Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 3

< January 2
January 4 >

January 3

Category:1788 establishments in Tahiti

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/delete all as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:12, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Large tree for only the Kingdom of Tahiti article. Merge/delete per WP:NARROW. –Aidan721 (talk) 23:29, 3 January 2025 (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:Impact and legacy of Taylor Swift

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:Taylor Swift. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: With or without a needlessly repetitive title—having just "impact" or "legacy" would be enough—this category comes off as fancruft. Anything that doesn't even contain those words or Taylor's name in the page titles can be safely removed. We shouldn't turn the website into Swift-o-pedia by lumping simply anything related to her into categories. It might also go against WP:Overcategorization#By being associated with based on the pages I saw it used for. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As the category's author, allow me to clarify the situation. I created it because Category:Taylor Swift had a few too many entries. To reduce them, I took inspiration from Category:Impact and legacy of Madonna. I do like Swift's music, but I had no intention of creating any fancruft. The vast majority of my edits on Wikipedia are not even related to her. GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 22:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what the "too many entries" threshold you're referring to is, but for anything she's not personally involved with, one could reasonably remove her main category from those pages. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:49, 3 January 2025 (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:Wikipedian miscellaneous pages

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Too broad which is not how categories work. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 22:03, 3 January 2025 (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:Fiction about giants

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, no clear distinction between the two categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Go for DELETION""".The nom is on to it. 22:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.249.196.179 (talk)
  • Merge per nom. I cannot see the above comment as anything but disruptive, even though it is clearly not. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:34, 5 January 2025 (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:Forbes 30 Under 30

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining award. Per the article Forbes 30 Under 30, "1,230 people under 30 years old" get this award each year. SMasonGarrison 20:22, 3 January 2025 (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:Republican feminists

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: manual merge. charlotte 👸♥ 20:19, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between political party and political orientation. SMasonGarrison 18:24, 3 January 2025 (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.

Works set in churches

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. charlotte 👸♥ 20:19, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article directly in each of these categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:35, 5 January 2025 (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.

WP:DISNEY categories

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#WP:DISNEY categories

Category:Church buildings in fiction

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 11#Category:Church buildings in fiction

Category:British Columbian provincial electoral districts established in 2023

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. Thorough discussion; unlikely a WP:RELIST will help. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Proposing that this category should be renamed to Category:British Columbian provincial electoral districts established in 2024. While I understand the rational behind why the category was originally named the way it was (the new destricts where decided upon in 2023), it doesn't make logical sense as they only came into effect (elected members) in 2024. The naming practice included here also doesn't follow what categories for other countries do on Wikipedia. i.e. the UK, where the Category:Constituencies of the Parliament of the United Kingdom established in 2024 exists for constrituencies which came into effect (established) in 2024, but were approved in 2023. On the United States, where congressional districts are sorted by the year they are first occupied, i.e. 2023 for North Carolina's 14th congressional district, and not the year they are apportioned and drawn (2021) or first elected (2024). I believe most other countries follow this latter practice as well.

Similar nomination for Category:Canadian federal electoral districts established in 2023 to Category:Canadian federal electoral districts established in 2025, but for new districts starting in 2025. Epluribusunumyall (talk) 05:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Sounds good to me. RedBlueGreen93 22:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – The articles are about WHEN the districts were established, which is 2023. It doesn't matter when the vote is held, it matters when the districts went into effect which is the year 2023, hence the name. User:RushtheeditorUser talk:Rushtheeditor 02:31, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – The districts are created as a matter of law when legislative act are passed (in 2023), but the effectiveness of the act(s) only comes into effect upon the dissolution of the last legislature (in the case of BC, 2024) or the current Parliament (in 2025). - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 06:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment/Oppose – I initially supported this rename, although I've reconsidered. These boundaries were not established for the 2024 British Columbia election, they were established for all elections that could have occured and will occur from April 25, 2023 until the next redistribution is approved. Matching it with the 2024 election is innacurate, and isn't really all that helpful as not all of the ridings contested in 2024 were actually established in the 2021–2023 redistribution. I initially supported this because there seemed to be consensus elsewhere on the matter, but ultimately we don't have to follow mediocre standards from the United Kingdom or United States. RedBlueGreen93 06:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I agree on the legal mechanisms behind it, but I don't think that's how most people go about thinking of something being established. It also becomes more confusing for the federal riding category, which was passed into law in 2023, couldn't come into fore until 2024, and will be created after the 2025 riding. Would also push back on these being "mediocre standards from the U.K. or the U.S.," and instead highlight that I think these two categories are outliers with regards to other establishment categories on en.wikipedia. Many other countries (Australian, Hong Kong, New Zealand, and the Philippines (partially), use the year the ridings were first occuppied after an election. Not all though, so maybe this should become a broader conversation over how these categories are sorted (i am happy to start that thread elsewhere).

Also, if we look to the broad Category:Establishments by type and year for populated places, many newer cities/towns are sorted by the year they actually came into effect, and not that they were legislated. Take Mosnac-Saint-Simeux - a commune-nouvelle - in Paris as an example. I was created on 1 January 2021, and therefore sorted by the category Category:Populated places established in 2021, but was legislated into law (similar to how new constituencies are), in December 2020. I'm not sure what purpose it'll serve to have inconsistencies between how we classify these two types of establishments.

While not a policy perse, WP:COMMONSENSE would have these categories reflect the year which people perceive they are created (i.e. when they come into effect during election), and not when they are legislated into law. - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 18:07, 10 January 2025 (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:I (newspaper) journalists

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. charlotte 👸♥ 20:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Changed name last year, and is ambiguous with i (Portuguese newspaper). Paradoctor (talk) 02:27, 3 January 2025 (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:Black feminists

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#Category:Black feminists

Category:Intersectional feminists

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#Category:Intersectional feminists

Category:Superwog

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. charlotte 👸♥ 20:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category only contains the eponymous category along with two redirections. SMasonGarrison 00:55, 3 January 2025 (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:Doctor Who aliens

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. charlotte 👸♥ 20:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Two categories with a distinctly similar overlap. The aliens category is bizarrely covering individual characters who happen to be aliens (As well as the Sea Devils for some reason), while the races section is covering the alien species as it is. Due to the high overlap between the cats and the potential for confusion due to the naming, I am proposing to merge both categories into one "Doctor Who aliens" category that can adequately and inclusively cover both categories' content without losing any content. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This has been fixed
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:Analog Drum Machine

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:Analog drum machines. WP:BARTENDER applies; going with the option which was originally proposed and has the most support. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:04, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I don't work with categories much, so I have no opinion about whether this category is needed at all. However, if we're going to keep it, it should be renamed "Analog drum machines" (sentence case, plural) for consistency with category names per WP:CATNAME. Popcornfud (talk) 20:34, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 02:22, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on jc37's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:08, 3 January 2025 (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:Baseball players from Edwards County, Texas

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 11#Category:Baseball players from Edwards County, Texas

Quelle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_January_3