Revision as of 18:49, 23 August 2023 edit+JMJ+ (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users20,658 editsm →Category:18th-century people from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth by occupation← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:27, 23 August 2023 edit undoMarcelus (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users9,608 edits →Category:18th-century people from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth by occupation: ReplyTag: ReplyNext edit → | ||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
*] is fine, the PLC one is a bit iffy but I guess both trees can exist as an overcat. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</sub> 00:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC) | *] is fine, the PLC one is a bit iffy but I guess both trees can exist as an overcat. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</sub> 00:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC) | ||
*'''Oppose renaming''', but agree with the '''procedural solution.''' Perhaps it would be wise to have overcats for states - ], ] and ], while there would be separate category trees for nationalities/ethnicities like ], ], and probably ] and others if there are enough people. After all, many ethnicities lived in that state. I am hesitant about the creation of categories for Belarusians and Ukrainians considering that they were both just Ruthenian in the past and drawing a line when one becomes another before the 20th century is rather complicated. Perhaps a ] would be a solution? Just throwing out ideas, perhaps they will give rise to something better later.--] (]) 18:48, 23 August 2023 (UTC) | *'''Oppose renaming''', but agree with the '''procedural solution.''' Perhaps it would be wise to have overcats for states - ], ] and ], while there would be separate category trees for nationalities/ethnicities like ], ], and probably ] and others if there are enough people. After all, many ethnicities lived in that state. I am hesitant about the creation of categories for Belarusians and Ukrainians considering that they were both just Ruthenian in the past and drawing a line when one becomes another before the 20th century is rather complicated. Perhaps a ] would be a solution? Just throwing out ideas, perhaps they will give rise to something better later.--] (]) 18:48, 23 August 2023 (UTC) | ||
*:Please reread my propostion; I don't propose renaming anything, but just to restore the previous state of affairs, which was wrongfuly changed. If we do that we can start talking about new category trees for countries, which I think is in general good idea. ] (]) 21:27, 23 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
==== Fooian culture to Culture of Fooland part 2 ==== | ==== Fooian culture to Culture of Fooland part 2 ==== |
Revision as of 21:27, 23 August 2023
< August 20 August 22 >August 21
Category:Eskimo Joe members
- Nominator's rationale: As per WP:SMALLCAT. There are 3 core notable members of this band in its 26 year history, this is unlikely to change. The first line of Eskimo Joe outlines these band members. LibStar (talk) 23:34, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Religion in the Arab world
- Propose merging Category:Religion in the Arab world to Category:Religion in the Middle East
- Propose merging Category:Irreligion in the Arab world to Category:Irreligion in the Middle East
- Purge Morocco (already in Category:Irreligion in Africa)
- Propose merging Category:Religion in the Arab world by city to Category:Religion in the Middle East by city
- Propose splitting Category:Christianity in the Arab world to Category:Christianity in the Middle East and Category:Christianity in North Africa
- Propose renaming Category:Eastern Christianity in the Arab world to Category:Eastern Christianity in the Middle East
- Purge Libya and Morocco (already in Category:Eastern Christianity in Africa)
- Propose splitting Category:Islam in the Arab world to Category:Islam in the Middle East and Category:Islam in North Africa
- Propose merging Category:Islamic organizations in the Arab world to Category:Islamic organizations in the Middle East
- Purge Algeria (already in Category:Islamic organizations in Africa)
- Propose splitting Category:Jews and Judaism in the Arab world to Category:Jews and Judaism in the Middle East and Category:Jews and Judaism in North Africa
- Propose merging Category:Christianity in the Arab world by city to Category:Christianity in the Middle East by city
- Propose merging Category:Religion in the Arab world by country to Category:Religion in the Middle East by country;
- Purge all countries which are already in Category:Religion in Africa by country (Algeria, Comoros, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Sudan, Tunisia, Western Sahara. Egypt can stay in both because it's part of Middle East)
- Propose deleting Category:Bahá'í Faith in the Arab world (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs); all contents are already in Category:Bahá'í Faith in Africa and Category:Bahá'í Faith in the Middle East
- Propose merging Category:Hinduism in the Arab world to Category:Hinduism in the Middle East
- Purge Somalia (already in Category:Hinduism in Africa)
- Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT WP:REDUNDANTFORK WP:ARBITRARYCAT. Follow-up to Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 20#Category:Irreligion in the Arab world. @Marcocapelle and Fayenatic london: pinging previous participants who requested this new fresh nomination. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:44, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- PS: See also Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 17#Greek Orthodoxy. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:30, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Merge per nom, too much overlap. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:17, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- I am not particularly keen on this, as it's part of Category:Society of the Arab world which I consider to be of some value for navigation. I also consider the Arab world to be sufficiently well defined for regional categories to be valid. However, this nomination does at least deal consistently with the nominated hierarchy, so I am not opposing it if other editors think pruning this hierarchy would be an improvement. – Fayenatic London 19:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- I have added two more sub-cats, but omitting Category:Islamism in the Arab world and Category:Jihadist groups in the Arab world since they also form a significant part of Category:Political movements in the Arab world and Category:Political organizations in the Arab world. – Fayenatic London 20:15, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- Those seem fine additions to me, although I would have appreciated it if you asked me to add them first. The nomination is already complicated, I would not like to see it fail. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:06, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:18th-century people from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth by occupation
- Nominator's rationale: The category and all subcategories name was changed on Feb 19, 2022 based on two erroneous premises:
1. "the Polish state did not exist," which is untrue because the Polish state did not collapse until 1795; it existed in the form of the Kingdom of Poland since the early Middle Ages, in union/federation with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania since 1569.
