Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 November 14

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: keep (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:36, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Aquaria by country to Category:Aquariums by country

Nominator's rationale: The parent category is Category:Aquariums. Not sure which way we should standardize, but we should pick one. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 20:56, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - the parent category was speedily moved from Aquaria in June 2020, leaving most subcats using aquaria. That was a very dubious speedy and should be reversed. (The article Aquarium uses both plurals, with aquaria in the majority.) Oculi (talk) 00:17, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose -- As it is a Latin word, "aquaria" is a correct plural. Move parent back. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:27, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Standardise at aquaria per above. Sadly, the battle seems to be just about over for stadia, but aquaria is still regarded as the usual plural. Grutness...wha? 02:17, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Standardise at aquaria per above. Seems appropriate. -Just N. (talk) 22:19, 19 November 2021 (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.

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. bibliomaniac15 05:20, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Albums recorded at Aldeburgh Music (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Aldeburgh Music doesn't appear to be a studio and the studio that the one album in this category was recorded at doesn't have an article. This is a non-defining quality. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:41, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- I think I detect some connection to Aldeburgh Festival. Is this the release of a live recording made at the festival perhaps in 2010, probably in Snape Maltings concert hall? If so, presumably there should be a link to that. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:25, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and SMALLCAT. --Just N. (talk) 22:23, 19 November 2021 (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.

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. bibliomaniac15 05:20, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Albums recorded at Panda Studios (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Nothing of significance for an album being recorded at Panda Studios. Non-defining quality to the album. No article on the studio. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:36, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Delete per nom and SMALLCAT. --Just N. (talk) 22:24, 19 November 2021 (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.

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, per WP:C2E (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Dynastic houses in the Holy Roman Empire to Category:Noble families of the Holy Roman Empire

Nominator's rationale: Should have done more research before creating this. They are essentially the same thing. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:26, 14 November 2021 (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.

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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:01, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians in micronations (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is in Category:Wikipedians by location, but it's really an impermissible political category and has none of the valid collaborative purposes of that tree. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:33, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 22:24, 19 November 2021 (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.

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 to Category:Toronto FC players. bibliomaniac15 05:19, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Toronto FC Senior Academy players to Category:Toronto FC Academy players

Nominator's rationale: Not sure why this separate category exists. Should just be all in one RedPatch (talk) 12:54, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 20:24, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge both into Category:Toronto FC players per example of Category:Celtic F.C. Under-20s and Academy players, which happened following a discussion at WT:FOOTBALL which said we do not categorise by youth teams. GiantSnowman 20:27, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge both into Category:Toronto FC players. --Just N. (talk) 19:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Relisting comment, I tagged Category:Toronto FC Academy players as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:11, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• 'Merge both as suggested. We should not be categorising youth teams, as these are generally NN. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:38, 14 November 2021 (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.

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 to Category:Populated places in Kumbungu District. bibliomaniac15 05:18, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Suburbs of Kumbungu to Category:Populated places in Kumbungu District

Nominator's rationale: It's clear from the articles in the category that they aren't all suburbs of the city Kumbungu, but are various types of populated places or communities within Kumbungu District, a second-order administrative division which contains Kumbungu. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:53, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Rename per nom. --Just N. (talk) 22:26, 19 November 2021 (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.

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 to Category:Wikipedians interested in climate change. bibliomaniac15 05:18, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians worried by climate change (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: I completely fail to see how this category facilitates collaboration. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:30, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Upmerge per nom, to the climate change interest category -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 18:21, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge to Category:Wikipedians interested in climate change which seems to be more useful for the facilitation of collaboration. --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:01, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Wikipedia is not activism! --Just N. (talk) 19:10, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Change the template to use Category:Wikipedians interested in climate change — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 11:02, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I prefer deletion to merging, as saying that one is seriously worried by Climate Change does not express a Wikipedia-relevant interest in the subject (see Wikipedia:Overcategorization/User categories#by interest). It's baffling me that so many people prefer to merge, as all merging would do is foist the exact same problems that this category has on its parent. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:47, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Comment I also prefer deletion to merging, as saying that one is seriously worried by Climate Change does not express a Wikipedia-relevant interest in the subject. Even if it's true. --Just N. (talk) 22:28, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete after upmerging would seem to make everyone happy, and I think deletion of template-populated user categories is our normal practice after any merge (as opposed to keeping a soft redirect). UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:00, 20 November 2021 (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.