Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 December 21#Category:Living Landmarks

: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 will upmerge the contents into parent categories as appropriate. – Fayenatic London 07:49, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Guelmim-Es Semara}} and

:*{{lc|Laâyoune-Boujdour-Sakia El Hamra}}

:Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALL. These categories are for Guelmim-Es Semara and Laâyoune-Boujdour-Sakia El Hamra, two of the 16 former Moroccan administrative regions, all of which (except for Oriental) were abolished and reorganized in 2015: see Regions of Morocco#1997 to 2010: Full unitary system. None of the other abolished regions have their own categories. The post-2015 regions (see :Category:Regions of Morocco) already all have their own categories and a consistent scheme of subcategories. Cobblet (talk) 21:39, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

• Weak keep There's no reason why them being defunct is enough to delete (e.g. :Category:Northwest Territory) so we can take appropriate articles for towns, births, establishments, etc. and categorize or subcategorize them as appropriate. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:37, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
• There are no towns that could not be sorted into the geography categories of the current Moroccan regions and/or of Western Sahara. People in these two former regions are already categorized by town (:Category:People by city in Morocco, :Category:People by city in Western Sahara), while :Category:Establishments in Morocco and :Category:Establishments in Western Sahara are not currently subcategorized by geography. These two former regions overlap with the disputed territory of Western Sahara, so categorizing their things by town is preferable anyway – the use of Moroccan administrative subdivisions could be seen as non-neutral. Cobblet (talk) 00:33, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
• Delete, in general we may sometimes keep categories like these as "history of" categories but I do not expect for these two particular categories that they can sufficiently be populated with articles about the former administrative regions' histories. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:19, 22 December 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. Timrollpickering (Talk) 18:36, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Species named for Barack Obama}}

:Nominator's rationale: Not a defining trait of the organisms. Despite the initial flurry of press releases Obama-named species often generate (and twenty million fluff news pieces regurgitating 99% identical churnalism) the namesakes of any organisms are not described by reliable sources commonly and consistently. Keeping this category only builds precedence for thousands of parallel category clutter: Species named for Charles Darwin, Species named for David Attenborough, species named for David Bowie, species named for any famous person, species named for Tolkien characters, species named for the place they were found, species named for whatever some Wikipedian wants to categorize them by, etc. --Animalparty! (talk) 18:30, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

• Delete per nom and per previous discussions (example). DexDor ^(talk) 21:53, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:SHAREDNAME. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:28, 22 December 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. The two New York landmarks are within the subcategories of :Category:Landmarks in New York (state), leaving nothing to merge. ℯxplicit 04:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Living Landmarks to :Category:Landmarks in New York (state)

:Nominator's rationale: There's no Living Landmark article to match these to, it seems to be some kind of local designation by New York Landmarks Conservancy - the two members are both in NYC Le Deluge (talk) 17:58, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

• Keep. The_Weeping_Beech is one of two living landmarks in NYC. The other is Magnolia grandiflora (Brooklyn) Both list the category and are active articles. Kingsland homestead and John Bowne house are both on the national registry of historic places. There are others around the country, their articles just are not written yet. Some, like Africa's transcontinental Great Green Wall and the circular grove in China or the grove of aspen trees Pando_(tree) and Methuselah out west should be added but do not have recognized landmark status, more research is needed before deleting or merging the category. CaptJayRuffins (talk) 05:58, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

• Delete as non-defining e.g. for Great Green Wall. DexDor ^(talk) 16:09, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

::'Keep' for consideration, the great barrier reef is a living landmark and should be added. What exactly is non-defining about a line of green trees that can be seen from space? CaptJayRuffins (talk) 12:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

:::Great Barrier Reef is well categorized (grouped with articles about similar subjects) by, for example, :Category:Reefs of Australia. DexDor ^(talk) 13:15, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

• Do not keep, this is too ambiguous. For example [http://www.nylandmarks.org/events/living_landmarks_gala/ here] is a link in which people are honored as Living Landmarks. By merging the two original articles to :Category:Landmarks in New York (state) we solve that ambiguity. The third article can be purged. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:24, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

