[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 October 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 18 October 20 >

October 19

[edit]

Category:Distance education in Nicaragua

[edit]
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 action taken, discussion deferred to the bundled nomination below. MER-C 18:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only article is about an institution Rathfelder (talk) 22:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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:Geographical Indications in Kongu Nadu

[edit]
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. MER-C 09:19, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: With only 15 unique articles in total, it is not necessary to start subdividing the parent category. In addition, it does not seem helpful to subdivide a modern designation (GI) based on historical boundaries (Kongu Nadu is a historical region of Tamil Nadu). (Courtesy pinging the category's creator, User:Magentic Manifestations) -- Black Falcon (talk) 18:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Wikipedians contributing under Dual License

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 November 1#Wikipedians contributing under Dual License

Category:English-language podcasts

[edit]
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. MER-C 09:20, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Superfluous and non-defining. WP:OVERLAPCAT Most podcasts, at present, are in English. Rathfelder (talk) 10:57, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The only evidence we have at present is the categorisation system, which has 85 English and one Russian and nothing else. English Wikipedia is, unsurprisingly, biased towards English language media and coverage of online material much more so than older stuff. Rathfelder (talk) 16:19, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding the procedural close: the reasons for deletion are different so it is entirely valid to nominate the two siblings separately. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:04, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:04, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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:Podcasts by language

[edit]
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. Category:Russian-language podcasts and Category:English-language podcasts (the surrounding nominations and the only content of this category) were both deleted. MER-C 19:44, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 2 subcats. English language, 250 articles. Russian 1 Rathfelder (talk) 10:56, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:04, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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:Russian-language podcasts

[edit]
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. MER-C 09:17, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: only 1 article Rathfelder (talk) 10:55, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:04, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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:Non-free images for NFUR review

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 November 3#Category:Non-free images for NFUR review

Category:Daughters (band) EPs

[edit]
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. MER-C 10:05, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Categorization of one EP release with the article for it redirected is better suited to the parent category of album releases. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 22:13, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:04, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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:Educational video websites

[edit]
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:Educational websites. Even if considering the blocked socks contributions, the arguments to merge are better supported by policy. (non-admin closure) ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 08:56, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not defining. Most educational websites include videos. How do you decide if a video site is educational?Rathfelder (talk) 09:47, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Website name Wikipedia says My investigation says
60second Recap Yes No
Bluprint Yes Yes
BYJU'S Does not say Yes
Channel 9 (Microsoft) Does not say Yes
CreativeMornings Does not say Inconclusive
Khan Academy Does not say Inconclusive
Knowing Neurons No, but they have a YouTube channel No, but they have videos
New Europe Market Does not say Yes
ResearchChannel Does not say No, but they have a YouTube channel
SchoolTube Yes Yes
ScienceStage Yes Inconclusive (Error 503: Service unavailable)
SexyMandarin Yes (but let's AfD this) Inconclusive (Blocked in my region)
Social impact of YouTube Not an article about an educational website
TeacherTube Yes Yes
Teaching Channel Yes Yes
TED (conference) Yes Yes
Wireless Philosophy Yes Inconclusive
IMHO, there are enough websites (8) to warrant a full category. flowing dreams (talk page) 06:34, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "but "My investigation says" quite literally is WP:OR, isn't it?" Not if it is purely source-checking. If you don't like the sources of these articles and want to contest them, there is a {{citation needed}} for it. Why attack me? I just tabulate the results. flowing dreams (talk page) 10:55, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article does not say it but in your own investigation column you put it on "yes". However neweumarket.com does not tell that it is an educational video website, while most other sources confirm that New Europe Market is a marketing conference, which is something completely different than an educational website. In other words I have strong doubts about your investigation, and I would certainly not base a category on such an investigation, per WP:OR. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:48, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't get me wrong. I am not accusing you of hypocrisy. But you don't doubt my "investigation" because of what you see. It is a fact that two people cannot convince each other, unless they are friends. You and I are not. Hence, there is no point continuing this. If you'll excuse, I'll unwatch this page. Please refrain from sending reply notifications. Just do yourself a favor and don't pelt WP:OR at another editor who has never touch a disputed article. flowing dreams (talk page) 16:39, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The question is not whether there are educational sites with videos. Clearly there are. Are they significantly different from the other educational sites, the large majority of which also have videos, though perhaps more other material? And is the distinction significant for users? Is it even permanent - a site which has no videos now may have lots next month, or vice versa? Rathfelder (talk) 13:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 09:02, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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:Distance education in the Philippines

