Cannabis Ruderalis

thcscience_admin
< December 31 January 2 >

January 1[edit]

Category:Sportspeople from Chennai[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:02, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. All categories have under 5 articles. User:Namiba 21:30, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for Now These currently break up the actual article and hinder navigation but no objection to recreating any if they exceed expectations and ever get up to 5+ articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Rikster2 (talk) 23:56, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Not enough content to warrant a city level category. State level is working fine. SFB 01:17, 3 January 2021 (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:Burghers by occupation[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:01, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCEGRS and WP:SMALLCAT. User:Namiba 20:29, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, trivial intersections between ethnicity and occupation. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:54, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:OCEGRS. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:10, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Sri Lankan categories seem to have been indiscriminately spread in ethnic-occupational intersections regardless of the conditions set at WP:OCEGRS. Place Clichy (talk) 16:55, 6 January 2021 (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:Films set in one day[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:00, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category was previously deleted, albeit with a slightly different title, and more than eight years ago. Bringing it here to see if consensus has changed. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:59, 1 January 2021 (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:Formerly wanted fugitives[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:59, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not a good idea to base a category on a temporary state of affairs. Quite a lot of the people in the other subcategories of fugitives are no longer wanted. Rathfelder (talk) 19:08, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep/merge Both categories are needed, so we know who is no longer wanted by the law, or merge if we must since we don't want this category to go to waste. Davidgoodheart (talk) 20:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge/delete per nom, and besides Wikipedia is not a police database. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge I'm not sure if I'm sold on having "wanted" categories, but we definitely should not categorize by something people are not. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with very few exceptions we do not seperate former and current in categories. John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge being "wanted" shouldn't be divided into a temporary category. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:11, 4 January 2021 (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:Physician-politicians[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:57, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-notable intersections. Many of these were previously deleted following a 2009 discussion. User:Namiba 16:29, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, trivial intersections. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete Per WP:G4. We already discussed this and came to a consensus. - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, I hadn't realized there was already a consensus when I created the American, Chilean, and Italian categories - that's my bad. I had assumed since there is a Physicians in the United States Congress article, a category would have been worth making as well. I'm ok with deleting it. Kyjama (talk) 19:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete while the seperate identities are both defining, this intersection of the two is not defining, such politicians are in no way a group, and at some times and places this has been a fairly high overlap. I would also point out that in the Pakistani case the category as written is an extremely narrow one, and in the highly unlikely case we keep it we should change it to Category:Pakistani Medical doctor-politicians.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no inherently notable intersections. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No indication that this is a notable topic on its own. Dimadick (talk) 16:54, 5 January 2021 (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:Murdered religious leaders[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:45, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Trivial intersection. No notable WP:DEFINING link between the occupation and the manner of death. Not expected as a professional qualification. There may have been many years between the occupation and the death, making the link even weaker.
... who were killed for reasons other than religious motivation. Others listed under "Assassinated" and "Martyrs".
Note: Sources about the death of a person will often discuss both their occupation and their cause of death. This doesn't make this intersection any more notable than a combination with other aspects often discussed in such notices, such as their number of children.
See also: related rationale about suicides by occupation:
William Allen Simpson (talk) 10:49, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per nom. These are trivial intersections with the exception of martyrs which are not part of the nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:08, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. There is significant overlap between these categories and their corresponding "martyrs" categories. I presume that those here not included in the martyrs ones were mere coincidence and not notably related. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:17, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Their religious activities could well be the cause of the murders. Dimadick (talk) 16:55, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • That cannot possibly be true, as this section of the category tree is reserved to other than religious motivation, as already noted in the nomination. Please read more carefully. Removing this will assist editors who don't read the category tree, and add them blindly.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:30, 8 January 2021 (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:Murdered scientists[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'. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:55, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Trivial intersection. No notable WP:DEFINING link between the occupation and the manner of death. Not expected as a professional qualification. There may have been many years between the occupation and the death, making the link even weaker.
Note: Sources about the death of a person will often discuss both their occupation and their cause of death. This doesn't make this intersection any more notable than a combination with other aspects often discussed in such notices, such as their number of children.
See also: related rationale about suicides by occupation:
William Allen Simpson (talk) 10:34, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But, in addition: the subCategory:Murdered American scientists should be merged to Category:American murder victims. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:36, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Usually coincidental so a trivial intersection. - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:58, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:19, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Their scientific activities or their advocacy for scientific causes could well be the reason of the murders. Dimadick (talk) 16:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • That applies to only very few articles in this category. Please read them through. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:46, 8 January 2021 (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:Black British sportspeople[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 consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:53, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, violation of WP:BLPCAT: the case for each content category must be made clear by the article text and its reliable sources. In fact almost none of the articles in this category makes this clear. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suppport I would add that this is true for most ethnicity categories. While it is often defining, I would be in favor of blowing it up and starting over.--User:Namiba 16:36, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - per cfd 2020_March_2#Black_British_people (a resounding keep). This issue is in the UK news every day, regarding nearly every occupation. Oculi (talk) 18:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- This is a well understood ethnic descriptor. I do not think misattributing ethnicity is likely to lead to a libel suit, the reason for the BLP policy. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:44, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whatever the reason for BLP policy, it is what we have to adhere to. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Hmlarson (talk) 20:12, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per all the above and remove articles that don't mention the subject's ethnicity, per WP:CATVER. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 08:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete when in practice categories are applied regularly in the face of no text indicating they apply and no article indication that the intersection is actually defining, the categories should be deleted.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete another "descent" category in disguise, suffering the usual problems, see User:Carlossuarez46/Descent categories. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:20, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Per Oculi's rationale. Dimadick (talk) 16:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete because these categories have been indiscriminately spread to too many articles that do not meet the criteria set in the WP:EGRS guideline. In fact, their mere existence (unfortunately) serves as invitation to even good-faith contributors to plaster them on too many articles based on a mere face test, rather than reliable sources and Wikipedia guidelines. Ethnicity is a topic worth a great ammount of nuance, which are much better treated in article body with all possible commentary and references, rather than a mere category inclusion that does not allow any nuance or mention of sources. The tool is broken and hard to fix, therefore the best way forward is probably to be very conservative in creating such categories, and deleting trivial intersections between ethnicity and occupation which do not meet WP:OCEGRS conditions. Place Clichy (talk) 16:55, 6 January 2021 (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.

