Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 May 29

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:25, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Sellwood, Portland, Oregon to Category:Sellwood-Moreland, Portland, Oregon

Nominator's rationale: Per parent article: Sellwood-Moreland, Portland, Oregon. Perhaps navbox should be moved as well for consistency? --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:20, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:36, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, the article was moved over a year ago, that should be long enough. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:35, 5 June 2022 (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: No Consensus to rename. - jc37 08:39, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Leaders of American trade unions to Category:American trade union leaders

Nominator's rationale: Many American trade unions operate outside of the United States as internationals and are not strictly "American trade unions." To clear this up, I recommend renaming and purging this category of unionists who are American nationals. User:Namiba 17:15, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I think the location of the union is more significant that the nationality of its leader. Maybe we should rename Category:Trade union leaders by nationality to make that clearer.Rathfelder (talk) 08:44, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose -- The present name is clear. The target is not. The important thing is the main location of the union, not the nationality of its leader. Even if it has international operations too, it is still an "American" Union. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:02, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Most of these are by definition international unions. Some of the leaders are in fact not even US nationals. Sorting people by the location of the organization they work for is not typical as far as I can tell. We sort individuals based on their nationality. The other option is to delete this category altogether, which is also acceptable to me.--User:Namiba 12:42, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Category:American trade unionists, this is the far better populated category. We do not need a fork, both categories contain union leaders. (It is unlikely that mere passive membership of a union is even mentioned in an article.) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am comfortable with a merge (and rename) but we should nominate the whole tree to do so.--User:Namiba 13:18, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Surely this category for the person who actually leads the trade union. As opposed to ordinary trade unionists, which includes trade union officials and activists who do not actually lead it, who are categorised as trade unionists if it's a major part of their life. It's therefore not a fork, but a subcat. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JBchrch talk 14:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reflecting on this further, I think this category should be renamed but containerized.--User:Namiba 12:50, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename American is meant to modify the person not the organization.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:25, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Many American trade unions operate outside of the United States as internationals and are not strictly "American trade unions." Actually, most of them are only "international" inasmuch as they may also have branches in Canada. "International" is just a common fiction used in American trade union titles to imply they're more important than they really are. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Agree with that, the question whether this about nationality of the leader or about the location of the organization is a non-discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:21, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:36, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as ambiguous or merge to Category:American trade unionists. ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:30, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose merge – the whole of Category:Trade union leaders should be considered together, and it would be invidious to remove one of its largest sub-cats . Rename either as nominated, or to Category:Leaders of North American trade unions to cover US & Canada.– Fayenatic London 15:10, 12 July 2022 (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:Local political office-holders by country. There was no consensus on Category:Women city councillors. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:31, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:City councillors to Category:Councillors
• Propose renaming Category:Women city councillors to Category:Women councillors

