Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 20#Category:Colonial agents

: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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:24, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Houses in Copiah County, Mississippi to :Category:Houses in Mississippi and :Category:Buildings and structures in Copiah County, Mississippi

:Nominator's rationale: Per SMALLCAT User:Namiba 22:29, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Merge, only one article in the category, without objection to recreating the category when at some point there are five articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 21 September 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Kamaksha temple}}

:Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary 1-article-category overcategorization Gjs238 (talk) 21:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Support in the spirit of WP:C2F. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete as far as I understand, this is by definition a 1-element category. Pichpich (talk) 23:00, 21 September 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Ghanaian men fashion designers}}

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Ghanaian men activists}}

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Ghanaian men television presenters}}

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Ghanaian men radio presenters}}

:Nominator's rationale: Cluster of categories all newly created solely to overcategorize one person. (One of them has had two other people added to it; the others have not.) Per WP:CATEGRS, the fact that we sometimes have dedicated categories for "women X" does not necessarily require balancing off with "men X" categories across the board: women are so categorized because they were mostly barred from participating in professional life before the latter half of the 20th century, meaning that they're still a relative minority of the articles we have about people in that occupation, and thus are actively studied by reliable sources researching the phenomenon of women's participation in work life: reliable sources actually investigate and write about whether women do their jobs differently than men do, whether they prioritize different goals, whether they use different professional strategies, and on and so forth.
So while there are some occupations where we do have both "men X" and "women X" categories sitting alongside each other, there are many more where we don't, and these four are among the occupations where we don't. Bearcat (talk) 20:57, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

::Support, but I recommend merging up the categories into their ungendered parent category, in case someone is added to exclusivly to the men category. Mason (talk) 23:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Comment :Category:Ghanaian men activists was emptied. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Gjs238 (talk) 19:28, 30 September 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:30, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Valdai Discussion Club Participants}}

:Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization by participation in an event that most of the articles filed here completely fail to bother mentioning at all (and neither does the event's article list most of the people either), which is thus not clearly a defining characteristic of these people. Bearcat (talk) 20:41, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

::Would it be better as a list? Nangaf (talk) 05:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

:::I'm not convinced that such a category or list is necessary or desirable.

:::The category in question contains 305 articles, or participants. A much larger organization such as the World_Economic_Forum#Individual_participants which, according to the article, had "some 3,000 individual participants" at the 2020 annual meeting, has no such category or list. Gjs238 (talk) 12:56, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

• del - overcat: not a defining characteristic. - Altenmann >talk 21:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete, not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete, not a defining characteristic. Pichpich (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:31, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Private Museums in Nigeria}}

:Nominator's rationale: Category recently created solely to overcategorize one thing. Wikipedia does not have any established scheme of using the category system to separate "private" from "public" museums, and one museum in Nigeria does not warrant special treatment. Bearcat (talk) 20:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

::Support. If anything it isolates that lone museum. Mason (talk) 00:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

::Delete. Unnecessary/over-categorization. Gjs238 (talk) 01:54, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

• Delete, merge is not needed because the article is already in :Category:Museums in Lagos. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete, not a meaningful subcategorization scheme. Pichpich (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2023 (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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:34, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Military conflicts between Armenia and Azerbaijan to :Category:Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

:Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT, all articles inside with the possible exception of Armenian–Azerbaijani war (1918–1920) belong to Nagorno-Karabakh conflict whose bulk are clashes and confrontations. Brandmeister^talk 17:35, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Support per nom, but the list and Armenian–Azerbaijani war (1918–1920) should be moved to :Category:Wars involving Armenia, :Category:Wars involving Azerbaijan and :Category:Armenia–Azerbaijan military relations instead. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:04, 20 September 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:32, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Gambian government stubs}}