Mayors in the Netherlands[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, just one or two articles in each of these categories and they are not part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:55, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for Now While these places would have had more than five mayors, most would be non-notable. No objection to recreating any if they exceed expectations and get up to 5+ articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:01, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per WP:SMALLCAT. Please redirect:
Category:Mayors of Meppel to Category:Mayors in Drenthe and Category:Politicians from Meppel
gidonb (talk) 21:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is very unusual to create category redirects to parent categories. Category redirects are mainly used in case of synonym. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:20, 5 January 2021 (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.

Sanskrit scholars by nationality[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:50, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, only one, two or three articles in every of these categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Paul 012: This nomination isn't opposing doing away with this nationality tree altogether since the well populated Indian, British, American and French subcategories are not nominated. The question here is really should we be creating nationality subcats in every instance. Usually we use the WP:SMALLCAT exception when the tree is generally well populated with just a few runts. - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No objection to recreating the Thai category later if it ever gets up to 5+ articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest merging all European scholars into one category. The Sri Lankans are likely to be Tamil and Hindu, so that they are different — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterkingiron (talk • contribs)
  • Upmerge these are all below the normal size threshold. Also because these scholars will often study and publish on issues besides just sanskrit, the more broad parent categories plus the specific sanskrit scholars category tend to be a reasonable arrangement of the articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:57, 4 January 2021 (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:Genies in video games[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: rename, without prejudice to a proposal to change it to Category:Video games about jinn. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:51, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEF. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 09:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Though the main article is called Jinn, not genie. Dimadick (talk) 16:59, 5 January 2021 (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:Regents by regency in Indonesia[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:34, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge, unnecessary intermediate category level "by" something because the parent category is (nearly) empty. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:26, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Both per nom as the layer does not aid navigation. (I had to read through the articles for a bit since I was unaware of this definition of "regency".) - RevelationDirect (talk) 14:01, 2 January 2021 (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:Shopping courts[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:33, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not clear what makes any of these "shopping courts". Shopping court is currently prodded for lack of sourcing, and the concept seems no different than "outdoor mall". Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:12, 1 January 2021 (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:HR 7722[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:53, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The system is not very notable.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kepler-1229b (talk • contribs) 00:30, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle per WP:SMALLCAT but I suspect the category should be merged to one or more of its parent categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: there isn't really a suitable category to merge these articles. Praemonitus (talk) 17:18, 3 January 2021 (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:Meridiano de Oro Awards[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:32, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEF (WP:OCAWARD and likely WP:SMALLCAT)
The Meridiano de Oro is a Venezuelan award given by the Dearmas Block that recognizes "excellence of professionals in the World of Spectacle" and the only article in this category, Daniela Alvarado, doesn't even mention the award. Doesn't get much clearer than that. I don't know if I can say the category is "listified" since there is only 1 article but it is now linked here in the main article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:02, 1 January 2021 (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:Stoner/stonette of the year awards[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:31, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)
High Times magazine gives out these awards. For a minority of the biographies in this category, they're association with marijuana is defining like with Seth Rogan, Snoop Dogg and Bill Maher but they are already well categorized under Category:Canadian cannabis activists, Category:Businesspeople in the cannabis industry and Category:Drug policy reform activists, respectively. In contrast, this award is either mentioned in passing or not at all in the articles so it doesn't seem defining. The winners are already listified in the Stony Awards article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:02, 1 January 2021 (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.
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_January_1

Leave a Reply