::Link Thanks for adding that link. I just realize that somehow the New York Landmarks Conservancy has something to do with a WP:Category so it needs to be deleted. Not. Their annual gala and any promotion for is not the source for Category:Living Landmarks. It is a definition, for a subset of unique organisms that exist or did and were notable for the time they existed. Equating the two is wrong, the great barrier reef consists of living coral that is not used in the construction of any buildings that the NY conservancy wants to honor at it's annual people that mattered gala. And, the category was not created to promote that party. There are others (living organisms) that don't have a wiki written about them as they have no notability, but the future is not written yet. Dump the Great Green Wall, a 15 kilometer line of trees stretching across Africa from Senegal to Djibouti 'cause it's not landmarked by the NRHP. 100.2.105.65 (talk) 07:48, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

• Delete as WP:SMALLCAT. The category page includes the definition "Living flora that have landmark status"; The Weeping Beech formerly met those criteria, although it died in 1998, so perhaps the definition ought to have been "Flora that had landmark status while living". That only makes two; the Wall, while visible from space, does not "have landmark status". The phrase "Living Landmark" appears to be WP:OR, not used in reliable sources, e.g. [https://nypost.com/2012/10/21/growing-push-for-landmark-tree/ NY Post] The commission has previously only designated two trees as landmarks, [https://www.nytimes.com/1985/04/27/nyregion/new-york-again-tree-city-usa-pays-homage-to-its-finest-specimens.html NY Times] In 1966, it became the first New York tree to be designated a historic landmark. The term "Living Landmarks" is used more for people: the New York Landmarks Conservancy has so far honoured over 150 people as Living Landmarks.[http://www.nylandmarks.org/events/living_landmarks_gala/honoree_list/] Perhaps the category could be renamed as {{c|Landmark trees in the United States}}. If not renamed, the category should be deleted rather than merged, as the Weeping Beech and Magnolia grandiflora (Brooklyn) are already in other specific sub-categories of :Category:Landmarks in New York (state). The could be linked under "See also". – Fayenatic London 21:50, 6 January 2019 (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: Rename. Timrollpickering (Talk) 18:12, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Lists of fauna of the Arabian Peninsula to :Category:Lists of animals of the Arabian Peninsula

:Nominator's rationale: To make the name consistent with similar categories (e.g. :Category:Lists of animals of Africa). Note: I created the category a few days ago. DexDor ^(talk) 17:36, 21 December 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 together. Timrollpickering (Talk) 18:13, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose seperating :Category:Bisexual scientists from :Category:LGBT scientists

:* Propose seperating :Category:Gay scientists from :Category:LGBT scientists

:* Propose seperating :Category:Lesbian scientists from :Category:LGBT scientists

:* Propose seperating :Category:Transgender and transsexual scientists from :Category:LGBT scientists

I want to revoke Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 December 16. --Sharouser (talk) 13:36, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

:Oppose at least until a reason for separation is specified. (CFD link). DexDor ^(talk) 15:04, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

:Oppose for the same reason as DexDor. I don't see how being a different type of LGBT has any effect on most types of scientific research. Catrìona (talk) 17:18, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose: non-defining intersection of sexuality and profession (i'd support removing most LGBT profession except where directly relevant: I don't think "Lesbian science" is a recognized subfield like Lesbian literature. It's just science. --Animalparty! (talk) 00:05, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
• Being a trans and being a LGB have different effects on most types of scientific research. Most of trans person may adopt a new name. I think that :Category:Transgender and transsexual scientists should be seperated. --Sharouser (talk) 00:14, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

::: People may adopt a new name when they're married too, should we have Category:Married scientists? And you're going to have to provide some evidence for the claim for "Being a trans and being a LGB have different effects on most types of scientific research." Are there gay paleontology journals? Do trans people use microscopes differently than non-binary, cisgendered, or asexuals? We normally categorize only by defining traits, not just any trait. --Animalparty! (talk) 00:58, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose if lesbian science differs from straight science then the science is wrong. Look to the science, not the scientist. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:36, 26 December 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: Rename. Timrollpickering (Talk) 09:52, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Lists of Australian animals to :Category:Lists of animals of Australia

:* Propose renaming :Category:Lists of Australian plants to :Category:Lists of plants of Australia

:Nominator's rationale: Consistency of naming - e.g. see :Category:Lists of animals of Africa, :Category:Lists of moths of Australia and a 2012 CFD. DexDor ^(talk) 09:52, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

• Speedy rename per WP:C2C. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:29, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
• I created this category and have no objection to a rename. Hesperian 03:44, 23 December 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/Delete. Timrollpickering (Talk) 09:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in A Coruña to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Galicia (Spain) and :Category:A Coruña‎

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Albaida to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in the Valencian Community and :Category:Buildings and structures in Albaida

