodensuperman 15:21, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The goal of PERFCAT and FILMNAV are both to avoid clutter, when many people, appear in many roles, but the overlaps between each group are minor. That's not the problem here. With the exception of Alice Roberts (who is now known for far more than this), the link each way is equally significant. For Baldrick, it's a minor role for him, but he's also the anchorman of the series, thus particularly significant to it, as FILMNAV et al. make specific exception for. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would argue that appearing on Time Team is a defining characteristic of most if not all of the members per WP:COPDEF, the reason(s) for the person's notability; i.e., the characteristics the person is best known for. With one or two exceptions, they are otherwise "run-of-the-mill" working archaeologists or academics that became notable because of their appearance on this television show, which has an extra-ordinary significance in the culture of British archaeology. However, if this category is deleted, its members should certainly be put back into Category:Time Team, which I took them out of to create this. – Joe (talk) 16:18, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't this why Category:Television archaeologists (or similar) is a better option? Adam Woodyatt is only really notable for being in EastEnders, but we categorise him by Category:English male soap opera actors, not Category:EastEnders actors. The fact they are appearing regularly is specifically covered by WP:PERFCAT: "Avoid categorising performers by an appearance at an event or other performance venue. This also includes categorization by performance—even for permanent or recurring roles—in any specific radio, television, film, or theatrical production". --woodensuperman 11:16, 14 September 2018 (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:Millennia in the Burgundian Netherlands

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 first two (millennia categories), no consensus on the rest. Note: I'm adding Category:Burgundian Netherlands into Category:2nd millennium in Europe after deletion of the millennium category. – Fayenatic London 06:48, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete. The Burgundian Netherlands started retrospectively in 1384 with the acquirement of only the County of Flanders by Burgundy (but at that time it was entirely unknown that this single acquirement would eventually be expanded to the final territory of the Burgundian Netherlands) and the Burgundian Netherlands ended in 1482. There is certainly no need to diffuse by millennium, all years are within the 2nd millennium. And there is also very little need to diffuse by century, since nearly all years are within the 15th century except for the first 16 years while it only contained the county of Flanders. There is no need to merge, all content is kept in Category:Decades in the Burgundian Netherlands and Category:People of the Burgundian Netherlands. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:35, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Peterkingiron: Your latter alternative option is more extreme than the nomination because it would imply also merging the decade categories which are currently not part of the nomination. Could you elaborate on why you think it is really not an option to just keep the decade categories but delete the century categories? Marcocapelle (talk) 14:49, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes it is more extreme, and probably needs a separate nom. However, none of the decades has more than 4 articles. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:05, 23 September 2018 (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:Larry Bird

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. Timrollpickering 11:08, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:OCEPON, with not enough pages or subcategories that are directly related to the subject. We do not need a category to include every season, series, game, cameo role, etc. that included Bird. —Bagumba (talk) 06:18, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I just thought you can't one without the other Espngeek (talk) 19:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)Espngeek[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:USA Cartoon Express

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. Timrollpickering 11:08, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Television program block that aired reruns of cartoons; not a defining characteristic. Trivialist (talk) 01:44, 12 September 2018 (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.