Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 12

: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. Timrollpickering 11:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Wildlife of Shetland to :Category:Biota of Shetland

:Nominator's rationale: More standard category name - e.g. for consistency with :Category:Biota of Orkney. Example previous similar CFD. DexDor ^(talk) 20:33, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

----

: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: speedy move. czar 20:21, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Anthropology of education to :Category:Works about education‎

:Nominator's rationale: only one article Rathfelder (talk) 19:08, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

• {{ping|Rathfelder|p=}}, there are plenty of books that fit this category (added to three, at the moment). If you would retract this nom, I'd repurpose/move the category to "Ethnographic studies of education", which would have a wider/more applicable scope. (not watching, please {{tl|ping}}) czar 19:25, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
• Happy to withdraw. But if these are all articles about books can we put the category into :Category:Works about education‎?Rathfelder (talk) 19:28, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

:: Yep czar 20:00, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

----

: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: {{Relisted}} at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 12#Category:Education enrollment. ℯxplicit 05:57, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Education enrollment to :Category:Education in the United Kingdom

:Nominator's rationale: Only one article Rathfelder (talk) 19:07, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

• Merge - in the UK it is enrolment. Oculi (talk) 23:53, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
• Comment: the contents of Template:Widening Participation in the United Kingdom would be sufficient to start a category, if it would otherwise be valid & useful. – Fayenatic London 07:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

----

: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: {{Relisted}} at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 23#Category:Films about special forces. ℯxplicit 05:57, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{Lc|Films about special forces}}

:Nominator's rationale: Only featured one subcategory, which wasn't even an accurate subcategory, so I removed it. The only existing subcategory that *could* accurately be placed here is :Category:United States Army Special Forces in films. I'm sure that there are films featuring non-American special forces, and if categories ever get made for those films, then having a "Films about special forces" parent category could be useful. But for the time being, having both of these categories is redundant. --Jpcase (talk) 14:56, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

• There are articles, e.g. The One That Got Away (1996 film), that would belong in this category. DexDor ^(talk) 20:00, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
• {{ping|DexDor}} Does that film feature non-American special forces? My point is that there's already a category for films about American special forces - :Category:United States Army Special Forces in films. So :Category:Films about special forces is redundant, unless films featuring non-American special forces are added. --Jpcase (talk) 13:22, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
• Yes, that's about UKSF. There's also articles such as The Cockleshell Heroes that may predate the term "special forces", but would fit the definition. DexDor ^(talk) 16:48, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
• {{ping|DexDor}} Then I'm not opposed to keeping :Category:Films about special forces, although it would probably be best to treat it as a diffused category, with subcategories along the lines of :Category:British special forces in films, :Category:French special forces in films, etc., rather than adding articles about individual films directly to :Category:Films about special forces. Someone would have to actually make those subcategories though, since the only subcategory to currently exist is the one for American special forces.

::::Also - I'm not a military expert and can't say for sure what the term "special forces" refers to outside the US. In the American military, "Special Operations Forces" refers to various groups within the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and Air Force, while "Special Forces" exclusively refers to a single group within the Army. I'm pretty sure that most other countries use the term "Special Forces" synonymously with how the US uses the term "Special Operations Forces". So an explanation of what's covered under :Category:Films about special forces should probably be added to the top of that page, if the category is kept. --Jpcase (talk) 17:22, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

• Delete suffers the usual problems of the "films about" categories: objectively define how much about special forces a film must be to be included, and what reliable sources say it's at least that much. Moreover, "special forces" is itself an ill-defined concept: are SS-Sonderkommandos and Einsatzgruppen included? what about James Bond 007 or Jason Bourne or Jack Ryan? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:18, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

::If the category is kept, then I would suggest renaming it :Category:Special forces in films, that way we could avoid debates over whether a film is *about* special forces, and instead, the category could simply include any films that *feature* special forces. I agree that "special forces" is a nebulous term though, so there would certainly have to be some discussion over what the category's scope should be. --Jpcase (talk) 18:46, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

::* Oppose delete for this particular reason (while I'm neutral about deleting for other reasons) and oppose alternative name. "Films about" is exactly right, as the category is about categorizing films for which this is a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:40, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

----

: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. ℯxplicit 05:57, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{Lc|Eponymous clothing}}

:Nominator's rationale: Categories are for grouping articles about similar topics - not for grouping articles whose title has a particular characteristic (see, for example, the loanwords CFDs). For example, the article about the Trilby should be, and is, in :Category:Hats, but does not need to be categorized with articles such as Plimsoll shoe and Richard Nixon mask.  If the Wellington boot article was named Rubber boot (as it is in Fr wp, De wp etc) then presumably it wouldn't be eligible to be in the category.  See also previous CFDs (e.g. in July). DexDor ^(talk) 14:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

• Delete This might be OK for a list on the etymology, but I can't imagine what reader wants an easy navigational path between Mary Jane (shoe) and Princess Leia's bikini, for instance. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:43, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
• Strong keep: There are enough articles about pieces of clothing named after people to at least group them together in some form or another. - User:Kjell Knudde, 17:47, 13 August 2018 (UTC).