2. "nationality is the same as being subject to a single state", this is untrue as this concept has a much broader meaning: nationality is the status of belonging to a particular nation, defined as a group of people organized in one country, under one legal jurisdiction, or as a group of people who are united by a common culture, history, traditions, and awareness of a common origin. Polish nationality existed in both the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, the existence of a sovereign Polish state is irrelevant.
Besides:
3. we base Misplaced Pages on reliable secondary sources, if they describe, for example, Hugo Kołłątaj as a Polish reformer, etc. then that is how Misplaced Pages should describe him, and he should be able to be included in his defining category.
4. the author of the original proposal was banned permanently for sockpuppetry. There is a risk of manipulation of the original vote.
5. category names are inconsistent ("people from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth" vs. "Polish-Lithuanian actors"); Polish-Lithuanian identity is something much different, referring to people with dual Polish and Lithuanian identities.
6. the previous move was done messily and created a hole in the tree ordering Poles according to centuries, and leaving dozens of other nations and ethnicities (Lithuanians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Germans, Latvians, Karaites, Roma, Jews, Hungarians, Vlachs, Armenians, Greeks, Russians and others) out of the PLC people categories
Previous discussions on this topic: 2023 March 22, Misplaced Pages:Move_review/Log/2022_March#2022_March - previous move review, 2022 June 28 - previous nominator request to move back. Related current discussion about 18th century Lithuanian categories.
Proposed solution: create a separate category tree for Category:People from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, leaving Polish people category tree untouched. Marcelus (talk) 22:22, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Procedural oppose, this is forumshopping after it has already been on move review.By all means populate the category further with people of other ethnicities if you know they are lacking. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)- Misinformation on your part: the previous move review was closed because of technical reasons (Consensus here found that the main question underlying this move review is whether Commonwealth citizens can be considered Poles or Lithuanians. Debates like these are outside the scope of move reviews, which mainly deal with whether move discussions were closed appropriately), the suggestion of the closer of the original move discussion @bibliomaniac15 was to open regular CfD, what I'm doing right now.
- Please strikethrough your misleading statement. Marcelus (talk) 05:58, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- You are right. I did not read the entire MR discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:06, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Marcelus (talk) 06:10, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- You are right. I did not read the entire MR discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:06, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- Notes attempting to clarify this nomination: The stated target category Category:18th-century Polish people does exist, and has several sub-cats including women/nobility/LGBT, but had no occupational sub-categories until Marcelus' recent work. If I understand correctly, the current nomination is intended to split Category:18th-century people from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth by occupation and its occupational sub-categories back to Category:18th-century Polish people by occupation (formerly a redirect after the original CFD), Category:18th-century Lithuanian people by occupation and occupational sub-categories as appropriate.
- I think it is common ground that (i) "People from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth" is the category for official nationality in the C17 and C18, and (ii) that many if not all the citizens also maintained an identity as Polish or Lithuanian. The question comes down to whether to sub-divide the occupational sub-categories by this Polish/Lithuanian identity, which would result in many even smaller categories, or whether occupations should only be categorised at the level of the official nationality.
- I commend the nominator for linking to previous discussions. As he says, after the unsuccessful move review, the original nominator changed his mind and brought a follow-up CFD to reverse it; this was notified to WikiProject Poland and relisted a few times, but gained no more participation than the original discussion and was closed with no consensus.
- This CFD should be considered alongside the current Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_August_20#18th-century_Lithuanian_people_by_occupation which follows the same direction as the original CFD. Clearly they must not both be approved. – Fayenatic London 20:51, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- To clarify:
The stated target category Category:18th-century Polish people does exist, and has several sub-cats including women/nobility/LGBT
- mistake on my part, of course the target category is Category:18th-century Polish people by occupationIf I understand correctly, the current nomination is intended to split Category:18th-century people from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth by occupation
, I'm advocating moving back the said category to it's original name, people whose nationality was Lithuanian are already in the Category:18th-century Lithuanian people by occupationThe question comes down to whether to sub-divide the occupational sub-categories by this Polish/Lithuanian identity, which would result in many even smaller categories, or whether occupations should only be categorised at the level of the official nationality.