Nominator's rationale: Many of the subcategories include councillors from places which are not cities. The anchor article is Councillor. Rathfelder (talk) 09:59, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose the article "councillor" covers various different types of councillor. If these categories are to be not a grabbag of various kinds of councillor, they should keep "city" in their names. Or if you want to broaden it a little, it could be called "municipal". But there are other forms of councillor that are not related to urban or settle areas, like county councillors, which would include rural regions. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 17:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merging to Category:Local political office-holders by country is fine by me -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 03:05, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• They are already "a grabbag of various kinds of councillor", including plenty of county councillors. If we want to differentiate them that needs to be done on a country basis. What counts as a city varies from country to country and over time as does the structure of local government. Or possibly the whole thing should be merged into Category:Local political office-holders by country. Rathfelder (talk) 10:34, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Alt rename to "municipal councillors" per anon and per several of the subcategories. Municipal is broad enough for the content that is currently in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Category:Local political office-holders by country per Rathfelder. "City" only tends to be a generic term for an urban area in North America. In most parts of the world most urban settlements are actually towns. But many of the people in these categories aren't even town councillors. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:40, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• I do not object against merging per se, but then all country subcategories should be merged too. Otherwise we will have one merged top category with two subcategories per country. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I am striking my previous comment as I realize that in every country city councillors may become or remain a subcategory of local office-holders. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:45, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:03, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I think some of the country categories are properly called city councillors. What counts as a city varies between countries. Rathfelder (talk) 18:44, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Category:Local political office-holders by country. Not only if there a problem with the city/town/borough/whatever else it is called issue, but in some places the people are not members of a council, they are aldermen, or commissioners, and there are other titles used. We should focus on the general position, not break out by specific title.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• The merge is ok too, but take care. The two articles and the "fictional" subcategory do not belong in a by country category, so they should be moved to Category:Local politicians. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:58, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Just purge Australia and UK categories which are not specifically for city/municipal councillors. Oppose merge unless all the national sub-categories are also nominated, and the parent Category:City councils. However, I would support upmerging of all the national sub-categories with only one or two members, to both parents. – Fayenatic London 08:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• See also previous inconclusive discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_June_10#Category:City_councillors. – Fayenatic London 08:22, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support as nom -- This avoids the difficulty as to what is a city and what only a town. This ought to be a container only. When UK had aldermen, they were part of the council, but the term is now largely obsolete. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Category:Local political office-holders by country. A city vs. town vs. other type of local government distinction isn't useful here — different countries define the status of local communities and even the job titles of local government office-holders in different ways, so it's not particularly helpful to group "city" councillors to the exclusion of "town" councillors or "local authority" councillors or whatever else local politicians might be called. But since Category:Local political office-holders by country already exists, there isn't really a pressing need to rename this — that can already serve as the overall parent, while each country under it can do its own subcategorizing based on its own circumstances and needs. Bearcat (talk) 17:38, 3 June 2022 (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. I have checked the contents that were not already categorised in Internet memes, see talk page. – Fayenatic London 21:12, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Music memes to Category:Songs in internet memes

Nominator's rationale: This seems to be a non-defining categorization with its current name. An attempt in 2018 to rename the category to something more defining resulted in no consensus.

I think "Songs in internet memes" or "Songs in memes" makes the defining characteristic less ambiguous and more exact. However, if going into anything more specific is not advisable, I would not be against blowing it up and starting over as the cat has existed for 8 years. – The Grid (talk) 17:29, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Isn’t a cat an animal? Rosiedanugbtugn (talk) 16:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I feel like Category:Musical internet memes would be a better name as the songs themselves are what are usually what is the meme in the first place. Rockford the Roe ^{boop my snoot} _{pet the goats} 16:29, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not a defining characteristic of these songs. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:09, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not a defining characteristic. I don't think any proposition is better than WP:TNT. --Muhandes (talk) 19:50, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename sjh (talk) 13:20, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This type of information seems better conveyed in list form, like in List of viral music videos, List of viral videos, or List of Internet phenomena. bibliomaniac15 04:50, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to clarify whether the category should be renamed or deleted.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JBchrch talk 18:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment It should be Category:Music-related Internet memes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan Wescher (talk • contribs) 18:14, 2 May 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE – Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:14, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Unfortunately, there are actual music memes (not heavily memed songs) such as The Lick and Weird SoundCloud, meaning that there may be some need for a "music memes" category. However, heavily memed songs are purely original research and should not be included. Why? I Ask (talk) 17:50, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• (reply after relisting) The Lick and Weird SoundCloud may be moved to Category:Memes if they belong there. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:18, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: trying to find member pages that are not in other meme categories, I found a problem, now reported at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_198#PetScan_missing_results. – Fayenatic London 08:57, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per TNT. ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:33, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: I have now posted on Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 May 29 a list of the 104 member pages that are not otherwise categorised in Category:Internet memes. If any of these are internet memes then any interested editor may categorise them as such by year and/or country. – Fayenatic London 19:05, 10 July 2022 (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) Qwerfjkltalk 18:35, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Children of Christian VI of Denmark (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT ★Trekker (talk) 11:20, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This has already been discussed once here.Ramblersen2 (talk) 11:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, as should have happened after the earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 30 May 2022 (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 parents. – Fayenatic London 22:59, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Bambi films (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT ★Trekker (talk) 11:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Not clear how a character's filmography is not defining. Dimadick (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your standard reply doesn't work here, @Dimadick:, the issue with this one is that its small.★Trekker (talk) 11:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• @StarTrekker: why shouldn't it be merged to its parent categories? Marcocapelle (talk) 06:05, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Marcocapelle: You're right, my bad, a merge would probably be best.★Trekker (talk) 07:20, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Marcocapelle: No real problem with that suggestion. By the way, there was one parent category missing. The films are based on an Austrian novel. Dimadick (talk) 08:09, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to parnets. ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:36, 28 June 2022 (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) Qwerfjkltalk 18:37, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Films featuring Butch (animated character) to Category:Butch (animated character) films

