Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Categories

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Johnpacklambert (talk | contribs) at 16:45, 23 December 2024 (→Women diplomats and women ambassadors: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 16:45, 23 December 2024 by Johnpacklambert (talk | contribs) (→Women diplomats and women ambassadors: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Shortcut

WT:CATP

Category:Diamond League winners

The editor @Apple15367: has recently added this category to a large number of articles. Out of curiosity, and because I'd come across them misapplying (in good faith) another category, I had a look at some of these articles. They don't seem to mention the Diamond League, which is a complex of different athletics events. The two I looked at in detail don't even seem to mention the Diamond League component events in which the person was a winner.

I started to word a WP:CFD, but then realised that the category, which has existed since 2020, may not be inherently deletion-worthy, although I think that it is being misapplied. Athletics is not my natural habitat, so I'm asking categorisation geeks here for a view on this.

The text I had written before stopping the CfD nomination (I'd argued myself out of it) was:

This does not seem to be a useful category. I noticed it being added to a large number of articles recently. The Diamond League does not appear to be mentioned in their articles. Consider Pamela Dutkiewicz: yes, she is listed in 2018 Diamond League, but there is no mention in her article of the Diamond League or of the Birmingham 2018 British Grand Prix (athletics) event, within the Diamond League, corresponding to that table entry. Similarly Ihab Abdelrahmans article doesn't mention the 2014 Shanghai event, or the 2015 Doha and Rome events, or the 2016 Eugene event, which are the Diamond events in his "What links here", though it does have a Diamond League entry in his External Links. Perhaps someone has gone through the Diamond League events pages and added the category for all the names mentioned there, but is this sufficient? If a category is significant for a person, the relevant events should be mentioned on their page. Perhaps this is not so much a case for deletion of the category but for caution in its use?

Any views on the use, or existence, of this category? is it WP:Overcategorisation? Is there a relevant guideline? PamD 21:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

PS I am not Pamela Dutkiewicz: it's just that face with a list of names from which to pick an example I tend to gravitate towards similar names! (Just in case anyone wondered). PamD 21:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Category and Article Matching

Greetings. I have one question:

A few months ago, Edenvale, Gauteng was renamed to Edenvale, South Africa and Kempton Park, Gauteng was renamed to Kempton Park, South Africa. So, should I request for Category:People from Edenvale, Gauteng to be renamed to "Category:People from Edenvale, South Africa" & should I request for Category:Suburbs of Kempton Park, Gauteng to be renamed to "Category:Suburbs of Kempton Park, South Africa"? GeographicAccountant (talk) 19:16, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Biology-related category loop

I noticed a category loop. Specifically, Category:Primatology ⊂ Category:Biological anthropology ⊂ Category:Human biology ⊂ Category:Humans ⊂ Category:Hominina ⊂ Category:Hominini ⊂ Category:Homininae ⊂ Category:Hominidae ⊂ Category:Apes ⊂ Category:Primate taxonomy ⊂ Category:Primate taxa ⊂ Category:Primates ⊂ Category:Primatology ⊂ Category:Biological anthropology ⊂…, which has length twelve. (There are also overlapping loops, such as one using Category:Biological anthropology ⊂ Category:Anthropology ⊂ Category:Humans instead of Category:Biological anthropology ⊂ Category:Human biology ⊂ Category:Humans.) How shall we fix this? I personally favor changing Category:Primate taxonomy ⊂ Category:Primate taxa to Category:Primate taxonomy ⊃ Category:Primate taxa, but because the category loop is so long (twelve members), there are many other possibilities for others' consensus to settle on. Care to differ or discuss with me? The N User 20:07, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Shortcut index#CAT decapitalized

Check the discussion I started at Misplaced Pages talk:Shortcut index#CAT decapitalized. Web-julio (talk) 06:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Category:Maintenance categories

Would any contributors mind clarifying the purpose of this category with respect to Category:Misplaced Pages maintenance?

I understand that it contains categories of course, but is the intent for Category:Misplaced Pages maintenance to be emptied of categories? Or perhaps a catch-all category, while Category:Maintenance categories is for commonly useful maintenance categories (generally omitting technical ones like the 'Page displaying...' series)? Something else? Tule-hog (talk) 23:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Diplomats categories

I noticed we have a lot of over categorization in Diplomats categories, partly because many people in Fooian diplomats are also in multiple fooian Ambassadors to Boo, often for multiple boos. I posted something about 1 such case in which the 2 Fooian Ambassadors to Boo categories each only had 1 article, the person is in Fooian diplomats, so we could move from 2 1 article not helping navigation categories and 1 large Category in that case Ambassadors of Greece, Ambassadors to Brazil and Ambassadors to another country that I forget. I posted it on User Smasongarrison's talk page, so you can go there to see the exact details of what I think would nee to happen, it would require a CfD nomination, but I do not think we really need a person in 2 1 article categories. This got me thinking more broadly about how the ambassador and diplomat categories are organized. I discussed the matter with S. Mason Garrison and she thought it would be good to post about it somewhere that more would notice. I am about to posy that idea below.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:25, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

The problem I noticed is that "Fooian diplomats" are including at least 3 things. 1-diplomats for foo. 2-diplomats who were nationals of foo who either gave up that nationality, or while still holding that nationality worked as diplomats for another country. 3-diplomats who are nationals of foo who work as diplomats for international organizations or non-national entities that employ diplomats, such as the United Nations, the European Union, etc. I believe we should create a "diplomats for foo" tree, in which we have Diplomats for the United States, Diplomats for Nigeria, Diplomats for Uganda, Diplomats for Nepal, Diplomats for France, Diplomats for Bulgaria, etc. I think "for" is better because "of" we usually use in a title, like "King of England", etc. Most of categories of that type are specific offices. We have some categories that use "in", however most diplomats do much of their work outside the home country (there are staff in the home country, although not often for their wole career), so in would be confusing and misleading. At the same time I think we should leave "French diplomats", "Ugandan diplomats" etc. to hold nationals of that country who were diplomats for international organizations. One example of the Later is Filip Grzegorzewski who was head of an EU cooperative office is a Polish national who worked as a diplomat, but is not a diplomat for Poland. I think these are 2 separate things. I also think the high rate of the Diplomats for x also being x nationals who are diplomats means we really should apply overlap cat rules and not place Diplomats for x in the x nationals who are diplomats Category for the same country. With the diplomats by city I would leave these under the diplomats by country. I would leave people in both say Diplomats for France and Diplomats from Paris. This is partly because in reviewing Diplomats from Krakow I realized a few were diplomats for Israel and 1 a diplomat for the Soviet Union, so there are several cases where people are defined by a city they were raised in which is not In the country they served as diplomats for. I am not sure if the intersection of city domeone is "from" and being a diplomat is defining, but that is a question others can take up independently. I think we would then make "Ambassafors of x" a diffusing sib-cat of "Diplomats for x" so that anyone is "Ambassadors of Brazil" would not also be in "Diplomats for Brazil".John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Women diplomats and women ambassadors

Do we really need both these categories? I think the intersection of being a diplomat and being a woman is defining. Having the women ambassadors cat makes last rung issues more likely. It also leads to overcatehorization and small categories. The Brazilian woman diplomats cat has 6 articles, the Brazilian women ambassadors category 4. 2 articles are in both, so we have 2 categories for a tree that has 10 entries. This seems excessive. I think women diplomats is enough and we do not need the additional woman ambassadors categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Category:

WikiProject Categories pages