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Alicante to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in the Valencian Community and :Category:Buildings and structures in Alicante

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Aranjuez to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in the Community of Madrid and :Category:Buildings and structures in Aranjuez

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Bilbao to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in the Basque Country and :Category:Buildings and structures in Bilbao

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in León, Spain to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Castile and León and :Category:Buildings and structures in León, Spain

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Olite to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Navarre and :Category:Buildings and structures in Olite

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in A Coruña

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Albaida

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Alicante

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Aranjuez

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Bilbao

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in León, Spain

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Olite

:Nominator's rationale: merge/delete per WP:SMALLCAT, the Roman Catholic churches categories contain only 1 or 2 articles, while the parent Churches categories do not contain any article at all, apart from the Roman Catholic subcat. So this is a double merge nomination, for the Churches and the Roman Catholic churches simultaneously. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:47, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

• Support all per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:20, 23 December 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/Delete. Timrollpickering (Talk) 09:54, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Capua to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Campania and :Category:Capua and :Category:Churches in the province of Caserta

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Città di Castello to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Umbria and :Category:Buildings and structures in Città di Castello and :Category:Churches in the province of Perugia

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Fano to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in the Marche and :Category:Fano and :Category:Churches in the Province of Pesaro and Urbino

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Forlì to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Emilia-Romagna and :Category:Buildings and structures in Forlì and :Category:Churches in the province of Forlì-Cesena

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Lecce to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Apulia and :Category:Buildings and structures in Lecce and :Category:Churches in the province of Lecce

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Udine to :Category:Udine‎ and :Category:Churches in Friuli-Venezia Giulia

:* Propose merging :Category:Roman Catholic churches in Urbisaglia to :Category:Roman Catholic churches in the Marche and :Category:Urbisaglia and :Category:Churches in the Province of Macerata

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Capua

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Città di Castello

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Fano

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Forlì

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Lecce

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Udine

:* Propose deleting :Category:Churches in Urbisaglia

:Nominator's rationale: merge/delete per WP:SMALLCAT, the Roman Catholic churches categories contain only 1 or 2 articles, while the parent Churches categories do not contain any article at all, apart from the Roman Catholic subcat. So this is a double merge nomination, for the Churches and the Roman Catholic churches simultaneously. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:47, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

• Support all per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:20, 23 December 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: Rename. Timrollpickering (Talk) 09:51, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Mammals of Southwest Asia to :Category:Mammals of Western Asia

:Nominator's rationale: To match the text and the parent category. Note: The target is currently a redirect back to the current category name. DexDor ^(talk) 07:09, 21 December 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 04:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Crimes in Europe by decade to :Category:Crime in Europe by decade

Also proposing the following renames:

:* :Category:Crimes in France by decade to :Category:Crime in France by decade

:* :Category:Crimes in Germany by decade to :Category:Crime in Germany by decade

:* :Category:Crimes in the United Kingdom by decade to :Category:Crime in the United Kingdom by decade

:Nominator's rationale: The singular seems appropriate here at this level to match the parents (:Category:Crime in Europe, etc.) and follows the naming convention of the "by year" sub-categories under :Category:Crimes by year and continent and :Category:Crimes by country and year (eg. :Category:Crime in the United Kingdom by year‎). Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 03:22, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

• Keep - we have {{cl|Crime}}, a topic category (topics about crime in general), and its subcat {{cl|Crimes}}, a set category (articles about a particular crime). Subcats of {{cl|Crimes}} should all be set categories and should all use the plural. Oculi (talk) 09:51, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

::So should all the categories under :Category:Crimes by country and year be changed from "crime" to "crimes" instead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk • contribs)

::* That would be the better solution, also because all countries have crimes subcats. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:28, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

::* Support Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars' suggestion per above. Needs to be plural. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:03, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

• do not change as nominated; Support Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars' suggestion above and fully populate :Category:Crimes by country Hmains (talk) 01:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

::{{ping|Hmains}} Wait, are you saying there should be both :Category:Crime in Austria and :Category:Crimes in Austria or that Crime in Austria be changed to Crimes in Austria? Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:23, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

• there should be both; see :Category:Crime in the United States and its major subcat :Category:Crimes in the United States which demonstrate the innate difference between the two. Hmains (talk) 00:04, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

:* In the US the categories are diffused by year instead by decade, but still they are about crimes: e.g. :Category:1875 crimes in the United States‎. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:02, 26 December 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.