, Polish and Lithuanian were these people "official" or "civic" nationality (of course such notion didn't really exist back then in the form as we understood it today), since both Polish and Lithuanian states still very much existed. Also your presumption that these categories will be small is wrong, because all categories which are currently in the Category:18th-century people from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth by occupation tree were originally in the Category:18th-century Polish people by occupation and should stay there. So the size of categories will remain basically the same. Moreover, I emphasise once again, parent Category:18th-century people by nationality refers to nationality understood broadly, i.e. as both 'civic nationality' and 'ethnic nationality'. We should base our categorisation on reliable sources.This CFD should be considered alongside the current Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_August_20#18th-century_Lithuanian_people_by_occupation which follows the same direction as the original CFD. Clearly they must not both be approved
, that's correct; we should restore the previous state of affairs and reconsider creating new category tree for people of the PLC.
- Marcelus (talk) 21:16, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- To clarify:
- Category:18th-century Polish people is fine, the PLC one is a bit iffy but I guess both trees can exist as an overcat. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose renaming, but agree with the procedural solution. Perhaps it would be wise to have overcats for states - Category:18th-century people from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth by occupation, Category:18th-century people from the Kingdom of Poland by occupation and Category:18th-century people from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania by occupation, while there would be separate category trees for nationalities/ethnicities like Category:18th-century Polish people by occupation, Category:18th-century Lithuanian people by occupation, and probably Category:18th-century Jewish people by occupation and others if there are enough people. After all, many ethnicities lived in that state. I am hesitant about the creation of categories for Belarusians and Ukrainians considering that they were both just Ruthenian in the past and drawing a line when one becomes another before the 20th century is rather complicated. Perhaps a Category:18th-century Ruthenian people by occupation would be a solution? Just throwing out ideas, perhaps they will give rise to something better later.--Cukrakalnis (talk) 18:48, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- Please reread my propostion; I don't propose renaming anything, but just to restore the previous state of affairs, which was wrongfuly changed. If we do that we can start talking about new category trees for countries, which I think is in general good idea. Marcelus (talk) 21:27, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Fooian culture to Culture of Fooland part 2
- Propose renaming Category:Abkhazian culture to Category:Culture of Abkhazia – main article: Culture of Abkhazia
- Propose renaming Category:Albanian culture to Category:Culture of Albania – main article: Culture of Albania
- Propose renaming Category:Andorran culture to Category:Culture of Andorra – main article: Culture of Andorra
- Propose renaming Category:Armenian culture to Category:Culture of Armenia – main article: Culture of Armenia
- Propose renaming Category:Austrian culture to Category:Culture of Austria – main article: Culture of Austria
- Propose renaming Category:Azerbaijani culture to Category:Culture of Azerbaijan – main article: Culture of Azerbaijan
- Propose renaming Category:Belarusian culture to Category:Culture of Belarus – main article: Culture of Belarus
- Propose renaming Category:Belgian culture to Category:Culture of Belgium – main article: Culture of Belgium
- Propose renaming Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina culture to Category:Culture of Bosnia and Herzegovina – main article: Culture of Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Propose renaming Category:British culture to Category:Culture of the United Kingdom – main article: Culture of the United Kingdom
- Propose renaming Category:Bulgarian culture to Category:Culture of Bulgaria – main article: Culture of Bulgaria
- Propose renaming Category:Croatian culture to Category:Culture of Croatia – main article: Culture of Croatia
- Propose renaming Category:Cypriot culture to Category:Culture of Cyprus – main article: Culture of Cyprus
- Propose renaming Category:Czech culture to Category:Culture of the Czech Republic – main article: Culture of the Czech Republic
- Propose renaming Category:Danish culture to Category:Culture of Denmark – main article: Culture of Denmark
- Propose renaming Category:Estonian culture to Category:Culture of Estonia – main article: Culture of Estonia
- Propose renaming Category:Finnish culture to Category:Culture of Finland – main article: Culture of Finland
- Propose renaming Category:French culture to Category:Culture of France – main article: Culture of France
- Propose renaming Category:German culture to Category:Culture of Germany – main article: Culture of Germany
- Propose renaming Category:Hungarian culture to Category:Culture of Hungary – main article: Culture of Iceland
- Propose renaming Category:Icelandic culture to Category:Culture of Iceland – main article: Culture of Abkhazia
- Propose renaming Category:Italian culture to Category:Culture of Italy – main article: Culture of Italy
- Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C (all are in Category:European culture by country) & WP:C2D (all main articles are called Culture of Fooland). Follow-up to consensus established at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 9#Fooian culture to Culture of Fooland. I recommend leaving a redirect (already exists in 3 cases). Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:38, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Renamings that have already been agreed to in the past:
- Y 2009: Category:Georgian culture was Renamed to Category:Culture of Georgia (country)
- Y 2010: Category:Northern Irish culture was Renamed to Category:Culture of Northern Ireland
- Y 30 March 2023: Category:Irish culture was Renamed to Category:Culture of the Republic of Ireland
- Y 2 days ago: Category:Dutch culture was Renamed to Category:Culture of the Netherlands
- Y 2 days ago: Category:Greek culture was Renamed to Category:Culture of Greece
- Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy rename per WP:C2C and predecent consensus was opposed by @Marcelus: Oppose, foonian culture and culture of foo isn't the same. Further talks resulted in the decision to move to full.