:Nominator's rationale: Undersized stub category with no evidence of approval by WikiProject Stub sorting. As always, stub categories are not free for just any user to create on a whim -- the minimum requirement for the creation of a stub category is 60 articles, and accordingly stub categories have to be approved by the wikiproject before they can be created.
But there's no evidence that approval was sought, and the only thing in the category is the template itself because it hasn't been applied to any pages at all -- and there's no realistic prospect of getting it up to 60 articles quickly, because even the parent {{cl|The Gambia stubs}} only has 89 articles in it total, and does not appear to be two-thirds government-related articles that could be moved here. (There are some of those, admittedly, but there aren't 60 of them.)
The template's harmless, but should just sort articles into the existing {{cl|The Gambia stubs}} instead of having its own dedicated category. Bearcat (talk) 12:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:56, 29 September 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:32, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Member states of the Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations}}

:Nominator's rationale: Per WP:CATDEF. This is a recently created group with limited participation and inconsistent membership that has only released a few statements. This is unlike other United Nations members, such as NGOs or regional blocs.
Its parent category, :Category:Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations, has been deleted for similar reasons (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 3#Category:Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations) NoonIcarus (talk) 09:43, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

:Comment: Just noticed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 6#Category:Member states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, Category:Observer states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and Category:Dialogue partners of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, with the same issues and outcomes. --NoonIcarus (talk) 09:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Delete, not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete, not defining for states. - Altenmann >talk 20:55, 20 September 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:32, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Kashmir (band) albums to :Category:Kashmir (Danish band) albums

:Nominator's rationale: Kashmir (band) redirects to Kashmir (disambiguation)#Music. The main article for this category is Kashmir (Danish band) Jeeputer ^Talk 05:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Rename per WP:C2D. The subcategory should be nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Rename : Kashmir (band) is a non-unique identifier. - Altenmann >talk 20:41, 20 September 2023 (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. – Fayenatic London 12:31, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Top 10 dive sites}}

:Nominator's rationale: Subjective category - as the description does not refer to which publication denoted these as the top 10, then it appears to be largely meaningless, as it's unclear how this top 10 is to be determined. Loafiewa (talk) 04:48, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

:ClarificationThe purpose of the category is to identify sites verifiably claimed to be in the "top ten" by any notable publication. It is expected that there would be considerably more than 10 sites eventually, as the designation is inherently subjective. I have now clarified inclusion criteria the category page. Is there a rule against classifying by subjective assessments made by verifiable sources? · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 06:15, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Delete, arbitrary cut-off. This is more suitable for lists, where publication and rank can be specified. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:58, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• :Delete, per @Marcocapelle. @Pbsouthwood this could work as an article if you reviewed how these rankings worked etc Mason (talk) 23:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
• ::{{U|Smasongarrison}}. In theory yes, but in practice there are no known secondary sources discussing how the rankings work. Each reviewer appears to apply arbitrary personal preferences, probably influenced by recent experience, hearsay and possibly commercial motivation. Even the reviewers seldom give their motivation. All that can be reliably reported is that the source has claimed the site to be in the top ten, sometimes qualified by region or that it is a wreck or cave site. A few sites are independently rated in the top ten by different sources, seldom , if ever, the same top ten. I created the category to keep track to see if anything interesting emerged over time, as this was the only way I could see to do that. Without a method of gathering the data, there is no chance of compiling a list. The sites are not always actually ranked within the top ten anyway. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 08:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• ::Perhaps there is some sort of administrative or hidden category that would be more appropriate? I have never worked on creating or editing those, so would appreciate any relevant advice. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 09:24, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• ::* The way you describe it sounds as if this should not be in Wikipedia at all. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• ::::No big deal, It just seemed a convenient way to keep track. If it appears to be a problem, delete it. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 04:11, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. To see the problem, imagine if we did this for movies where hundreds of publications publish their top 10 list on any given year. Furthermore, 10 is a bit arbitrary : why not top 5, or top 1? I'm not even sure this works as a list. Pichpich (talk) 17:44, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete - per WP:OCARBITRARY, WP:OCSUBJECTIVE, and, well WP:TOPTEN... - jc37 19:17, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
• :Fair enough, These reasons seem adequate. Delete per Jc37. Thanks, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 04:20, 24 September 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:36, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Colonial agents to :Category:Colonial agents of the British Empire