Nominator's rationale: "Featuring" is not defining. ★Trekker (talk) 10:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose The suggested title does not define the scope. Dimadick (talk) 10:38, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Butch is usually not the main character, so I would tend to delete rather than rename. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Marcocapelle's rationale Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 20:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Marcocapelle --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment to closer, I just left a notification of these discussions at WT:FILM. Please wait another week before closing or relisting any of these "featuring" nominations. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:42, 6 June 2022 (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. – Fayenatic London 22:50, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Films featuring Mammy Two Shoes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining, these are all pretty much just Tom & Jerry films. ★Trekker (talk) 10:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Not clear how a character's filmography is not defining. Dimadick (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, it is not defining for the films. The question is not whether it is defining for the character. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:19, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:37, 28 June 2022 (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. – Fayenatic London 22:50, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Films featuring Goopy Geer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT ★Trekker (talk) 10:41, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Valid exception. Dimadick (talk) 10:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Dimadick: Why?★Trekker (talk) 10:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Because as with most categories, it is an easy way to locate related articles. Dimadick (talk) 10:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Dimadick: As is looking at Goopy Geer's article. This category serves no function.★Trekker (talk) 11:00, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, if it is relevant enough the two articles can easily link to each other directly without the need of a category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:21, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Marcocapelle and nom. ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:38, 28 June 2022 (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) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:26, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Films featuring Lola Bunny (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining. ★Trekker (talk) 10:41, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Not clear how a character's filmography is not defining. Dimadick (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Dimadick: you have been on Wikipedia for years now and have been told repeatedly how to and how not to use categories, we've been over this exact topic before with the similar Disney categories.★Trekker (talk) 10:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have been on Wikipedia since 2001. I disagree with you on what is defining or not. I view the character's filmography as far more defining than information on a film's creators or company. And I would like to recreate the Disney categories. Dimadick (talk) 10:54, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Dimadick: Doesn't matter how you personally feel, Wikipedia consensus has clearly shown repeatedly that you're in a very small minority on this topic, your insistance on keeping on creating these kinds of categories is borderline disruptive.★Trekker (talk) 10:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • I did not create this category, User:Krisi tranchev.1999 did. But it has scope for expansion. Dimadick (talk) 10:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Dimadick: Speculative, she has never had a single solo cartoon.★Trekker (talk) 11:00, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
            • Few Looney Tunes characters had solo cartoons to begin with. There were plenty of short film co-starring two or three different characters. Dimadick (talk) 11:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
              • And even by that criteria this character fails.★Trekker (talk) 11:06, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, it is not defining for the films. The question is not whether it is defining for the character. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, only real films notable for featuring Lola are Space Jam and Looney Tunes: Rabbits Run, the rest merely see her as a participant. Keeping just those creates a WP:SMALLCAT. (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:56, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:SMALLCAT --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:20, 6 June 2022 (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) Qwerfjkltalk 18:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Films featuring Sylvester Jr. (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT and not defining. ★Trekker (talk) 10:38, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Not clear how a character's filmography is not defining. Dimadick (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. (Oinkers42) (talk) 18:27, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per WP:SMALLCAT, and overlapping with Category:Films featuring Sylvester the Cat. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:18, 6 June 2022 (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. – Fayenatic London 11:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Tim Burton characters to Category:Characters created by Tim Burton

Nominator's rationale: Standard name ★Trekker (talk) 09:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy rename per WP:C2C. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:02, 6 June 2022 (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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 21:08, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Wes Craven characters to Category:Characters created by Wes Craven

Nominator's rationale: Standard naming. ★Trekker (talk) 09:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy rename per WP:C2C. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:02, 6 June 2022 (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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 21:08, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Fictional characters in Quentin Tarantino films to Category:Characters created by Quentin Tarantino

