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.
Nominator's rationale: per WP:SMALLCAT. These ten by-year categories contain only 26 articles in total, i.e. an average of 2.6 pages per category. Only one of them has more than 4 pages.
Most cities just have by-decade categories. Compare the large number of city categories in the by-continent sub-categories of Category:Decades by city with the sparse set in Category:Years by city.
Per WP:SMALLCAT, small categories are a nuisance to navigate. Chronology categories are most useful when part of an established series. So we don't split up decade categories unless we have enough articles in the set to make the by-year categories more of a meal than a crumb. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 23:37, 9 September 2020 (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:Marvel Comics CGI characters
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:DeleteTimrollpickering (talk) 18:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overly specific category that doesn't seem defining. Note: category creator has been banned from creating categories due to constantly creating unnecessary categories. See: [1]JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 22:59, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nondefining. bibliomaniac15 21:02, 19 September 2020 (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.
Years in Hamburg
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/delete as nominated. Good Ol’factory(talk) 22:41, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That is a total of 25 articles in a nest of 36 categories.
As of now, we have nowhere near enough articles on by-year topics in the history of Hamburg to make a by-year category tree useful navigation. So this nomination proposes merging all the establishment and disestablishment categories to the national level, and merging all the year categories to decade categories. This will be in line with the usual category structure for cities and other national subdivisions (Hamburg is both a city and a state of Germany). --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 19:41, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Hamburg was a (nominally) independent polity prior to the creation of various German confederations. We usually categorize by that, rather than by the country that didn't exist but later absorbed the place (e.g., Category:Establishments in East Germany by year). Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We do categorize by independent polity, but not necessarily by year. By decade or even by century can also be appropriate. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:15, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
For decades there is not enough, but keeping centuries is reasonable. For example, the whole of the 19th century only contains 12 articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:20, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge decades and years except for the 2010s, keep centuries per Marcocapelle. This listing may be incomplete. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:33, 3 November 2020 (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:Family-in-law
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 and redirect. – FayenaticLondon 11:14, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The article Affinity (law) is the main subject of the category. ★Trekker (talk) 16:28, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, the category is not specifically about law and Affinity (law) should not be listed as the main article. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How is it not? Affinity law is literally why its called "family-in-law".★Trekker (talk) 06:27, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And? Im well aware of those article, I was the one who put this category on them. Before I started imporving this category it only included 3 pages.★Trekker (talk) 04:33, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The fundamental concept is still based on the idea of Affinity as defined as "legal" in a variety of cultures. Not everything in Category:Marriage law (and its child categories) is legal articles either. And the article Affinity (law) defines the concept as "In law and in cultural anthropology".★Trekker (talk) 06:06, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Don't you think its pretty telling that there is no such article as Family-in-law? That's because "family-in-law" is just called affinity, and it is fundamentaly a legal relationship.★Trekker (talk) 06:10, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, the social concept preceded the legal concept and there is no necessity to have law about family-in-law in order for it to have a meaning. I am not impressed by the fact there is no article about it, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:38, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what dictionaries have to do with anything. Also law is a fluid concept, just because some ancient peoples didn't write down what marriages of family members meant it didn't mean they didn't have social rules which could fall under "law".★Trekker (talk) 15:36, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose several other articles can be written or be included that runs affinity to opposite conclusions. Levirate marriage could be included in this category (e.g., you may/must marry your [older] brother's widow regardless of whether there are children from that prior marriage); and Yibbum (e.g., you ought, but need not marry your brother's widow but only if there are no children from that prior marriage). Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:41, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's still affinity law.★Trekker (talk) 04:33, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Rename. I'm not clear on what the concern is here. Affinity (law) is the article that addresses the concept of the family-in-law. There is no article for Family-in-law, and I don't see the benefit of the category and the article using different terminology. Good Ol’factory(talk) 02:55, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Rename with redirect. From a strictly categorical standpoint, I think it would be best to rename to conform to the main article, leaving a redirect behind. The oppose rationale given by Marcocappelle strikes me more as an argument to rename the main article (which I'm not totally against, I think Affinity (relationship) might do a better job at broadening the scope beyond the merely legal aspect). But I also do not think that renaming the category "Affinity (law)" necessarily disregards the social aspect of things; (law) is merely a disambiguator, though it may not be the best one. Carlossuarez46's opposition is also not clear to me; in fact, I see no reason why levirate marriage or Yibbum wouldn't be included in this category, seeing as they involve different interactions between in-laws, unless the argument is that the category is a set category instead of a topic category. bibliomaniac15 21:19, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Rename with Redirect We should blindly follow the main article name to aid navigation in the category space. Since that article has what is, at least to me, an obscure name a redirect makes sense for Hotcat users. RevelationDirect (talk) 21:54, 1 November 2020 (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.