- Pinging participants from previous discussion for this follow-up: @Marcocapelle, Laurel Lodged, and Fayenatic london: for your consideration. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:05, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Nederlandse Leeuw please inform all potentially inerested Wikiprojects Marcelus (talk) 22:07, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Culture of foo is much better category name, as it is much broader. For example, Hungarian culture includes the culture of Hungary, but also, for example, the culture of Hungarians in Romania or in the USA. Besides, the borders are changing. Franz Liszt was born outside modern Hungary. Marcelus (talk) 22:45, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Renamings that have already been agreed to in the past:
- I am no longer opposing this. A while back I read it as "Culture in Fooland" and therefore opposed it because I thought it would exclude expatriates. But in hindsight "Culture of Fooland" still covers that too. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:36, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- Fooian culture also covers expatriates, and is much broader in general, because not linked to a particular country, but to a culture as a whole; care to elaborate why you are advocating narrower scope? Logically culture of Foo should be a subcategory of Fooian culture, not replacing it. Marcelus (talk) 06:01, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- As said, I no longer think that it narrows the scope. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:42, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- Support, following renaming of "society" categories likewise, here and here. I think I opposed these in the past, on the basis that culture also applies in the diasporas, but as Marcocapelle says, this is not a conclusive objection. – Fayenatic London 06:37, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- Rationale expanded: WP:C2C (all are in Category:European culture by country) & WP:C2D (all main articles are called Culture of Fooland). This helps new participants understand the nomination. The main article names are the more important argument than consistency in category tree naming. WP:C2D can take precedence over WP:C2C. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:55, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I might add the observation that since the early days of English Misplaced Pages, roughly c. 2001-2006, all articles in this category were created under the title of Culture of Fooland, while in the c. 2003-2008, all the redirects called Fooian culture were created to redirect readers to Culture of Fooland. The move logs don't always accurately preserve the early history of renaming or deleting pages, but it may be that in the early days some articles were originally named Fooian culture (which is why the first sentence of these articles may still feature the boldened phrase Fooian culture today), but they were moved to avoid confusion with the language of the same name. In other cases,
Culture of Fooland
already existed, and Fooian culture was created as a redirect to it (far more common). Around the same time, subcategories of countries were created about that country's culture. E.g. Category:Barland would have a subcategory named Barian culture. From June 2004 onwards, these subcategories were all grouped into Category:Culture by country.
Some examples |
---|
|
- And this pattern holds true for almost all these articles and their redirects in the 2000s. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:55, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment The following main articles were moved from Fooian culture to Culture of Fooland:
- Hungarian culture was merged into Culture of Hungary after agreement (2017)
- Russian culture was moved to Culture of Russia (2021).
- Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:18, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- But we are debating the scope of categories, not articles, aren't we? Marcelus (talk) 15:24, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- They are the same. They have always been the same. Both the main articles and the connected categories have always included expatriates, and the spreading or influence of the culture of Fooland abroad.
- E.g. from the day that Culture of Greece was created on 23 February 2003, it included a reference to (Ancient) Greek philosophy, which originated in Ancient Greece, but spread around Asia, Africa and Europe later. At the time, the article (Ancient) Greek philosophy indicated:
There are clear unbroken lines of influence from early Greek philosophers, through early Muslim philosophy especially the Mutazilite school, to the Renaissance and hence the secular sciences of the modern day.
There has never been the suggestion that just because the article is named Culture of Greece, we can't talk about how that culture spread abroad outside Greece. Today, Culture of Greece#Philosophy, science and mathematics states:The tradition of philosophy in ancient Greece accompanied its literary development. Greek learning had a profound influence on Western and Middle Eastern civilizations. The works of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and other Greek philosophers profoundly influenced Classical thought, the Islamic Golden Age, and the Renaissance.
- Similarly, there is no need to be worried that whatever Culture of Belarus is spread abroad can't be mentioned. E.g. Culture of Belarus#Literature tells a little story:
By the 16th century, Polotsk resident Francysk Skaryna translated the Bible into Belarusian. It was published in Prague and Vilnius between 1517 and 1525, making it the first book printed in Belarus or anywhere in Eastern Europe.