Nominator's rationale: Standard category naming. ★Trekker (talk) 09:42, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy rename per WP:C2C. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:02, 6 June 2022 (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. Rather than lose or tinker with the links to parents & interwikis, I'm going to implement this by purging the nominated category of everything except the list Characters of Kingdom Hearts and the two sub-cats, and invite the participants to nominate the main sub-cat for renaming/merging. ​​​​ – Fayenatic London 22:25, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Kingdom Hearts characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining, the child category "Kingdom Hearts original characters" already covers the characters that are defing by this game. ★Trekker (talk) 09:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per rationale Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 16:35, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Instead, purge Category:Kingdom Hearts characters of all entries but Donald Duck, Goofy, and possibly Mickey Mouse, then merge up Category:Kingdom Hearts original characters. Donald and Goofy are very important to Kingdom Hearts, and Kingdom Hearts is important to their character's importance in video games. The same is somewhat true for Mickey as well, albeit less so. Also, if Yen Sid ever got an article, he could be included as well. (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom. It would be easier to simply delete this one and move Category:Kingdom Hearts original characters to its current location. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:48, 31 May 2022 (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:Films set in Middle-earth. – Fayenatic London 11:40, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Middle-earth films to Category:Films based on Middle-earth

Nominator's rationale: More appropriate name, these films are not direct parts of a franchise but adaptations of the legendarium by Tolkien. ★Trekker (talk) 09:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Clearer scope. Dimadick (talk) 10:41, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. You cannot base a film on a fictional place. You can set a film in a fictional place or base it on a book or series. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Necrothesp: it's not just a place, its the common name for Tolkien's legendarium and collected works.★Trekker (talk) 16:16, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am aware of that, but I still maintain you cannot base something on it. It's bad English. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:19, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support the motion to rename, but proposing the title Category:Films set in Middle-earth Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 16:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename but for Category:Films set in Middle-earth which matches its sister cats --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:07, 3 June 2022 (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: no consensus. Some strong arguments were put forward in favour of the nomination, but failed to gain majority support. Meanwhile, Marcocapelle has expanded Category:Racially motivated violence against white people with 2 new sub-cats, and as a result Category:Anti-white racism by continent and its 3 like-named sub-cats are now pointless layers containing only 1 sub-cat each, so it may be worth renominating those. – Fayenatic London 22:11, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 June 28#Category:History teachers

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: no consensus. Some strong arguments were put forward in favour of the nomination, but failed to gain majority support. During the discussion, Marcocapelle has expanded Category:Racially motivated violence against white people with 2 new sub-cats, and as a result Category:Anti-white racism by continent and its 3 like-named sub-cats are now pointless layers with only one sub-cat each, so it may be worth renominating those for upmerging. – Fayenatic London 22:14, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Anti-white racism to Category:Anti-white sentiment
• Propose renaming Category:Anti-white racism by continent to Category:Anti-white sentiment by continent
• Propose renaming Category:Anti-white racism in Europe to Category:Anti-white sentiment in Europe
• Propose renaming Category:Anti-white racism in North America to Category:Anti-white sentiment in North America
• Propose renaming Category:Anti-white racism in the United States to Category:Anti-white sentiment in the United States
• Propose renaming Category:Anti-white racism in Africa to Category:Anti-white sentiment in Africa added 25 May

Nominator's rationale: Whether or not anti-white sentiment / anti-white prejudice should be referred to as "racist" is controversial. Many scholars, intellectuals, academics, activists, etc. do not consider prejudice against whites to amount to racism because there is no structural oppression of white people. Furthermore, the notion of "anti-white racism" is often used by white nationalist and white supremacist circles to promote racism. I think "Anti-white sentiment" is a less loaded term for this phenomenon. There are other categories with similar titles, such as Category:Anti-European sentiment and Category:Anti-Western sentiment. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 09:43, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Alt1: merge Category:Anti-white racism by continent and :Category:Anti-white racism in North America to the top category by lack of sufficient content.

On top of the former, alt2: suggest renaming Category:Anti-white racism in Europe to Category:Racially motivated violence against white Europeans, similar to Category:Racially motivated violence against European Americans and cut the remainder of the tree, since the violence part is all that matters here.