::The nom isn't about SMALLCAT. DexDor ^(talk) 16:59, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

• Keep -- The fact that clothing items are named from people is of interest, not something casual. The Wellington boot was originally of leather and was closely linked to the 1st Duke. Rubber is a more recent discovery. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:54, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

::That may be a good reason for mentioning the etymology in the articles (or linking to Wiktionary), but is it really a defining characteristic of the topic? And do articles about shoes, hats etc belong in :Category:Linguistics etc? DexDor ^(talk) 16:59, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

• Delete - there should be a specific named policy against this sort of category, which is collecting together articles based on the name of the article rather than its topic. WP:SHAREDNAME is close. Oculi (talk) 18:09, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
• Delete per nom; WP:SHAREDNAME, like :Category:Eponymous cities deleted long ago. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
• Delete, the eponymous aspect is insufficiently defining. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:29, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

----

: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: Keep. Timrollpickering 11:26, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Railway schools to :Category:Railway Schools in India

:Nominator's rationale: All these schools were in India when they were founded, and all but one still are. Rathfelder (talk) 09:11, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

• Question what is a railway school? I would have imagined that these schools have a particular curriculum to educate children to become railway employees, but the articles do not support that hypothesis. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:39, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
• Keep - I don't see why a school in Bangladesh should be deemed to be in India. The article Railway Schools gives the background. Oculi (talk) 12:31, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
• Keep If the one school had closed while still part of India, I'd go along. But Bangladesh is a separate country now and readers wouldn't expect to find that article under an Indian cat. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:46, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
• Keep -- These were schools founded under the British Raj, associated with railway lines, settlements for railway employees. They offered education to the children of railway employees. Possibly the target should be :Category:Railway Schools in South Asia to encompass the Bangladesh case. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:59, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
• Keep The category is needed to group the pages of different countries.Shyamsunder (talk) 02:16, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

----

: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). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:30, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Elementary middle schools to :Category:Middle schools‎

:Nominator's rationale: A US name for middle schools. Middle schools are inherently an uncertain concept. Calling them elementary doesn't seem helpful or defining. Rathfelder (talk) 09:01, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

• Merge for different reasons. The only loose article here is Landstuhl Elementary Middle School, an American military school in Germany. (If not for it's location, it would fit nicely into :Category:Public K-8 schools in the United States.) The article is already well categorized. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:51, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

----

: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 and delete. ℯxplicit 05:57, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting :Category:Years of the 11th century in Germany

:* Propose deleting :Category:Years of the 12th century in Germany

:* Propose deleting :Category:Years of the 13th century in Germany

:* Propose deleting :Category:Years of the 14th century in Germany

:* Propose deleting :Category:Years of the 15th century in Germany

:* Propose merging :Category:1002 in Germany to :Category:1002 in Europe and :Category:1000s in Germany

:* Propose merging :Category:1018 in Germany to :Category:1018 in Europe and :Category:1010s in Germany

:* Propose merging :Category:1024 establishments in Germany to :Category:1024 establishments in Europe and :Category:1020s establishments in Germany

:* Propose merging :Category:1040 establishments in Germany to :Category:1040 establishments in Europe and :Category:1040s establishments in Germany

:* Propose merging :Category:1474 in Germany to :Category:1474 in Europe and :Category:1470s in Germany

:* Propose merging :Category:1475 in Germany to :Category:1475 in Europe and :Category:1470s in Germany

:* Propose merging :Category:1482 in Germany to :Category:1482 in Europe and :Category:1480s in Germany

:Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, mostly just a single article in every category. Note that this is not a nomination to discuss anachronism (Germany versus Holy Roman Empire), for such a discussion there should be a nomination of centuries and decades as well. The only thing that will happen with this proposal is that Germany and the Holy Roman Empire will become consistently categorized (i.e. by decade in the Middle Ages, by year thereafter), which might be of help to set up a future anachronism discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:29, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

• Support -- I hope this will be followed up by one to rename/merge the Germany categories to Holy Roman Empire. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:01, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support per nom and I share Peterkingiron's hope about the rename. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:21, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support all per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
• Merge all into Holy Roman Empire categories.GreyShark (dibra) 19:38, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
• Merge to HRE per Greyshark. Tim! (talk) 08:16, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

----

: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.