[edit]
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 action taken, discussion deferred to the bundled nomination below. MER-C 18:12, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All the articles are about institutions Rathfelder (talk) 07:54, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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:Distance education in Canada

[edit]
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 action taken, discussion deferred to the bundled nomination below. MER-C 18:13, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All the articles are about institutions Rathfelder (talk) 07:53, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Rathfelder, My concern is that this may end up being a WP:NARROWCAT should an eventual Category:Distance education in Canada be re-created. Why can't we co-mingle institutions and articles on the topic in the same broader category? I don't think the inclusion of "institutions" is particularly helpful and is unnecessarily wordy.Doug Mehus (talk) 14:21, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Procedural oppose. I'm not necessarily wedded to this structure in principle, but the way things are currently structured, 26 other countries besides Canada also have subcategories within the Category:Distance education by country category, while 21 countries besides Canada also have Category:Distance education institutions by country subcategories separately from that. Granted that in a lot of cases the institutions category is the only content that the more general "education" category has at all, so we could potentially stand to rethink how we handle the whole shebang — but there's no case for treating Canada differently from countries like Australia, France, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States, all of which have separate categories for "Distance education" and "distance education institutions" which haven't been put up for discussion at all. It's also not even true that all of the contents here are institutions in the first place: there's also a template, two technical networks that are used as delivery mechanisms for distance education but are not themselves institutions, a radio station, a television station and a television series, none of which could legitimately be categorized as "institutions". I'm not opposed to the idea that we could potentially reconsider how we categorize distance education across the board — but pulling Canada, and only Canada, out of what's otherwise an international standard categorization scheme while leaving the rest of the scheme otherwise intact, no. Bearcat (talk) 02:26, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with Bearcat. This belongs as part of a larger conversation on rethinking the global distance education category structure. Whether that's here here, at the Village Pump, or elsewhere, I'm not sure. --Doug Mehus (talk) 14:29, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - create subcat Category:Distance education institutions based in Canada. Oculi (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We already have it. Nomination is a bit misconstrued; he's actually trying to merge two categories that already exist. Bearcat (talk) 23:55, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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:Distance education in India

[edit]
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 action taken, discussion deferred to the bundled nomination below. MER-C 18:13, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All the articles are about institutions Rathfelder (talk) 07:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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:Distance education in Cyprus

[edit]
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 action taken, discussion deferred to the bundled nomination below. MER-C 18:13, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 sub cat. which is already in Distance education institutions by country Rathfelder (talk) 07:43, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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:Spouses of United States senators

[edit]
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. MER-C 09:18, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Notability is not inherited, so this is nondef. ミラP 01:47, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. What about other categories (e.g. Category:Spouses of American politicians)? Isn't being a politician's spouse a/the defining characteristic of, for example, Jill Biden? DexDor (talk) 08:44, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, the articles in this category generally spend few words on these people's role as the spouse of a senator. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:19, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Obviously our categories for First and Second Ladies aren't going anywhere, and it's certainly possible for the spouse of a congressperson to be independently notable for their own independent reasons — Michelle Obama is obviously notable in her own right, for example, but the fact that Barack served a term in the US Senate has nothing whatsoever to do with why. Then there's Bob and Liddy Dole, who are each notable because they were senators themselves, and not because the other one was too, but are still both filed here next to each other anyway. Then there's Julia Thorne, who's so minimally sourced that it's not even obvious that she's notable at all, and is certainly not "inherently" notable just because her husband served in the senate (or even because he unsuccessfully ran for president nearly 20 years after they split up, either.) This is not a WP:DEFINING characteristic of these people's notabilities, because it has nothing to do with what they're notable for. Either they're independently notable for their own reasons and thus the fact that their spouse served in the US senate is just biographical data rather than the crux of a notability claim, or they're not independently notable at all and don't inherit notability just because of who they happened to be married to. Bearcat (talk) 15:05, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - consistency with everything that's been said at the House of Representatives spouses discussion. Place Clichy (talk) 11:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_October_19&oldid=927095828"