< September 23 September 25 >

September 24

[edit]

Category:Dark Sun lists

[edit]
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. MER-C 18:18, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary small category. Both articles already exist in the parent category. TTN (talk) 20:51, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support: I've been working on the the Dark Sun main page for a while now. Users can find information about these things in from that page. I agree. No need for this list.Sugarcoma (talk) 23:21, 24 September 2020 (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:7th-century BC establishments in Guatemala

[edit]
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. MER-C 18:23, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories created by the same user at the same time, clearly should be merged. GreyShark (dibra) 18:09, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
From my experience with Egypt, i go slowly; apparently users change their mind all the time.GreyShark (dibra) 20:36, 26 September 2020 (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:1750s in the United States

[edit]
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 first two, rename the third to category:1750s disestablishments in New York. – Fayenatic London 11:29, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: An anachronistic duplicate, we already have category:1750s in New York for the colony. GreyShark (dibra) 17:26, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant - we already have categorization for 1750s in New York for the colony, it is just a recently created duplicate.GreyShark (dibra) 20:38, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and the colony should stay in the tree of the Thirteen Colonies, hence merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:02, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the last one be renamed to Category:1750s disestablishments in New York, within Category:1750s in New York? – Fayenatic London 08:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, I thought there is a already an existing category for that. Rename category:1750s disestablishments in New York (state) then to category:1750s disestablishments in New York.GreyShark (dibra) 13:22, 30 September 2020 (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:11th century in Canada

[edit]
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. MER-C 18:22, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Canada was created in 1867, prior to that there was no Canada. Anachronistic category, imposing colonial concepts on events and peoples prior to colonization.GreyShark (dibra) 17:20, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I find it highly problematic to speak of Category:Viking Age in Canada prior to the existence of Canada (did Vikings consider their colony to be in Canada? Would it still be Viking Age in Canada if Canada changes it's name (like North Macedonia recently did)? sounds ridiculous...). Category:Viking Age in North America makes much more sense.GreyShark (dibra) 09:22, 29 September 2020 (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:High school national basketball association draft picks

[edit]
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. MER-C 09:23, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:High school national basketball association draft picks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: One would never write "Kobe Bryant was a high school NBA draft pick." As such, this is a non-defining characteristic. This information is already found at NBA high school draftees. User:Namiba 16:39, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete I've changed my decision due to the existence of Category: National Basketball Association high school draftees.
  • Please revisit your vote in light of Category:National Basketball Association high school draftees. Rikster2 (talk) 12:56, 26 September 2020 (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:Empires and kingdoms of Iran

[edit]
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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:58, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate or mostly overlapping categories. The target category already gathers former empires and kingdoms in the history of Persia and Iran, and the nominated categories have little other content. Their parent categories refer to the linguistic group of the Iranian peoples, which is a different topic and is not defining for centuries-old states. Place Clichy (talk) 14:53, 24 September 2020 (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:5th-century establishments in Roman Egypt

[edit]
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. Note that there was a consensus to use just plain "Egypt" in the 28 Sep CFD on "Ottoman Egypt" categories. So a follow-up nomination may be necessary. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:10, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:5th-century establishments in Roman Egypt to Category:5th-century establishments in Byzantine Egypt
Nominator's rationale: Moving from speedy section due to opposition by some users. The category Category:5th-century establishments in Roman Egypt was created by myself erroneously as "Roman" instead of "Byzantine" (which already has a category tree) - this should match parent Category:5th century in Byzantine Egypt and be in line with previous CFR procedures on June 2017 and April 2019 regarding classical period categories for countries / provinces in the Nile Delta region.GreyShark (dibra) 07:27, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You created the Roman Egypt tree mind you and the Byzantine Egypt tree too.GreyShark (dibra) 17:52, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You oppose merging into Byzantine and keeping a mix of Roman / Byzantine?GreyShark (dibra) 17:47, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reminding your vote here.GreyShark (dibra) 17:50, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Omanyd and Johnpacklambert: also from Ottoman Syrian categories.GreyShark (dibra) 18:51, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@BrownHairedGirl: from recent speedy discussions, who has not joined yet.GreyShark (dibra) 18:53, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed the question was about completing Roman/Byzantine split, already agreed in prior nomination, but now opposed in speedy. However, it seems that many editors are using the concepts Egypt (modern Arab Republic of Egypt) and Lower Egypt interchangeably, thus creating this opposition. Technically within Wikipedia "in Egypt" means in Egypt (Arab Republic of Egypt), if we want categories about geographical location then it should have been "in Lower Egypt". Obviously, almost all "in <country>" categories are about modern states and Egypt should probably be not an exception, but that is very hard for some to conceptualize.GreyShark (dibra) 20:45, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is all wildly mistaken reasoning. Many countries have had radically changing borders, and changing the category names to reflect these changes would be a path to madness. How many dozen names would we need for the United States if we changed the category name with every territorial expansion on the USA's path from being a wee corner of north-Eastern North America to a huge slice of the full width of the continent plus a non-contiguous vast swathe of tundra purchased from Russia plus colonial outposts in the Craibbean and Oceania?
@Greyshark09 overlooks that per WP:CAT,

the central goal of the category system is to provide navigational links

. Greyshark09 and a few others are approaching categories as if they were an attempt to create some of strict Linnean taxonomy, which is absolutely wrong. Unless and until an RFC agrees to radically change the purpose of the categorisation system, Greyshark09 and others should stop disrupting its current purpose. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:57, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your proposal to change contemporary category tree to anachronistic (by "modern country") is violating the five pillars of Wikipedia. This is a pointless effort changing this approach - it would create a battlefield in the category tree, just imagine that someone tries to change the contemporary category of the Siege_of_Sevastopol_(1941–1942) from category:1941 in the Soviet Union to either category:1941 in Ukraine or category:1941 in Russia.GreyShark (dibra) 17:53, 28 September 2020 (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:The Bachelor

[edit]
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 (talk) 10:57, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Franchise is more successful in recent years ApprenticeFan work 02:56, 24 September 2020 (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:Sunni Rashidun Caliphs

[edit]
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 Timrollpickering (talk) 10:57, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The Rashidun caliphs were—by retroactive definition, at least—Sunni. It is redundant to add "Sunni" to the category name. The nominated category was recently created as a subcategory of the target category. Technically, no merger is required as all of the articles in the nominated category are in the target category. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:38, 24 September 2020 (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:Songs recorded at Henson Recording Studios

[edit]
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: listify. MER-C 09:43, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I looked at a handful of articles in this category and the only mentions of Henson are usually in the infobox, a credits section, or just in passing. There can't be many songs that are defined by where it was recorded. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:56, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
^ don't think that is a valid reason for deleting the category. It is a helpful category to have particularly as this is a well known recording studio steeped in history. I don't see how having this category is any different from having "Song recording produced by x" categories which are also fields in the infobox. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 20:28, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I thought WP:CATDEFINE was always a valid reason to delete a category. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 20:57, 25 September 2020 (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.
More