Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 March 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: merge/delete (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:42, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Department stores of Bangkok to :Category:Department stores of Thailand

:* Propose deleting :Category:Department stores of Thailand by city

:* Propose deleting :Category:Department stores by country by city

:Nominator's rationale: Not part of any larger categorisation scheme. Paul_012 (talk) 20:47, 17 March 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: procedural close. The nom withdrew the original proposal, at which point this discussion should have been closed. Trying to use this discussion as the place for a different proposal involving different categories just makes a confused discussion. Feel free to open a new discussion about the new proposal. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:44, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

----

:* Propose renaming :Category:Sportspeople to :Category:People in sports

:* Propose renaming :Category:Sports competitors to :Category:Sportspeople

:Or alternatively:

:* Propose upmerging :Category:Sports competitors to :Category:Sportspeople

:* Propose upmerging :Category:Sports competitors by sport to :Category:Sportspeople by sport

:* Propose upmerging :Category:Sports competitors by nationality to :Category:Sportspeople by nationality

:* Propose creating :Category:People in sports as a parent of :Category:Sportspeople and moving non-athlete categories into the new parent

:Nominator's rationale: The current category name is confusing. The category's scope, "people involved in sports in some way", does not match the dictionary definition of sportsperson, which is "someone who plays sport", i.e. :Category:Sports competitors. I would appreciate if someone could help tag the subcats. Otherwise, I'll get to it in a few days. Paul_012 (talk) 19:18, 17 March 2018 (UTC) Paul_012 (talk) 21:13, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

• Presumably we need two categories, :Category:Sportspeople and :Category:People in sports on top of it. Similar to :Category:Businesspeople and :Category:People involved in business. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:38, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
• I think the new narrow Sportspeople category is already covered by :Category:Sports competitors. --Paul_012 (talk) 21:06, 18 March 2018 (UTC)Looking again, the current tree structure is more complicated, and the Sports competitors subcat doesn't exist at a national level. --Paul_012 (talk) 21:26, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose. "Sportspeople" is the correct term for those playing. I can see a case for a parent :Category:People in sports, but I am not persuaded that the extra layer would really help; it would just cause theological debates about whether a coach is really a sportsperson, etc. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:01, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
• The category currently includes managers, sportswriters, historians, etc. Will they need to be purged? --Paul_012 (talk) 21:06, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
• Note: I've modified the original proposal. --Paul_012 (talk) 21:06, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
• Note: I'm withdrawing the original proposal; it'd be too much work for little gain. This is now mainly a merge proposal for :Category:Sports competitors. (Creation of a new parent layer shouldn't require CfD.) --Paul_012 (talk) 21:21, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
• The new merge proposal may be a bit tricky as well, for example it should also require merging :Category:Sports competitors by sport to :Category:Sportspeople by sport and there may be more issues like this. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:44, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
• Tagged, as well as :Category:Sports competitors by nationality. (:Category:Sportspeople by sport mostly contains subcats that include non-players, but some player cats are there as well, so it will need manual clean-up either way.) --Paul_012 (talk) 22:50, 18 March 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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

----

:* Propose deleting {{Lc|African-American biographical dramas}}

:Nominator's rationale: This was rejected at CSD, which is fine, but my argument remains the same: we do not categorize by race. How can this category be defined except as films about African-Americans, and how is that anything other than categorization by race? The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 17:35, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• Delete' per nom. Deloop82 (talk) 17:40, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
• Comment I'm nuetral but we in fact frequently categorize by race: :Category:African-American films, :Category:African-American film producers, :Category:African-American film directors, :Category:African Americans' rights organizations, :Category:African-American society, :Category:African-American players of American football. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose, we don't categorize by race, but we do categorize by ethnic groups, and African American is a well established ethnic group in the category tree, see :Category:African-American society. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:05, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

::African-American is not an ethnic group. Ethiopian-American, Kenyan-American, or Tanzanian-American would all be ethnic groups, but African-American is a racial group and forbidden by our own policies. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 01:02, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

::: More info about African Americans as an ethnic group, see African Americans. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:49, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose, African-American is an ethnic group, not a race. Black is a race. Ethnicity is cultural and race is genetic. African-American's are people brought over from the slave trade and whose culture is distinctly, American. Ethiopian-American, Kenyan-American, etc are immigrants or first, second generation Americans who's roots can be traced back to their parents or grandparents country of origin. African-Americans have no such distinction. There are a myriad of pre-existing pages films, directors, etc. And there is nothing wrong with that. This page should stand like the others. saviaj (talk) 23:40, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