Nobody is saying we can't mention that just because Prague is not located inside Belarus. This is a nice example of the culture of Belarus being spread abroad, and that's okay. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:33, 22 August 2023 (UTC)- I really think that we should dicuss it case by case, possibly with involvement of Wikiprojects, unlike you I don't consider myself expert on every culture on earth. Category:Azerbaijani culture is the best example of that, afaik state of Azerbaijan isn't the main center of Azerbaijani culture. Azerbaijani culture shows it quite well. Marcelus (talk) 16:43, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- I've posted invitations to participate in this CfR to WikiProject Countries and WikiProject Culture. I don't think it will be necessary to request permission from everyone at, say, WP:WikiProject Andorra to rename Category:Andorran culture to Category:Culture of Andorra if the main article has been called Culture of Andorra since 2004 and the scope of the main article and adjoining category have remained unchanged for the past 19 years. But if you think so, go ahead. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:13, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- I really think that we should dicuss it case by case, possibly with involvement of Wikiprojects, unlike you I don't consider myself expert on every culture on earth. Category:Azerbaijani culture is the best example of that, afaik state of Azerbaijan isn't the main center of Azerbaijani culture. Azerbaijani culture shows it quite well. Marcelus (talk) 16:43, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- But we are debating the scope of categories, not articles, aren't we? Marcelus (talk) 15:24, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Viziers of the medieval Islamic world
- Propose upmerging Category:Viziers of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Viziers
- Propose merging Category:Officials of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Government officials by nationality
- Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to several recent precedents:
- Follow-up to Category:Treaties of the medieval Islamic world being Upmerged to Category:Medieval treaties (Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_May_27#Category:Treaties_of_the_medieval_Islamic_world)
- Follow-up to Category:Foreign relations of the medieval Islamic world being Upmerged to Category:Medieval international relations
- Follow-up to Category:Ambassadors to the medieval Islamic world being Upmerged to Category:Medieval diplomats (Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_June_29#Foreign_relations_of_the_medieval_Islamic_world)
- Follow-up to Category:Governors of the medieval Islamic world being Renamed to Category:Medieval governors, Re-parented, and Populated (Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 29#Category:Governors of the medieval Islamic world)
- As the precedents have established, "the medieval Islamic world" was not a "country", so this is an WP:ARBITRARYCAT that can be upmerged. Unlike the precedents, I think "medieval" is also WP:NONDEFINING in this case and having a "medieval" subcat doesn't improve navigation, so it's better to just upmerge to parent Category:Viziers. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, see above. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:25, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Objection does not seem relevant. No vizier signed a contract with something which was not a state. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:06, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose merge as this would lose the medieval period. As long as the parent Officials of the medieval Islamic world exists, the current name seems valid, although "in" might be better than "of", rather like the precedent for Monarchs in Europe. If in future the Officials parent is deleted or renamed to something that would no longer parent this one, perhaps "Medieval viziers" would then be in order. For now, rename to Category:Viziers in the medieval Islamic world. – Fayenatic London 12:31, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
- Support "in", as "of" wrongly suggest they were viziers of the entire medieval Islamic world. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:54, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
- Well I doubt "medieval" has much navigational value for viziers. The only other period-based category in the Category:Viziers tree is Category:Ancient Egyptian viziers, and it wouldn't make sense to create an "Ancient viziers" parent just to be able to horizonally navseasoncat our way to the medieval ones. Upmerging makes it much more navigable.
- Second, I agree that we need to look to parent Category:Officials of the medieval Islamic world as well. I've already looked into it and there is actually no "Officials by century/period" tree, but there is a Category:Civil servants by century tree which runs from the 16th to the 21st century. So I would be quite open to Rename Category:Officials of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Medieval civil servants, and Re-parent and Populate it, just like we did with the Category:Medieval governors. How about that? Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 01:00, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- Civil servants is a too modern concept, it makes sense that it does not start earlier than the 16th century (I think even that is too early). Officials is a more generic concept which seems just fine. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:28, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- Okay. We could re-parent it to Category:Government officials, but that currently has no "by century" or "by period" branches. What it does have is Category:Government officials by nationality. In fact, Category:Government officials of the Seljuk Empire is already there. Merge? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:07, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- Agree with re-parenting to Category:Government officials. But having Category:Government officials of the Seljuk Empire in Category:Government officials by nationality is suboptimal, by dynasty would be more accurate. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:10, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
- Okay. We could re-parent it to Category:Government officials, but that currently has no "by century" or "by period" branches. What it does have is Category:Government officials by nationality. In fact, Category:Government officials of the Seljuk Empire is already there. Merge? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:07, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- Civil servants is a too modern concept, it makes sense that it does not start earlier than the 16th century (I think even that is too early). Officials is a more generic concept which seems just fine. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:28, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- Support "in", as "of" wrongly suggest they were viziers of the entire medieval Islamic world. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:54, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
- Nomination expanded: proposing to merge Category:Officials of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Government officials by nationality. See my 09:07, 15 August 2023 comment above. @Fayenatic london and Marcocapelle: For your information. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 18:02, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:42, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose officials too. We lose a relevant connection when merging. On top of that, the subcategories are mostly not based on nationality but derived from the ruling dynasty, as we usually do for categories in the medieval Islamic world, so the target is off. And the target is not specifically medieval either. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Marcocapelle what if we Alt Renamed the officials to Category:Medieval government officials, and somehow connected them to the target categories you proposed at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 18#Heads of government? E.g. Category:6th-century government officials would become a child of Category:Medieval government officials. This seems to solve both problems in 1 go. :) Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:17, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Greek Orthodoxy by continent
- Propose renaming Category:Greek Orthodoxy by continent to Category:Greek Orthodoxy by country
Alt proposal 1: propose renaming Category:Greek Orthodoxy by continent to Category:Greek Orthodox Church by country
- Propose renaming Category:Greek Orthodoxy by continent to Category:Greek Orthodoxy by country
- Nominator's rationale: Simply a better way of organising the same information for easier navigation. Right now there is a lot of duplication and sub-sub-categorisation going on:
Current structure |
---|
|
- As you can see, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine and Turkey are all mentioned twice. But at the core, these are country-based categories and there is no need for continental or regional layers in between. Those are redundant. Instead, I propose:
Proposed new structure |
---|
|
- I'd like to establish consensus on this first before going on a tagfest throughout all the subcategories and sub-sub-categories. That's only gonna make people confused. We can do that once we agree that we should simplify this tree by making it country-based. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:58, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Just another problem, "Greek Orthodoxy" is very ambiguous. Assuming all of this does not refer to the Church of Greece, these categories should rather be merged/renamed to Eastern Orthodoxy. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:37, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Well-spotted. Church of Greece states that
The Church of Greece part of the wider Greek Orthodox Church, one of the autocephalous churches which make up the communion of Eastern Orthodox Christianity.
