Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 12 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_12

< January 11	January 13 >

January 12

Valencian Community

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 first, delete the others. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:52, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:1497 establishments in the Valencian Community to Category:1497 establishments in Spain
Propose deleting Category:1490s establishments in the Valencian Community
Propose deleting Category:1490s in the Valencian Community
Propose deleting Category:1497 in the Valencian Community
Propose deleting Category:15th century in the Valencian Community
Propose deleting Category:15th-century establishments in the Valencian Community
Propose deleting Category:Centuries in the Valencian Community
Propose deleting Category:Decades in the Valencian Community
Propose deleting Category:Establishments in the Valencian Community by century
Propose deleting Category:Establishments in the Valencian Community by year
Propose deleting Category:History of the Valencian Community by period
Propose deleting Category:Years in the Valencian Community
Propose deleting Category:Years of the 15th century in the Valencian Community

Nominator's rationale: merge/delete per WP:SMALLCAT, this is a tree of 12 categories which all together contain just one article. In addition it is anachronistic, Valencian Community is a modern subdivision of Spain. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete certainly. 12 categories to support one article is grossly OTT. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:14, 14 January 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:Children's rights bodies

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 to merge. I think renaming the category is advisable; however, there was no discussion of User:BrownHairedGirl's suggestion of renaming to Category:Children's rights authorities, so any name change would have to be handled via another discussion. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 18:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Children's rights bodies to Category:Children's rights organizations

Nominator's rationale: Substantial and unhelpful overlap Rathfelder (talk) 20:01, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom Same scope. Dimadick (talk) 09:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and rename somehow. AFAICS, the distinction is that Category:Children's rights bodies is suposed to be for bodies which are emanations of the state, usually with legal powers. OTOH, Category:Children's rights organizations is predominantly Non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
That distinction is worth keeping, so I suggest a rename to Category:Children's rights authorities. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:15, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~Merge~~ per nom and per WP:SMALLCAT. Some of the articles are also in the child Category:Children's Ombudsmen and other than that there are too few articles left in this category. If kept, it may be an alternative to nominate Category:Children's Ombudsmen for merging into this. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:23, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle: Several articles in this cat are either not ombudsmen at all, or have much wider responsibilities than "ombudsmen" implies.

not ombudsmen: Committee on the Rights of the Child, Child Rights Taskforce – Australia, Snohomish County Children's Commission, Odisha State Child Protection Society

wider responsibilities: Commissioner for Children and Young People, Northern Ireland, Children's Commissioner for Wales, Children's Commissioner for England

--BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:38, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: You may be right that children's commissioners in the UK are not exactly ombudsmen (i.e. more than ombudsmen). In that case the second option that I mentioned, to nominate Category:Children's Ombudsmen for merging into this category, may be more suitable. After all, most of Category:Children's Ombudsmen consists of the British children's commissioners. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle: that sounds like a better option, and I'd be happy to support it ... but it would need a separate nomination. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:43, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:41, 24 January 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.

20th/21st-century sportspeople

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 and salt. – Fayenatic London 12:31, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting and salting:

Propose salting:

Nominator's rationale: these categories were deleted at WP:CfD 2010 March 7, after a very long series of CfDs in which it was repeatedly agreed that centuries are a spectacularly useless way of dividing sportspeople.

en.wp's articles on sportspeople overwhelmingly relate to people active in the 20th and 21st centuries. It's hard to think of a more useless way of splitting this set than by a single timepoint which creates significant overlap.

By-century categories seem to be a magnet for some editors, so I propose WP:SALT these categories to prevent re-creation. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the 2009/10 discussions for individual sports

Upmerge, delete, and salt. Not defining. Non-notable intersection. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:07, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:20, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. I could perhaps see the worth of categories for sportspeople by century or decade of birth (which is how the relevant stub categories are often divided), but the current scheme seems pretty useless. Grutness...wha? 01:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt -- these seemed in 2010 to be an attempt have a past/current split, which we do not allow. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:16, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Feeling conflicted

Does it make sense to discuss Category:20th-century Barbadian sportspeople without Category:20th-century Barbadian people by occupation? Don't mind if they both goIcarusgeek (talk) 15:53, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Concur provided some categories are not dumped into the overall "20th-century people" (or 21st century) category; I recall that the "20th-century people" category was swamped with entries for competitors at individual games; eg the 19XX Olympic Games, Paralympic Games, Commonwealth Games, Pan American Games, Francophone Games etc etc (in which case I would prefer that the sportspeople by century categories were retained for these categories by event!). Otherwise I would propose that there be an overall category for each event, eg by renaming Category:20th-century Commonwealth Games competitors by year to Category:Commonwealth Games competitors by year. Similarly upmerge Category:20th-century Olympic competitors by year and Category:21st-century Olympic competitors by year (with no category for the 1896 Athens Olympics!) to Category:Olympic competitors by year Hugo999 (talk) 01:03, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Hugo999: this is a proposal to delete, not merge, so nothing will be dumped. The Olympic competitors should be nominated in a separate followup nomination. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:28, 1 February 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:Economics by specialty

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: relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 February 1#Category:Economics_by_specialty. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:17, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Economics by specialty to Category:Subfields of economics

Nominator's rationale: Subfields of economics is more general and can include more subjects. Golopotw (talk) 13:48, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question @Golopotw: which subcategories might be additionally put in this category after renaming? Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps merge to Category:Economics. I do not quite see why subdisciplines should come directly under the main one. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:30, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
rename per nom 'subfields' is a good choice, to match up with other similar social science categories here Hmains (talk) 05:41, 24 January 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:People from Bowman, South Carolina

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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:00, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Bowman, South Carolina to Category:People from Orangeburg County, South Carolina

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT Small one-county community with just 2 entries. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@WilliamJE: Surely the target should be Category:People from Orangeburg County, South Carolina? Grutness...wha? 01:07, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Oops! I have gone ahead and fixed the nomination....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:31, 18 January 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.