Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/Today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion policies for the official rules of this page, and how to do cleanup.

Deletion of a category may mean that the articles and images in it are directly put in its parent category, or that another subdivision of the parent category is made. If they are already members of more suitable categories, it may also mean that they become a member of one category less.

How to use this page[edit]

  1. Know if the category you are looking at needs deleting (or to be created). If it is a "red link" and has no articles or subcategories, then it is already deleted (more likely, it was never really created in the first place), and does not need to be listed here.
  2. Read and understand Wikipedia:Categorization before using this page. Nominate categories that violate policies here, or are misspelled, mis-capitalized, redundant/need to be merged, not NPOV, small without potential for growth, or are generally bad ideas. (See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Manual of Style.)
  3. Please read the Wikipedia:Categorization of people policy if nominating or voting on a people-related category.
  4. Unless the category to be deleted is non-controversial – vandalism or a duplicate, for example – please do not depopulate the category (remove the tags from articles) before the community has made a decision.
  5. Add {{cfd}} to the category page for deletion. (If you are recommending that the category be renamed, you may also add a note giving the suggested new name.) This will add a message to it, and also put the page you are nominating into Category:Categories for deletion. It's important to do this to help alert people who are watching or browsing the category.
    1. Alternately, use the rename template like this: {{cfr|newname}}
    2. If you are concerned with a stub category, make sure to inform the WikiProject Stub sorting
  6. Add new deletion candidates under the appropriate day near the top of this page.
    1. Alternatively, if the category is a candidate for speedy renaming (see Wikipedia:Category renaming), add it to the speedy category at the bottom.
  7. Make sure you add a colon (:) in the link to the category being listed, like [[:Category:Foo]]. This makes the category link a hard link which can be seen on the page (and avoids putting this page into the category you are nominating).
  8. Sign any listing or vote you make by typing ~~~~ after your text.
  9. Link both categories to delete and categories to merge into. Failure to do this will delay consideration of your suggestion.

Special notes[edit]

Some categories may be listed in Category:Categories for deletion but accidently not listed here.

Discussion for Today[edit]

This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024_May_3


May 3[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS[edit]

Category:Sikh terrorism by country[edit]

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only three (and probably soon only two) subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Battles by location[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Recently created (12 March 2024) trivial intersection between military history and modern geography. We categorise Category:Battles by "country" (i.e. "battles involving country X"), "period", "type" (naval, aerial etc.), and "war", but not location or geography. We should follow precedent and delete any battles category based on location/geography as a WP:NONDEFINING WP:TRIVIAL WP:CROSSCAT.
Follow-up to:
Procedural note: I think it is important to confirm the precedents first, namely that battles should not be categorised by location/geography. But if it is desired that all subcategories be included in this nomination rather than nominated in a follow-up, I will tag them as well. But I expect that they will need a customised case-by-case approach with mergers and renamings, as happened with the Flanders/Wallonia, Drenthe, and Netherlands by province precedents. It would be wise to do so according to the Manescheut principle: Merging to the History of (modern territory) category (Ane), or Merging to the historically applicable territory (Scheut). E.g. Category:Battles in the Azores could be upmerged to Category:History of the Azores (Ane), merged to Category:History of the Portuguese Empire (Scheut), or perhaps renamed to Category:Military history of the Azores; it doesn't necessarily need to be deleted, but the current situation is untenable.
Therefore, to prevent a WP:TRAINWRECK, I'm only nominating the recently created two new categories for deletion, and to purge the subcategories that are in the battle by country (involved) and battle by type (battlespace) trees. NLeeuw (talk) 09:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The nomination deserves sympathy, but the proposal is deletion of the parent categories while the subcategories are the bigger issue. By deleting the parents we will merely loose sight of the subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pocatello Army Air Base Bombardiers football seasons[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Only one page in category. Let'srun (talk) 16:36, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; standard cat scheme. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Saying something is standard, so we should keep it, is not a compelling reason. Having only one category is not helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 23:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is. Parallelism matters and should be considered a central pillar of Wikipedia. If this cat merged as nominated, then 1943 Pocatello Army Air Base Bombardiers football team is lost from the tree at Category:College football seasons by team. User:Let'srun's notations here are becoming tiresome and obstructive. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (d) 08:21, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Film controversies in India[edit]

Nominator's rationale: See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country: this one also has a subcategory which needs purging, so I have elected to nominate it separately to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK. Purge of all articles about films, leaving only the articles about controversies themselves. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Purge all articles about a particular film, but keep subcategories and articles about controversies, per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Purge per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 08:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Film controversies in South Africa[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country: I don't see a future for this category in its current state. Most of the articles in this category are controversial films, not articles about film controversies. What stopped me from including it in the mass nomination is Films and Publications Act, 1996, which seems does not seem to belong here, either. Even if we grant that it does belong here, after purging the articles about films this would be a single-member category. Delete this category; discussion of the categorization of Films and Publications Act, 1996 can take place at Talk:Films and Publications Act, 1996 HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Film controversies in Malaysia[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country: I don't see a future for this category in its current state. Most of the articles in this category are controversial films, not articles about film controversies. What stopped me from including it in the mass nomination is 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal, which seems does not seem to belong here, either. Even if we grant that it does belong here, after purging the articles about films this would be a single-member category. Delete this category; discussion of the categorization of 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal can take place at Talk:1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 23#Category:Film controversies in Spain, in which it was decided to nominate the entire tree of Category:Film controversies by country. I would in theory say we should purge the categories of articles about films themselves – leaving only articles about controversies themselves. However, doing that would leave most of these categories empty. Therefore, I have nominated those categories for deletion, with no prejudice against recreating any of these categories if they can be appropriately populated. The ones which do contain articles about film controversies themselves (e.g. Category:Film controversies in Canada contains Natural Born Killers copycat crimes) I have nominated for purging. If, after purging, any category is too small to be useful we can have a discussion about upmerging that category.

I have not nominated Category:Film controversies by country for anything in particular, but I will tag it so it can be discussed here. I personally would advocate for that it be kept, even though most of its contents will no longer exist.

There are also three categories (Category:Film controversies in South Africa, Category:Film controversies in India, and Category:Film controversies in Malaysia) which have considerations specific to that category; I will start separate discussions on those to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK. Also pinging participants in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 23#Category:Film controversies in Spain: Marcocapelle, Bearcat, Qwerfjkl, and Nederlandse Leeuw. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom and my own rationale in the previous discussion. To summarise: It should not be sufficient to only have a "controversy/controversies" section in an article about the film itself; although it may help establish notability, it is usually WP:NONDEFINING. Nor is it appropriate to label an entire film as "controversial" per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT, and Category:Controversial films has been repeatedly deleted for that reason. And yet, almost the entire tree of Category:Film controversies by country is currently populated with main articles about the films themselves, rather than stand-alone spin-off articles about the controversies they caused. I think that is very inappropriate categorisation practice. I happened to come across it first with the Spain subcategory, but as this is not a Spain-only issue, at the request of fellow editors, I have withdrawn the nomination in favour of a broad discussion about the entire tree. I thank HouseBlaster for preparing this follow-up. NLeeuw (talk) 02:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support i.e. purge all articles about a particular film, but keep subcategories and articles about controversies, per nom. And delete the category if it becomes empty after the purge. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support purging and deleting subsequently empty categories. The same purging appears needed at the parent Category:Film controversies with the rationale Nederlandse Leeuw provides. CMD (talk) 07:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Spam filtering[edit]

Nominator's rationale: These seem to be the same topic - many pages are in both. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. There could be a set category for spam filters but that can be created after this merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]