Cannabis Sativa

thcscience_admin
< January 29 January 31 >

January 30[edit]

Category:Ancient Cretan philosophers[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:44, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEGRS, WP:SMALLCAT, nothing philosophically special about Crete and there are two entries - car chasm (talk) 23:33, 30 January 2023 (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:West German expatriate sportspeople in Ghana[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:45, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was merge. Crowsus (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization across multiple categories. We should delete this, all are solely populated by Rudi Gutendorf Pbritti (talk) 22:11, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to the respective German (rather than West German) categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:28, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete — an insanity level of microcategorization. Already in German in Samoa. Already in other expatriate subcategories in the same country, such as Category:Expatriate football managers in Ghana. I've tagged those mentioned.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:19, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to the respective German (rather than West German) categories. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:10, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as creator. I need to start them somewhere as I work my way through this neglected ex-nationality (if the objection is to West German, that debate should be starting a lot higher up the tree than here). If it's just Smallcat that's the issue, you haven't given me sufficient time to populate them more fully - they were tagged literally as soon as created. As I am working my way through the relevant articles I'm finding plenty of missed categorisation which would boost the numbers of several. Japan, for one, now has three entries. Besides, it's hardly an "insanity" level to have a X citizen sportsperson in Y when both are sovereign states, its just that one is a rather small place in some cases. The individual concerned happens to be the world record holder for international coaching appointments, so not surprising that his name crops up in several places. 'German expatriate sportspeople in Samoa' is demonstrably a valid category, I don't see the harm in such topics existing for small nations even when the list itself has only one or two members. Crowsus (talk) 02:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Crowsus: you misunderstand the purpose of categories, specifically nationality categories. Categories are for navigation, not "extended attribute" tagging. "By nationality" is used where a category needs to be divided because it is too large. Moreover, "world record holder for international coaching appointments" is not a thing.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:24, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But that doesn't aid navigation. If someone wants to find 'that German guy who was the Ghana football manager in the 70s', well it was defined in a category, but that was deleted because it was only two guys meeting the criteria and not ten different ones which apparently would make it OK. Crowsus (talk) 18:57, 8 February 2023 (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.

So you didn't instruct the bot to upmerge these as appropriate, just delete them? What a fantastic navigation aid. The consensus was clearly MERGE but it looks like I'll have to do it. Crowsus (talk) 09:35, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Crowsus, the sole article was Rudi Gutendorf. You can add any categories to that as you feel necessary. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:14, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As I stated above, the Japan category had three members by the time it was deleted. I have fixed them now. Crowsus (talk) 01:26, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Events in ancient Greek philosophy[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT and no significant potential for growth, no apparent branch of Category:Events that this would belong and therefore merge to. - car chasm (talk) 20:07, 30 January 2023 (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:Ancient Greek metaphilosophers[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Metaphilosophy is a field of study from the modern era, and while we often project our definition of philosophical subfields onto ancient philosophers, per the IEP essentially all ancient Greek philosophers (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and all of the cynics, stoics, skeptics, and epicureans are specifically mentioned in the article) were "metaphilosophers" so this is not WP:DEFINING - car chasm (talk) 19:46, 30 January 2023 (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:Cultural critics[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is not a WP:DEFINING term, virtually anyone in history who has ever made a comment about any aspect of culture could be considered a "cultural critic" - car chasm (talk) 19:32, 30 January 2023 (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:1930s Australian game shows[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Second recreation 11 December 2022 after original Speedy deletion on 23 August 2022. First re-created and deleted a second time on 25 August 2022. See user's talk page regarding the 23 and 25 August deletion notices. AldezD (talk) 19:03, 30 January 2023 (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 based on the Jason-Medea myth[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:47, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "The Jason-Medea myth" is an unclear descriptor and doesn't appear to be in common usage even in scholarly sources. After restructuring the categories, all but one of the films focusing on Jason and Medea are in the subcat Category:Films based on Medea (Euripides play)‎. Everything can be upmerged. MClay1 (talk) 14:18, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:12, 30 January 2023 (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:Companies based in Yarmouth, Maine[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:47, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Yarmouth is a small town and this category has only two entries. User:Namiba 18:08, 30 January 2023 (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:Classical musicians associated with the BBC[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. The category is now empty. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:48, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization by a mixture of performer by venue and by association. Bearcat (talk) 03:32, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:44, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but purge -- BBC has long employed classical musicians, who would be properly categorised as BBC people. These are likely to be (or have been) full time employees, responsible for providing music programming. Others will be staff members of BBC orchestras (which should be a separate category). I would suggest that a narrower Category:BBC classical musicians, explicitly excluding those to whom nom's complaint applies, would be a valid category, particularly in the period when there were few other broadcasters. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:53, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This sounds rather arbitrary. Few people in this category spent large part of their life with the BBC. Listification would then be a better solution. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:03, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete — speaking as a professional classical musician, we perform with many organizations and at many venues. When performing with broadcasters, we don't even get our individual names in the credits.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 12:30, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Listify?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 08:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep but purge per Peterkingiron. There are plenty of people specifically named in Category:BBC Symphony Orchestra and Category:BBC Orchestras etc, eg conductors. Oculi (talk) 10:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further comment -- I am grateful to those who have identified the orchestra categories. My impression is that their musicians are staff members. However there seems to be a notable intersection of classical musicians and BBC staff could usefully be put in my suggested Category:BBC classical musicians. Those who merely give performances on BBC Radio 3 should not be included, as this would offend WP:OC#PERF. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment – completed purge, and these are all over the place. Many were at BBC for a few years and then moved on. Some are never associated with classical music at BBC, merely trained in music before coming to BBC. Many were executives; I've added a new Category:BBC music executives. Some were presenters, some were producers, some were founders or conductors of orchestras. Some were performers, such as accompianists or organists, but later became presenters or producers or executives. Some were with defunct services; I've recategorized them under the current name such as Radio 3 or 4. None were performers-only. As I'd mentioned earlier, names not usually in the credits.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:26, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This category has been emptied. Liz Read! Talk! 01:29, 8 February 2023 (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:UV Creations films[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 8#Category:UV Creations films