Alt1 can be implemented in conjunction with the nomination, if desired. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. The concept that one cannot be racist against a particular ethnic group is in itself inherently racist and is based on purely subjective views of what is and is not racism, usually motivated by a particular political agenda. Most people without a political agenda would consider any anti-ethnic group sentiment to be racist so this clearly meets WP:COMMONNAME. Keep current category titles. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:31, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia's contents are not determined by Wikipedia editors' opinions on what is or not "racist" or "political", nor does WP:COMMONNAME reflect what "most people" call something. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 22:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose:If white people are to be considered a race, it is possible to be racist against them. I don't see why some carefully selected sources should change that because they have decided that racism has more to do with power structure than it has to do with race, espescially considering there are plenty of sources/scholars who do say you can be racist towards white people. --TylerBurden (talk) 22:45, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Such as...? --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 14:08, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, for a start British law considers that racist hate crime can be directed by people of any race towards people of any other race.[1] -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:48, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Laws are made by politicians, not scholars. Wikipedia follows reliable sources, not political trends. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 16:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  So, let me get this straight, you think "scholars" should take precedence over common usage? That makes a nonsense of such fundamental Wikipedia principles as WP:COMMONNAME does it not? -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:09, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  No it does not. Common usage is the concern of a dictionary, not an encyclopedia. Per WP:COMMONNAME, The term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred. Per WP:V, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources in topics such as history, medicine, and science. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 09:29, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment:The words Racism, Prejudice, and Sentiment all have different meanings but are used interchangibly, which ruins the catagory since we seem to have a different opinion on what qualifies as racism depending on the victim or perpetrator. Many articles with these tags were tagged when the victim of a crime commited by a BIPOC suspect so happened to be white, but plenty of other articles that actually showcase anti-white racism are precisely that, racism. Unless you plan on changing the other racism tags I don't see why this should change. June Parker (talk) 01:28, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and populate: The anti-black racism category is not contested in its name, so why would this be? Yuotort (talk) 20:25, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Populate with what? Anti-black racism is an extremely well-verified phenomenon examined in many reliable sources, unlike "anti-white racism", which is a controversial descriptor. See WP:OTHERCONTENT. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 16:06, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom, neutral on alternate proposal by Marcocapelle. Of course anti-white racism is theoretically possible, but broadly speaking it's not an accurate description for the articles categorized as such right now. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 20:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Racism, in sociological terms, is not simply prejudice against members of a different race but a structure of systemic oppression. There isn't the equivalency among all races of people as some editors here seem to personally believe. I think we need to rely on reliable sources, not editor's opinion on whether animosity against the class of people in a society who hold power can be termed as "racist". Note, I'm saying "class of people" and "systemic", this is not a matter of individual actions and beliefs, at least sociologically. It's not a matter of morality but of inequality of different groups in power and social resources. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • But we're not just talking in "sociological terms". Racism is prejudice by any ethnic group against any other ethnic group in common usage and also, as I have pointed out above, often defined as such in legal terms. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:09, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    That is one definition of racism. The use of "racism" to refer to systemic oppression is also well-established by now. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 16:16, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    So why should the narrower definition take precedence over the wider definition? -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    You make a very good point, the narrower term shouldn't take precedence. Unnamed anon (talk) 21:56, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Because the existence of "racism" against white people is rather contentious among people who actually know about such things, i.e. reliable, published sources. The term "sentiment" is much more precise. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 09:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I have added the African sibling category to the nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:35, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:15, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support The suggested title does not involve discussions over the scope of racism, and could include works expressing anti-white sentiment. Dimadick (talk) 10:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Support or delete. WP doesn't have an article on Anti-white racism; the term redirects to Reverse racism, which is about a specific concept relating to backlash against anti-racism efforts such as affirmative action. In general, category names should reflect usage in reliable sources. The top Google Scholar results for "'anti-white' racism" are sources describing perceptions—especially right-wing perceptions—of anti-white bias, not anti-white racism as a reality. Most the pages about anti-white violence—which is most of the pages in the category—don't say anything about anti-white "racism". The various pages on Black supremacist/Black separatist subjects only mention racism by way of attribution to specific authors. Therefore it's misleading to have a category name that suggests "anti-white racism" is a significant topic in its own right. Agnostic on the alternative merge proposals. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 05:05, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Necrothesp and TylerBurden's rationales, and the nominator's rationale is disingenuous as "European" and "Western" are not ethnicities. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 16:43, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Neceothesp, TylerBurdern, Cat Tuxedo, Yuotort, and June Parker. Acting hatefully towards white people for being white is just racism, plain and simple. As an asian american, the idea that acting hatefully towards white people for being white isn't considered racist is an extremely harmful double standard and practically encourages the action. As for Marcoappelle's proposed alternatives, they do get across the point that these actions are not okay, but at that point "racially motivated violence" is just the broader definition of racism that has nothing to do with systemic power that some fringe editors disagree counts as racism. I would much rather take Marcoappelle's alternative over the initial proposal, but I also see very flimsy reasons for any name changes. Unnamed anon (talk) 21:47, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  WP users' personal beliefs about what is or isn't harmful or okay are, once again, irrelevant. We leave it up to reliable sources to determine what racism is and isn't. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 09:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  You want a reliable source? Here: https://www.sciencespo.fr/research/cogito/home/is-there-such-a-thing-as-anti-white-racism/?lang=en. It would do wonders for you to read this article instead of blowing off any attempts at any discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unnamed anon (talk • contribs) 03:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  A single online essay (not peer-reviewed?) is hardly enough to establish due weight for the views contained therein. It may be more productive to check the first page of Google Scholar results before cherry-picking sources that seem to agree with a given position. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 11:57, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The whole "anti-white racism isn't noteworthy because of power difference" is a nonsense statement because it doesn't aknowlege that there are times when white people can be and have been in the weaker end of the power spectrum. With that being said, I really question why categories alternate between "anti-Foo sentiment", "anti-Foo racism" and "prejudice against", to me it seems like there should be more consistency among category and article naming.★Trekker (talk) 09:28, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Unnamed anon (talk) 03:39, 27 June 2022 (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) Qwerfjkltalk 21:13, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Directors of Mickey Mouse short films (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Generally people should not be categorized by the franchises/series they have worked on. It is rarely defining. ★Trekker (talk) 08:30, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, as a sort of WP:PERFCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:32, 6 June 2022 (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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 21:15, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:History of Argentina by city to Category:Histories of cities in Argentina