So they are not the same, but you've got a point that (per WP:C2D) we should probably rename all categories named "Greek Orthodoxy" to "Greek Orthodox Church" because Greek Orthodoxy redirects to Greek Orthodox Church. I'll make that an Alt rename proposal. - But do you agree on the proposed new structure? Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:56, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Wait, it shouldn't become Greek Orthodox Church either, because that is highly ambiguous. It should become Church of Greece or Eastern Orthodox. As the Eastern Orthodox tree is far better populated, it is probably too early to say that the continent layer is redundant. But I have no objection to a merger of Middle East right now. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:33, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I speedy renamed Category:Greek Orthodoxy to Category:Greek Orthodox Church per WP:C2D Greek Orthodox Church already. The Requested move 20 January 2023 closed as not moved. I see you even participated in that discussion and didn't have a viable alternative to propose either. So I'm afraid we will have to accept that this term is ambiguous for the time being.
- But that's not the gravamen of my nomination, namely: the elimination of redundant and duplicate category layers. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 01:00, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
- Wait, it shouldn't become Greek Orthodox Church either, because that is highly ambiguous. It should become Church of Greece or Eastern Orthodox. As the Eastern Orthodox tree is far better populated, it is probably too early to say that the continent layer is redundant. But I have no objection to a merger of Middle East right now. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:33, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
- Well-spotted. Church of Greece states that
- Note: Category:Greek Orthodoxy was previously kept rather than renamed to Greek Orthodox Church, see Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_December_29#Category:Greek_Orthodoxy. – Fayenatic London 13:33, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
- Ok. Whether we call it "Greek Orthodoxy" or "Greek Orthodox Church" is not my primary concern anyway; we can keep that as it is. I just want to eliminate the continental/regional layers of this tree because the underlying structure is country-based. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:27, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
- Update A closely-related nomination has been submitted by Marcocapelle at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 17#Greek Orthodoxy. I think our ideas are theoretically compatible, but may interfere with each other in practice. For procedural reasons, I think it might be a good idea if we defer a decision on this one for now, and wait for Marcocapelle's nomination to be decided on first. Alternately, I'm also okay with withdrawing this nom to ensure the nominations do not practically interfere with each other. @Fayenatic Any advice? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:27, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:15, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds a good idea waiting to close this discussion until the other one is closed. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedians who believe that a hot dog is (not) a sandwich
- 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: speedy delete per author request. ✗plicit 13:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:USERCAT for lacking any discernible collaborative function. * Pppery * it has begun... 13:06, 21 August 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.
