Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 17

: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 04:10, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{Lc|Songs about the Gaels}}

:Nominator's rationale: A questionable category defined by an ill-defined ethnic group, whose article has been subject to continual dispute over who actually belongs to the group. Furthermore don't have similar categories for members of any other ethnic or national group. There is no :Category:Songs about Americans or :Category:Songs about Poles; instead, we have :Category:Songs about the United States and :Category:Songs about Poland. But this category is hopeless in that regard because there are Gaels in Ireland, Scotland, Canada, and elsewhere in diaspora. So it should just be deleted. Catrìona (talk) 23:42, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

• Delete The subject (Gaels) is far too vague to be of any use. The choice of songs is rather Irish, what make me think of subtle POV-pushing. The Banner talk 00:50, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
• Delete, the articles are already in :Category:Irish songs or :Category:Irish folk songs, that should suffice. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:34, 18 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 27#Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 17. ℯxplicit 04:10, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:1915 in German South West Africa to :Category:1915 in South West Africa

:* Propose renaming :Category:1915 disestablishments in German South West Africa to :Category:1915 disestablishments in South West Africa

:* Propose renaming :Category:1910s disestablishments in German South West Africa to :Category:1910s disestablishments in South West Africa

:* Propose merging :Category:20th-century disestablishments in German South West Africa to :Category:20th-century disestablishments in South West Africa

:* Propose renaming :Category:Disestablishments in German South West Africa by year to :Category:Disestablishments in South West Africa by year

:* Propose merging :Category:Disestablishments in German South West Africa by decade to :Category:Disestablishments in South West Africa by decade

:* Propose merging :Category:Disestablishments in German South West Africa by century to :Category:Disestablishments in South West Africa by century

:Nominator's rationale: German South West Africa was invaded in 1914. :Category:1915 in German South West Africa contains the final battles; although the last German commander only capitulated in July 1915, it will be helpful and sufficiently accurate to use "South West Africa" from 1915 onwards. The disestablishments category contains only the former territory and its currency. – Fayenatic London 14:52, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

• Support as to 1910s/1915 items. However German South West Africa only existed as a polity from 1884 to 1915, though not formally abolished until 1919. It then became a Mandate territory, governed by South Africa, and then Namibia. We do not therefore need century GSWA categories (2 members) or decade categories (4 members). Where polities have changed name, the best solution is to parent them to the present polity. The parent should thus be ones related to Namibia. It is exactly the same place. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:18, 18 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 27#Category:People from Amorium. ℯxplicit 04:10, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{Lc|People from Amorium}}

:Nominator's rationale: Typical WP:SMALLCAT. Only a handful of people are known to have come from the city. Constantine ✍ 11:27, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

• Keep Historically important area, with a large population. I reckon many more accounts can be included in this category.--Ortizesp (talk) 02:46, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

:*There is a :Category:Amorium for the city and :Category:Phrygia for the area; what there is not is many people known to have been born there. As someone who actually writes about the area and period, I do not reckon that there are many more articles to be added here. Should I be proven wrong, the category can always be recreated. Constantine ✍ 14:27, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

• Delete, I can't imagine many more biographies will be added here, the city flourished for a too short period in a too distant past and it has never been a country capital. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:33, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
• Probably keep -- unless someone can suggest a suitable merge target. Deletion is liable to leave articles orphaned. I know that it is too small. We regularly merge small places in America to their county. Is something similar an option here? Peterkingiron (talk) 18:22, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

:* All three articles are in the three of :Category:9th-century Byzantine people, that should suffice. We seldom categorize medieval people by city, even less by country subdivision. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:53, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

• Keep Why was this category so scarcely populated? We have several articles on Byzantine military commanders and rebels who used Amorium as their headquarters, and Constantine V used Amorium as his residence during the civil war against his brother-in-law (who was the one who held Constantinople). Dimadick (talk) 13:28, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

:*Except that the category is for "People from Amorium", i.e., born in the city. People associated with a city but not born there should be categorized at :Category:City X or even :Category:History of City X. BTW, discretion should be exercised with over-categorizing: someone using a city as a base in a single year, or commanding a unit there, is not sufficient grounds for putting him/her in the respective category; there needs to be a strong link between person and city, that makes the latter an integral part of the given subject, such as being its longtime governor, bishop, having lived most of one's life there, etc. Constantine ✍ 14:23, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

::Most of our "city from" categories are simply recording residence in a city, not place of birth. See for example :Category:People from Chicago.Dimadick (talk) 14:44, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

:::I would like to see some data to support the "most of" claim. My impression is quite the contrary, and at any rate categorization always implies, as can be seen in the Chicago example as well, being closely associated with a the category topic. Simply staying there briefly, or having a parent or grandparent from there, is not enough, per WP:NON-DEFINING. Constantine ✍ 14:48, 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: {{Relisted}} at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 August 27#Category:Free Linux distributions. ℯxplicit 04:10, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{Lc|Free Linux distributions}}

:Nominator's rationale: "Free" is ambiguous as most Linux distributions are free of charge, there is only one subcategory: {{c|Free software only Linux distributions}} and that being more specific, this category obviously isn't needed. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 08:56, 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: merge. ℯxplicit 04:10, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Housing struggles in South Africa to :Category:Housing in South Africa

:Nominator's rationale: upmerge, :Category:Housing by country is an established tree, while :Category:Housing struggles by country is not. It is also not super clear what "struggles" means. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:50, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

• Upmerge per nom. Unnecessary, vaguely defined subcat. Catrìona (talk) 23:55, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support Lack of accuracy in current name. Excelse (talk) 10:10, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support. Finding decent housing is always a struggle if you havent a lot of money. Its not a good basis for a category.Rathfelder (talk) 20:46, 24 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. ℯxplicit 04:10, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting :Category:Esperanto by country

:* Propose deleting :Category:Esperanto in Slovakia

:* Propose deleting :Category:Esperanto in the Czech Republic

:Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, the Czech and Slovak categories together contain only two articles plus each a subcategory. No need to merge, the two articles are already in :Category:Esperanto meetings. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

• Keep and populate. I have used [https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=5484803 Petscan] to add Germany, France, UK and US categories and to find more articles for the 2 listed. 'By country' subcats are not controversial (and interesting in this case). Oculi (talk) 07:52, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
• Keep Secoding above. Categories for other countries can be added and SK and CZ can be populated. Per country divisions are usual. Thank you for the note, Marcocapelle.--Jetam2 (talk) 10:30, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
• Keep There is a potential for grow, see :eo:Kategorio:Esperanto-movado laŭ landoj so SMALLCAT is not appropriate. --KuboF Hromoslav (talk) 21:20, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
• Keep: the subcat :Category:Czech Esperantists is decently populated already, and there is room for expansion. Although probably many of the articles in the Esperanto categories don't meet enwiki notability guidelines, even so there would be enough material to fill the Czech and Slovak categories. Catrìona (talk) 23:50, 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.