Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 22#Category:Welsh innovators

: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) 14:57, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:German-American Soccer League players to :Category:Cosmopolitan Soccer League players

:Nominator's rationale: The German-American Soccer is the same as the Cosmopolitan Soccer League is was just renamed. I think it makes sense to redirect the category to the present name. Shotgun pete (talk) 16:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 07:53, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
• Support - we do not create new categories every time a sports league changes its name. GiantSnowman 07:54, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
• Support one category no matter how many names the league has had. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:55, 23 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) 14:56, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Azerbaijani administrative divisions of Artsakh}}

:Nominator's rationale: What do these districts have to do with Artsakh? These districts are Azerbaijani administrative divisions, whereas the Republic of Artsakh had different administrative divisions in the same territory, which were known as the provinces of the Republic of Artsakh. Kpratter (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Delete, trivial intersection. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:55, 23 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) 14:55, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Future IPA templates}}

:Nominator's rationale: Since the separate language-specific IPA templates were deprecated, this category is probably useless. Janhrach (talk) 14:06, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Upmerge with IPA language templates. These templates should eventually be TfD'd, but in the meantime this category is indeed redundant and inaccurate, as whether to link the input transcription to the generic guide or to a language-specific key is no longer determined by each template. Nardog (talk) 16:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• :{{agree}} Janhrach (talk) 17:03, 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: merge. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:57, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|July 1860 events by continent}}

:* Propose merging :Category:July 1860 events in North America to :Category:July 1860 events

:Nominator's rationale: One article. Merge per WP:SMALLCAT. –Aidan721 (talk) 13:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Merge for now, with no objection to recreate when at least five articles fit. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:01, 23 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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:German queens consort to :Category:Queens of the Romans

:Nominator's rationale: rename in order to reduce ambiguity. The category is for spouses of Kings of the Romans, not for e.g. queens of Bavaria or Hanover etc. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

{{Cot|copy of speedy discussion}}

• :Category:German queens consort to :Category:Queens consort of Germany – C2C: Siblings :Category:Queens consort of Bavaria, :Category:Queens consort of Thuringia, :Category:Queens consort of Württemberg, :Category:Queens consort of Italy (Holy Roman Empire), etc. NLeeuw (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

:* Comment {{ping|Nederlandse Leeuw}} this may ultimately result in deletion per WP:C1 as there have not been any unambigious queens of Germany. At best they were wives of Kings of the Romans or Holy Roman Empresses. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:59, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

:*:@Marcocapelle good point. Perhaps we should move to full discussion because I realise now that this is more complicated than I thought. The main article is List of German queens, but the equivalent article for their husbands is Kings of the Romans, :Category:Kings of the Romans. A WP:C2C-based Alt rename could thus be :Category:Queens of the Romans or :Category:Queens consort of the Romans. Just like with some Kings of the Romans who were never crowned Holy Roman Emperor in Rome by the Pope after an Italienzug, their wives will never have become Queens (consort) of the Romans either. So while arguably a narrowcat, this won't be an empty cat. (Meanwhile, I've nominated :Category:German kings for renaming to :Category:Kings in Germany). NLeeuw (talk) 21:11, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

{{Cob}}

: {{ping|Nederlandse Leeuw}} pinging initiator of speedy discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:45, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

• Rename per nom and my own response to nom's comment in the speedy discussion. We should also rename the main article to Queen of the Romans; I'll initiate a technical move request for that. NLeeuw (talk) 07:09, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
• :PS: WP:RM/TR filed. NLeeuw (talk) 07:12, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose - Not every woman in this category was queen of the Romans. Many early German queens were not known as queen of the Romans, such as Cunigunde of Swabia and Eadgyth. Others were queens of the East Franks, such as Hemma.--estar8806 (talk) ★ 13:40, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

:* They should be purged, as they don't comply with the criterion stated in the header. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:08, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

:*:Even those who were Holy Roman Empress are not all listed as Queen of the Romans, Isabella II of Jerusalem are listed as Holy Roman Empress and Queen of Germany. estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:19, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

:*::That doesn't matter. Albert I of Germany is called {{tq|King of Germany}} in his infobox but categorised as :Category:14th-century Kings of the Romans. This is acceptable variation, because these things mean the same. Compare how Henry V, Holy Roman Emperor is called {{tq|King of Germany (Formally King of the Romans)}}. Similarly, some bios say "Holy Roman Empress" while others say "Empress of the Holy Roman Empire". Both are fine, they mean the same. NLeeuw (talk) 00:05, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

:*:::PS: I support purging those who don't qualify, but first let's check whether we are simply dealing with different ways of saying the same thing before we start purging. NLeeuw (talk) 00:12, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose the scope of the proposed name is vastly different. Marcelus (talk) 08:15, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Keep, or purge and rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:02, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

• {{ping|Marcelus}} the scope is not vastly different, the explanation text on the category page says: "women who were queens consort of Germany by marriage to the Holy Roman Emperor (also King of Germany)." Marcocapelle (talk) 05:57, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 13:37, 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: merge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:28, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:American literature in immigrant languages to :Category:American literature

:Nominator's rationale: Not defining, among other things. Mason (talk) 04:43, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

::Adding to my rational as I believe that the literature categories are very much not defining (and concede that I was overzealous in also nominating their parent category). This category (and the poetry) category sit at a really odd intersection that I don't think is useful for navigation, when compared to "American literature by ethnic background‎ ". Like why does American literature in the Irish language‎ belong in "immigrant" languages as opposed to the parent. I could see a case for American literature by language, but the current category effectively isolates all the American literature not written in English (or native american languages...). Why immigrant languages specifically? Mason (talk) 23:44, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep Per above discussion.★Trekker (talk) 11:48, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