Category:Recipients of the Ulloor Award
- Propose Deleting Category:Recipients of the Ulloor Award
- Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SHAREDNAME, WP:OCAWARD, and WP:NONDEFINING
- There are 3 different "Ulloor Awards" issued by 2 different organisations that are all named after renowned Malayalam poet Ulloor S. Parameswara Iyer. In practice the 2 articles in this category don't treat the award as defining, (1) mentioning it in passing with other honours or (2) not mentioning it at all. The recipients are already listified here, here and here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:06, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete, WP:OCAWARD says it all. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Prix Emmanuel Roblès recipients
- Propose Deleting Category:Prix Emmanuel Roblès recipients
- Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCAWARD and WP:NONDEFINING
- The Emmanuel Roblès Prize is a French literary award for an author's first novel. The award might be initially defining for these young authors but, by the time they are notable enough for a Misplaced Pages article, this award is usually mentioned in passing with other honours. This is one of many French literary award categories created in late 2016/early 2017 by a banned editor. The contents are already listified here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:06, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete, WP:OCAWARD says it all. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:28, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Military personnel of the medieval Islamic world
- Propose upmerging Category:Military personnel of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Military personnel of the Middle Ages
- Propose upmerging Category:Admirals of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Medieval admirals
- Propose upmerging Category:Generals of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Medieval military leaders
- Propose upmerging Category:Military units and formations of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Military units and formations of the Middle Ages
- Propose upmerging Category:Navies of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Naval warfare of the Middle Ages
- Propose upmerging Category:Naval battles involving the medieval Islamic world to Category:Naval battles of the Middle Ages
- Propose upmerging Category:Sieges involving the medieval Islamic world to Category:Sieges of the Middle Ages
- Propose upmerging Category:Battles involving the medieval Islamic world to Category:Battles of the Middle Ages
- Propose upmerging Category:Rebellions in the medieval Islamic world to Category:Medieval rebellions
- Propose upmerging Category:Rebels of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Medieval rebels
- Propose upmerging Category:Wars involving the medieval Islamic world to Category:Wars of the Middle Ages
- Propose upmerging Category:Warfare in the medieval Islamic world to Category:Warfare of the Middle Ages
- Propose upmerging Category:Military history of the medieval Islamic world to Category:Military history of former countries
- Nominator's rationale: As the precedents have established, "the medieval Islamic world" was not a "country", so these are WP:ARBITRARYCATs that can be upmerged. Follow-up to Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 May 27#Category:Treaties of the medieval Islamic world, Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 29#Foreign relations of the medieval Islamic world, Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 29#Category:Governors of the medieval Islamic world. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:19, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose for categories that aren't fully diffused by dynasty such as Category:Generals of the medieval Islamic world. Some medieval Muslim dynasties were too short-living or too insignificant to have their own subcategory. By the proposed merge we lose the connections. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:13, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Why would keeping that generals category help with the issue you're describing? Suppose a state in the medieval Iberian Peninsula was too short-lived to have 5 generals for its own subcategory, should we then say they should be categorised as having served "the medieval Iberian Peninsula"? That was not a state. Neither was "the medieval Islamic world" a state. No general signed a contract with it. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:48, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- We do not organize the medieval Islamic world by state anyway, we organize it by dynasty. At most we derive "country" names from the dynasty, e.g. Ayyubid Caliphate. One dynasty could succeed another without change of territory, while within one dynasty the territory could change a lot. It was blurry. The overarching characteristic was that Islam was the rulers' religion, not that it was any sort of country as we currently know it. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:11, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- The overarching characteristic was that Islam was the rulers' religion. Well, at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 4#Category:Muslim princely states of India you agreed with me that the ruler's religion is WP:NONDEFINING for the state as a whole. So unless there is another defining overarching characteristic, there is no reason to keep these categories, but upmerge them as nominated. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:44, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- For India I agree. But the Islamic world of the Middle East and North Africa to Spain was a cultural region (a civilization if you wish) as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:22, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- That may be (or may not) be, but we do not categorise "rulers by cultural region" or "civilisation", do we? Category:Generals of the Bronze Age civilisations? Category:Naval battles involving the Indus Valley civilisation? We don't create Category:Military units and formations of Christendom either, do we? The difference is that the princely states of India were, well, states. They had armies, generals, navies, admirals, everything, because they signed contracts and paid for them (at least in theory, otherwise you get mutinies or desertion). The Hyderabad State Forces, for example. And though lots of crusaders, popes, patriarchs and (tel)evangelists may have claimed to represent Christendom (nl: christenheid, as opposed to Christianity, nl: christendom), there were (and are) no "Armed Forces of Christendom", just like there were no "Armed Forces of the medieval Islamic world". This comes back to the core problem that "the medieval Islamic world" was not a state actor or non-state actor. That's why we upmerged Category:Treaties of the medieval Islamic world, because treaties can only be signed by state or non-state actors. But the same goes for contracts of generals, admirals, footsoldiers, sailors, you get the idea. No state or non-state actor? Then no army, no navy, no Category:Sieges involving cultural region X. Cultural regions don't enlist soldiers and pay their salaries. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 01:25, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
- I would support categories for the medieval Christian world if it wouldn't overlap so strongly with medieval Europe. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:14, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, so you're not advocating for Category:Military personnel of the medieval Christian world etc. because what you would think of "the medieval Christian world" already conveniently strongly overlaps with "medieval Europe"? But there is no Category:Medieval European military personnel / Category:Military personnel in medieval Europe / Category:Military personnel of the Middle Ages in Europe etc. either. There isn't even a Category:Medieval Europe, even though (ironically) there is a Category:Medieval Asia, a Category:Medieval Africa, and a Category:Medieval history of the Middle East.