Nominator's rationale: merge, presumably the two categories are supposed to have the same scope. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, following standard naming format within Category:History by country and city. – Fayenatic London 11:38, 11 June 2022 (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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 21:15, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Bridges in Vladivostok to Category:Buildings and structures in Vladivostok and Category:Transport in Vladivostok
• Propose merging Category:Railway stations in Vladivostok to Category:Transport in Vladivostok, Category:Buildings and structures in Vladivostok and Category:Railway stations in Primorsky Krai
• Propose merging Category:Festivals in Vladivostok to Category:Culture in Vladivostok
• Propose merging Category:Films shot in Vladivostok to Category:Films shot in Siberia
• Propose merging Category:Education in Vladivostok to Category:Vladivostok and Category:Education in Primorsky Krai
• Propose merging Category:Streets in Vladivostok to Category:Geography of Vladivostok, Category:Transport in Vladivostok and Category:Streets in Russia
• Propose merging Category:Mass media in Vladivostok to Category:Vladivostok
• Propose merging Category:Mayors of Vladivostok to Category:Mayors of places in Russia and Category:People from Vladivostok

Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, only 1-3 articles in each of these categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:54, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom. – Fayenatic London 11:36, 11 June 2022 (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. Of the current member pages, only Jean-Baptiste Libouban is not in the parent so I will merge it there. – Fayenatic London 11:17, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Non-Indian Gandhians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is an unnecessary category, sources define people as Gandhians only, not as "Non-Indian Gandhians". I believe all articles in this are already in the upper level Category:Gandhians so it's safe to delete this. —SpacemanSpiff 04:42, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete but rather per WP:NONDEF and WP:OPINIONCAT. The same may apply to the parent category, I have not checked yet. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:21, 29 May 2022 (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.