:Nominator's rationale: I'm not really sure what to do with this category. Per the accompanying page: "A colonial agent was the official representative of a British colony based in London during the British Empire. " It definitely should be parented by People of the Thirteen Colonies, but something larger, like people from the British Empire. Mason (talk) 00:16, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

::*Peter La Heupe acted as Colonial Agent for Barbadoes - leading to his replacement as New York colonial agent. Thus it would be wrong to to make this category a subset of People of the Thirteen Colonies. Also I would suggest that making separate categories for each empire would only need serious consideration when the category has more members.Leutha (talk) 09:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

:::look at the page mentioned,I do see an argument for renaming that page, as the institutional relationships are quite specific.Leutha (talk) 10:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Rename per nom, all articles in the category refer to the British Empire. Also re-parent to :Category:British colonial officials. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:07, 20 September 2023 (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: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:38, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Slave owners from the Thirteen Colonies}}

:Nominator's rationale: trivial intersection Mason (talk) 00:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose, doesn't seem trivial at all. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 00:19, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• :We already have :Category:American slave owners. (Maybe redudant would have been a better term) Mason (talk) 00:42, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, as the enslavement of Africans played a significant role in the American War of Independence (see for example the Dunmore's Proclamation. It is not redundant as, for example, a number of slaveowners migrated to the USA from former French colonies, particularly after the Haitian Revolution.Leutha (talk) 09:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. The Thirteen Colonies and the United States were not the same entity any more than Turkey and the Ottoman Empire.--User:Namiba 14:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• If not kept, merge to :Category:American slave owners rather than delete. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:09, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Withdraw. All the commentors have made excellent and compelling points! Mason (talk) 13:10, 22 September 2023 (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: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:40, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Planters from the Thirteen Colonies}}

:Nominator's rationale: trivial intersection Mason (talk) 00:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

::rephrase: redundant with 18th-century and 17th-century american OCCUPATION. I'd be open to the idea of it becoming a container category. Mason (talk) 19:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose per the rationale described under the slavery section immediately above. Mason, it would aid discussion if you grouped nominations together like I did here.--User:Namiba 14:42, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• :Thanks for the feedback on grouping. I'll try to do that in the future. Mason (talk) 19:35, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• If kept, check if some articles in :Category:American planters should be moved to this category. If not kept, merge to :Category:American planters instead of delete. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• :*Withdraw. All the commentors have made excellent and compelling points!
• :Mason (talk) 13:12, 22 September 2023 (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: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:42, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Politicians from the Thirteen Colonies}}

:Nominator's rationale: trivial intersection Mason (talk) 00:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

::rephrase: redundant with 18th-century and 17th-century american politicians. I'd be open to the idea of it becoming a container category. Mason (talk) 19:39, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

::* {{ping|Smasongarrison}} does this mean you are withdrawing the nomination? Marcocapelle (talk) 13:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

::*:My comment was a clarification. However, independent of that, I am considering withdrawal. Mason (talk) 13:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

::*::*Withdraw. All the commentors have made excellent and compelling points!

::*::Mason (talk) 13:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• If not kept, merge to :Category:18th-century American politicians rather than delete. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:20, 20 September 2023 (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: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:44, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Merchants from the Thirteen Colonies}}

:Nominator's rationale: trivial intersection Mason (talk) 00:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• If not kept, merge to :Category:American businesspeople instead of delete. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:24, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• :*Withdraw. All the commentors have made excellent and compelling points!
• :Mason (talk) 13:12, 22 September 2023 (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: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:46, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Lawyers from the Thirteen Colonies}}

:Nominator's rationale: trivial intersection Mason (talk) 00:11, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

:Query Mason Trivial intersection between what, and in what way trivial? · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 06:18, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

::In hindsight, overlapping was a better choice, as this seems redudant with to X-century American lawyers. (Although the responses here have made me rethink that. ) Mason (talk) 19:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

:::*Withdraw. All the commentors have made excellent and compelling points!

:::Mason (talk) 13:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• If not kept, merge to :Category:American lawyers instead of delete. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Comment I would have thought the thirteen colonies are not the United Stares, though the lawyers could be considered American, depending on the scope of "American", and there are two continents which are "American". · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 09:33, 22 September 2023 (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.