- Why should we have to frame medieval military history of the Middle East, North Africa, Central Asia, South Asia, and the Iberian Peninsula purely in terms of the Islamic religion as if those areas were all entirely "Islamic" from the year 500 to the year 1500 (they weren't)? Why should we, for the purposes of military history, assume "medieval Europe" to have been entirely "Christian" (it wasn't)? I don't think we should. Such reductionist generalisations in naming category don't help accurately describe, organise and navigate medieval military history. They merely frame the past from a modern pan-Islamic and Pan-Christianity / Christian nationalist WP:POV, respectively. That's why I'm calling them WP:ARBITRARYCATs. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:03, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
- I would support categories for the medieval Christian world if it wouldn't overlap so strongly with medieval Europe. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:14, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
- That may be (or may not) be, but we do not categorise "rulers by cultural region" or "civilisation", do we? Category:Generals of the Bronze Age civilisations? Category:Naval battles involving the Indus Valley civilisation? We don't create Category:Military units and formations of Christendom either, do we? The difference is that the princely states of India were, well, states. They had armies, generals, navies, admirals, everything, because they signed contracts and paid for them (at least in theory, otherwise you get mutinies or desertion). The Hyderabad State Forces, for example. And though lots of crusaders, popes, patriarchs and (tel)evangelists may have claimed to represent Christendom (nl: christenheid, as opposed to Christianity, nl: christendom), there were (and are) no "Armed Forces of Christendom", just like there were no "Armed Forces of the medieval Islamic world". This comes back to the core problem that "the medieval Islamic world" was not a state actor or non-state actor. That's why we upmerged Category:Treaties of the medieval Islamic world, because treaties can only be signed by state or non-state actors. But the same goes for contracts of generals, admirals, footsoldiers, sailors, you get the idea. No state or non-state actor? Then no army, no navy, no Category:Sieges involving cultural region X. Cultural regions don't enlist soldiers and pay their salaries. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 01:25, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
- For India I agree. But the Islamic world of the Middle East and North Africa to Spain was a cultural region (a civilization if you wish) as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:22, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- The overarching characteristic was that Islam was the rulers' religion. Well, at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 4#Category:Muslim princely states of India you agreed with me that the ruler's religion is WP:NONDEFINING for the state as a whole. So unless there is another defining overarching characteristic, there is no reason to keep these categories, but upmerge them as nominated. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:44, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- We do not organize the medieval Islamic world by state anyway, we organize it by dynasty. At most we derive "country" names from the dynasty, e.g. Ayyubid Caliphate. One dynasty could succeed another without change of territory, while within one dynasty the territory could change a lot. It was blurry. The overarching characteristic was that Islam was the rulers' religion, not that it was any sort of country as we currently know it. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:11, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Why would keeping that generals category help with the issue you're describing? Suppose a state in the medieval Iberian Peninsula was too short-lived to have 5 generals for its own subcategory, should we then say they should be categorised as having served "the medieval Iberian Peninsula"? That was not a state. Neither was "the medieval Islamic world" a state. No general signed a contract with it. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:48, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:37, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- I did not realize they were missing. When I have time I will create them. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Before you do, maybe it's a good idea to reconsider whether such categories will have actual encyclopedic and navigational value, or be prone to be deleted per WP:ARBITRARYCAT. Category:Medieval Europe might not be a bad idea. But Category:Military personnel of the medieval Christian world? Please don't... :/. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:37, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- I mean European. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:39, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- Before you do, maybe it's a good idea to reconsider whether such categories will have actual encyclopedic and navigational value, or be prone to be deleted per WP:ARBITRARYCAT. Category:Medieval Europe might not be a bad idea. But Category:Military personnel of the medieval Christian world? Please don't... :/. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:37, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- I did not realize they were missing. When I have time I will create them. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:People associated with the University of Auckland
- Propose deleting Category:People associated with the University of Auckland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Nominator's rationale: "People associated with" is a vague category. We already have as better categories: Category:Academic staff of the University of Auckland and Category:University of Auckland alumni. LibStar (talk) 00:22, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Classic WP:OCASSOC. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:34, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete We do have the whole Category:People by university or college tree (which I just added this category to) so a rename would work as well to Category:University of Auckland people. But there are no direct loose articles in this category yet so delete for now without objection to recreation under the standard naming format. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep unless you are also going to also nominate all the other "People associated with the University of" categories for deletion. Have you checked? Just start typing in the Category search, and you'll see that "People associated with..." categories abound. This particular Category has only just been added, so best to let it sit awhile and see who adds to it. Chrisdevelop (talk) 12:26, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per Chrisdevelop. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:33, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- That is just WP:OTHERSTUFF to be nominated too. It is telling that there is no parent category and you can only get there by typing in the search bar. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:41, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, Whataboutism is a logical fallacy, but logical and syllogistic fallacies can still be true some of the time. The nominator's rationale: '"People associated with" is a vague category' surely applies to all "People associated with..." categories. If "People associated with..." is a vague category, then all "People associated with.." categories are therefore vague, and should accordingly all be nominated for deletion on the identical grounds that they're a "vague category". Why is "People associated with the University of Auckland" vaguer than, say, "People associated with the University of Edinburgh"? Not everyone "associated with" a university is an academic staff member or alumnus. Same goes for other "associated with" categories. Chrisdevelop (talk) 12:14, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- That is just WP:OTHERSTUFF to be nominated too. It is telling that there is no parent category and you can only get there by typing in the search bar. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:41, 22 August 2023 (UTC)