:* This category has very different type of content than the category above, so "per above discussion" isn't very helpful. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:46, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. An {{cl|American literature by language}} tree might be genuinely useful, in part because that could also include categories for indigenous language literature if such ever get developed — but "immigrant" isn't the useful distinction here. Bearcat (talk) 12:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
• :I certainly support the idea of changing the title to :Category:American literature by language. My intention was always to eventually add a category for :Category:American literature in Indigenous languages and to add American literature in English to immigrant languages, as English has always been one.K1ngstowngalway1 (talk) 21:21, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 13:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Merge as non-defining. You are always someone else's immigrant. Place Clichy (talk) 21:24, 7 October 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) 14:58, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:18th-century German entomologists to :Category:18th-century German scientists and :Category:German entomologists

:* Propose merging :Category:19th-century German entomologists to :Category:19th-century German scientists and :Category:German entomologists

:Nominator's rationale: Narrow overcategorization. We don't have any {{cl|Entomologists by century}} tree for these to be a part of, and the creator filed just one person in each of these without making any effort to follow through on recatting any of the other {{cl|German entomologists}}. If there's any desire to start subcategorizing entomologists by century the way some (but not all) occupations are, that would have to be undertaken as a comprehensive project across the corpus of all entomologists, with basic {{cl|18th-century entomologists}}, {{cl|18th-century entomologists}} and {{cl|20th-century entomologists}} parents in place first and subcategories by country following second -- but if there's no community will to get that done, then these aren't needed as isolated special cases. Bearcat (talk) 13:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

::Support per exactly your reasons. Mason (talk) 20:01, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Merge for now without prejudice to recreation when at least five articles fit the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 23 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 to :Category:People from Luxor Governorate. No prejudice against recreation when the category can be populated sufficiently. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 21:45, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:People from Armant to :Category:People from Luxor Governorate

:Nominator's rationale: Small category for just one person. As always, every town or city on earth does not automatically get its own "people from X" category as soon as there's one person with an article to file in it -- there have to be five people from Armant before a category is warranted, and below five they should just be categorized at a higher divisional level like the governorate.
A quick scan of Armant's "what links here" failed to find four other people, however -- admittedly I didn't comprehensively check every article, but after finding one person who linked to Armant in a different context other than being "from" it and four articles that looked like they might be personal names but instead turned out to be other towns or villages when I looked at them, I gave up.
So I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with a lot more knowledge of Egypt than I've got can find four more people to properly populate this with, but it's not needed for just one person. Bearcat (talk) 12:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Merge for now without prejudice to recreation when at least five articles fit the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 23 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 to :Category:17th-century Native Americans. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 21:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:17th-century Shawnee people to :Category:17th-century Native Americans

:Nominator's rationale: upmerge as this is a very small category, i'd be thrilled if we got to critical mass of folks to populate the category Mason (talk) 05:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Merge, the single article is in :Category:18th-century Shawnee people as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• Support merge. This category and :Category:18th-century Shawnee people be likely never be more populated. Yuchitown (talk) 14:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Yuchitown

----

: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) 14:59, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Innovators}}

::* Propose deleting {{lc|American innovators}}

::* Propose deleting {{lc|Innovators from Northern Ireland}}

::* Propose deleting {{lc|Irish innovators}}

::* Propose deleting {{lc|Lebanese innovators}}

::* Propose deleting {{lc|Welsh innovators}}

::* Propose deleting {{lc|Swedish innovators}}

::* Propose deleting {{lc|Scottish innovators}}

::* Propose deleting {{lc|Nigerian innovators}}

::* Propose deleting {{lc|Malawian innovators}}

::* Propose deleting {{lc|Innovators by nationality}}

:Nominator's rationale: vague and undefined Mason (talk) 01:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

::There was a discussion of this family of category. The sense was that this category could work as a container category. However, it doesn't seem to be used in that manner. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 June 6#Category:Innovators. I'll tag the main category, and then see how folks are feeling, before tagging more of them Mason (talk) 01:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

::Comment: :Category:Women innovators is also relevant to this discussion. Janhrach (talk) 07:25, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

::* I have tagged that category as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:43, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

• The top :Category:Innovators still seems to work well as a container category. However the nationality subcategories are mostly sparsely populated, occasionally contain articles and can be deleted easily. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete all - Looking at the contents of :Category:Innovators, this looks rather subjective in inclusion criteria. Just to start with, any craftsman, inventor, designer, or artist, could be considered an innovator. What arbitrary benchmark do we use to decide if a particular artist is an innovator? It looks like this cat is trying to gather together people who find things with people who make things. That is a rather broad inclusion criteria. And if we include everything listed in Innovation (where Innovator redirects to), it gets much much broader than that. - jc37 23:45, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
• Leaning delete all as vague. Compared to :Category:Inventors which feels better defined. -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:38, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• P.S. It's not explicitly mentioned here, but :Category:Sports inventors and innovators is one I think is sufficiently well defined. -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:40, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep: This was discussed under Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 June 6#Category:Innovators. The decision was to keep it as a container category and it and various subcategories are still being used as such. What has changed since this decision? I think it still applies. —Jonathan Bowen (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
• :10 years ago? It was only kept as a container to hold the subcats - which are now also being nominated for deletion. The previous discussion noted that this was "vague and poorly defined", and was not WP:DEFINING. - jc37 18:31, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
• :Keeping for being suitable as a container category was, and still is, a very weak argument. I think that this category arbitrarily groups together categories of people that have something to do with "newness". This is however too vague. Delete. Janhrach (talk) 07:01, 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.