::With all due respect, that response made no sense. "Black" is not a race, and the claim that it is is simply ridiculous. Your misunderstanding of these issues is evident in your misuse of these categories. But, you are correct in your statement that ethnicity is about culture, not race, which is why we should be specific. African-American is not an ethnic group; it is a catch-all phrase that obscures more than it illuminates. Likewise, European-American would not be a useful phrase, because it is not specific enough to be useful. I understand that we are on tender ground here and should proceed carefully, but this is an encyclopedia we are building and we need to be specific in our categorizations and our use of language. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 14:05, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose I agree with saviaj. We define African Americans as an ethnic group of Americans, and cover their history, demographics, religion, business, language, genetics, traditional names, politics and social issues, culture, music, and literature. We have the article "Black people" for the racial classification scheme, along with explanations of why there is no universally accepted definition of a black person. TheOldJacobite seems to have no familiarity with our articles on ethnic groups or the sources used for them. Dimadick (talk) 10:10, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose I can't add anything to what others have said. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:46, 20 March 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 April 17#Category:Gender pay gap by country. ℯxplicit 05:30, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Gender pay gap by country to :Category:Gender pay gap

:Nominator's rationale: upmerge per WP:SMALLCAT, this category and its parent category together contain six articles only. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:34, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• Support. Actually I don't think WP:SMALLCAT directly applies, since more articles could be created, but at the moment I don't see why a merge wouldn't be appropriate. --Paul_012 (talk) 21:29, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
• Merge, with no prejudice against re-creation if and when there are more articles. Grutness...wha? 00:42, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:SMALLCAT, because a) 5 articles is usually accepted as enough to make a viable category; b) it has plenty of scope for expansion; c) it also allows the by-country pages to be directly grouped under :Category:Gender equality by country. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:06, 10 April 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 April 10#Category:Modern_Turkic_states. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:18, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

----

:* Propose deleting {{Lc|Modern Turkic states}}

:* Propose deleting :Category:Autonomous Turkic states

:* Propose deleting :Category:Former Turkic states

:Nominator's rationale: delete as non-defining and too subjective (how much % of the population needs to be of Turkic ethnicity in order to characterize a state as Turkic?). Marcocapelle (talk) 10:34, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• comment There is no "Turkic ethnicity". The Turkic peoples are a collection of ethnolinguistic groups, consisting of groups who speak one of the Turkic languages. At least 35 documented languages, all descending from a Proto-Turkic language, that was probably spoken in the 1st millennium BC. Linguists have noted considerable similarities between the Turkic languages and the Mongolic languages, the Tungusic languages, the Koreanic languages, the Japonic languages, and the Uralic languages, probably indicating "extensive prehistoric language contact". Dimadick (talk) 10:32, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
• Support - certainly Pan-Turkism is a thing, but as the nominator says this is hard to measure and probably not defining anyway. Inter&anthro (talk) 17:47, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
• Keep - similar to :Category:Arab world.GreyShark (dibra) 17:08, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

:* Arab world is a common term. There is nothing like a Turkic world. Note that Turkic world redirects to List of Turkic dynasties and countries. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:47, 21 March 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, see here. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:51, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Tomb Raider series to :Category:Tomb Raider video games

:Nominator's rationale: More accurate description of what is in the category. Was moved here by accident a while back, then reverted, but I think "games" is more WP:CONSISTENT. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 08:56, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose Other articles in :Category:Video game franchises use the disambiguation "series", not "games". Dimadick (talk) 10:39, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
• {{ping|Dimadick}}The franchise already HAS a category, :Category:Tomb Raider. This is SOLELY for the games within the franchise as many other franchise categories have._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 10:55, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
• Comment I already know that, but I can not find an article which uses "game" as a disambiguation. Dimadick (talk) 11:40, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
• {{ping|Dimadick}}There are many similar categories, like :Category:Diablo video games, :Category:Dead or Alive (series) video games, :Category:Final Fantasy video games, just to name a few. Perhaps it should be moved to :Category:Tomb Raider video games then, that was an oversight on my part. I have changed the nomination accordingly._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 08:41, 23 March 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) 07:47, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Fictional rogue planets to :Category:Rogue planets in fiction

:Nominator's rationale: Procedurally sending, per Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_30#Category:Fictional_rogue_planets. Restored from redirect and proposing merger, and pinging everyone involved - {{ping|Usernamekiran|Tavix|LaundryPizza03|NYKevin|Amory}} Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:18, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

fix ping {{ping|Amorymeltzer}} Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:19, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• Comment, This earlier CfD discussion may be related as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:28, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
• Support I am still unable to understand whats benefit of keeping these two separate. —usernamekiran(talk) 12:41, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
• Support by contrast with e.g. :Category:Deserts in fiction, which has a reasonable set of subcategories, particularly the large :Category:Films set in deserts. It's clear that there are not enough fictional rogue planets to support such a scheme. --NYKevin 18:05, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
• Support There is only one article about a fictional rogue planet, and that is fictioncruft that should be merged into Cybermen._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 19:08, 17 March 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.