Category:Football at the 2023 Central American and Caribbean 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: delete. Empty. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:48, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single-entry WP:SMALLCAT with no imminent prospects of expansion. A couple of previous iterations of the Central American and Caribbean Games do have similar categories, but they have several articles filed in them -- namely, the equivalent head article and separate spinoff articles for the men's and women's tournaments. So no prejudice against recreation later in the year if and when spinoff articles actually exist, but this isn't already needed yet if only one article exists to be filed in it. Bearcat (talk) 18:13, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:05, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment This category is empty. Liz Read! Talk! 21:10, 31 January 2023 (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:Sugar substitutes[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: split. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:50, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category, originally titled Category:Sweeteners, was renamed by CFDS to Category:Sugar substitutes in 2015, tagged by User:Erpert. I'm not digging into the the history, but I assume that the reason was C2D, given that at that time Sweetener redirected to Sugar substitute. However, this was a mistake, as the contents of this category do not match the scope of the article, as a lot of sugar-containing sweeteners are included in the category as well. In 2018 User:Bodhi Peace suggested splitting the category into Category:Sugar substitutes and Category:Sweeteners for the same reasons. This was opposed mainly by User:Marcocapelle with the reason, "If there is a need for a fix it should be implemented in article space first," and closed as no consensus. Since then, Sweetener was converted into a disambiguation page following a 2021 RfD, then converted into a stubbish overview list article. The original reasons for renaming the category to Sugar substitutes and for opposition to moving it back no longer apply. Thus at the very least, the 2015 CFDS move should be reverted and the category renamed back to Category:Sweeteners. The option to split the category per Bodhi Peace's previous proposal should also remain open, though I'm not proposing it at this time as I'm not prepared to do the work. Paul_012 (talk) 14:59, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I have stumbled across this category multiple times and have always been confused about how both "powdered sugar" and "Xylitol" would fall into the same category. I would also support a split, but personally have no experience/knowledge with the process. RudolfSchreier (talk) 12:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Presumably splitting is unavoidable. Not every sugar substitute is a sweetener, is it? Marcocapelle (talk) 16:29, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's the other way round. Sugar is a sweetener, so not every sweetener is a sugar substitute. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:27, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hm, I see, in article space something else happened than I had expected. In any case you are right that my earlier reason to oppose this category rename is no longer applicable. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split — with Category:Sugar substitutes a subcategory of Category:Sweeteners — The pre-move Sweetener (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) article was basically copy and pasted back into the Sweetener (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) redirect, and suffers all the original complaints from Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 26#Sweetener. Keep them separate.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is that what happened? I was wondering because the sweetener article is just an unsourced list, which is why I just tagged it. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 15:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:41, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:01, 30 January 2023 (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:Pieles Rojas IPN players[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:49, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for just one player on a varsity-level football team. As always, team player categories are not automatically warranted the moment a sports team has had one former player for it go on to attain notability for other reasons -- this would be fine if there were five or six, or a few dozen or hundred, players to file here, but is not needed for just one person. Bearcat (talk) 13:41, 30 January 2023 (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:Papal testaments[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:49, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: After three AfDs (1, 2, 3), the category is now empty. Therefore, it should be deleted. Veverve (talk) 11:52, 30 January 2023 (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:Rajasthan current affairs[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:49, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Almost G11 (Promotional) but ambiguous enough to warrant a CFD. Anyways, I don't find any use for it that are already covered by other Rajasthan categories. The cat's creator was adding their website link to a few articles. As of writing this CfD, they have stopped adding their website link after a couple of warnings. --Lenticel (talk) 03:23, 30 January 2023 (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/2023_January_30

Leave a Reply