Years in cities without a wider series
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/deleteTimrollpickering (talk) 10:57, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Most cities just have by-decade categories. Compare the large number of city categories in the by-continent sub-categories of Category:Decades by city with the sparse set in Category:Years by city.
Only the largest cities in developed nations (basically the so-called "world cities") have enough articles to need by-year categories. See e.g. Category:Years in London and Category:Years in New York City. Please note that this is not some sort of judgement on the merits or significance of any city. The issue here is simply navigation, which per WP:CAT is the main purpose of categories: per WP:SMALLCAT, small categories are a nuisance to navigate. Chronology categories are most useful when part of an established series. So we don't split up decade categories unless we have enough articles in the set to make the by-year categories more of a meal than a crumb. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 16:27, 9 September 2020 (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.
Years in Austin
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/deleteTimrollpickering (talk) 10:56, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:SMALLCAT. These are the only by-year categories for Austin, and they each contain only a single article. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 15:08, 9 September 2020 (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.
Years in Chicago
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/deleteTimrollpickering (talk) 10:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:SMALLCAT. These 44 by-year categories contain a total of 257 articles, an average of 5.8 per category, which at first glance sounds OK: marginally beyond SMALLCAT territory.
However, https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=17314610 shows that 159 of those pages are in Category:Sports in Illinois by year. Most of those sports articles are also categorised in sporting series categories, so they are adequately categorised already. That leaves only 97 non-sporting topics split over these 44 Chicago-by-year categories(avg 2.2 per year).
This is not as clearcut a case as #Years in Dallas and #Years in Phoenix below, but I still think that the Chicago-by-year categorises are not adding navigational value, and that years are too fine a time unit for useful categorisation of Chicago. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 14:37, 9 September 2020 (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.
Years in Dallas
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/deleteTimrollpickering (talk) 10:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:SMALLCAT. These 31 by-year categories contain a total of only 76 articles, i.e. an average of only 2.5 per category. Seventeen of the categories (i.e. over half of them) contain only one page each.
It seems that we don't yet have enough coverage of Dallas to justify by-year categories for the city. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 13:57, 9 September 2020 (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:Massacre of Lwów professors
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 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.
Years in Phoenix
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/deleteTimrollpickering (talk) 10:53, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:SMALLCAT. These 21 by-year categories contain a total of only 48 articles, i.e. an average of only 2.3 per category. Nine of the categories contain only one page each.
It seems that we don't yet have enough coverage of Phoenix to justify by-year categories for the city. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 11:40, 9 September 2020 (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:Important Prophets of Islam
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 19:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, subjective list with no clear criteria, not clear we need to break up the extant category on prophets. —C.Fred (talk) 17:00, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per the obvious POV in the name. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 23:02, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete POV category. Who defines their importance? Dimadick (talk) 08:27, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel(talk) 00:13, 13 September 2020 (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:Scientific research methods journals
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.
Nominator's rationale: There is no obvious distinction in terms of stated definitions and member articles between these two categories, and no attempt to define how "scientific" research method journals differ from "generic" research method journals. The impression to the reader is that there's a battle going on to decide which research methods journals qualify as "science" meta-journals, tending to a non-world point of view - most of the world's research community sees a spectrum from the harder more quantitative sciences to the softer generally more qualitative ones. I don't seem to see any research methods journals focussing on highly qualitative science. I suspect that there's also an accident of editing history; the "generic" category was created in 2007, the "specific" category was created in 2018, probably without noticing the generic one or attempting to tidy up. For example, Sociological Methods & Research is currently classified in the generic, not scientific, category but includes papers such as "Improving and Validating Survey Estimates of Religious Demography Using Bayesian Multilevel Models and Poststratification" and "Optimizing Count Responses in Surveys: A Machine-learning Approach" and "Estimating the Proportion of a Categorical Variable With Probit Regression" - these all claim (by their titles) to use formal statistical methods and appear aimed at improving specific scientific methods. Boud (talk) 09:39, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge -- Most of the journals in the target might just as easily be in the subject. Some may question whether the social sciences are true sciences, but I do not see any useful distinction. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:59, 13 September 2020 (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:2015 in the Los Angeles metropolitan area
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.
Nominator's rationale: Not part of any established series of chronology categories, so merge to both parents. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 09:27, 9 September 2020 (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:Neurology, SS, and psychiatry disease and disorder templates
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.
Nominator's rationale: Super broad category that serves no useful organisational purpose. I request deletion of the category, with contents moved to the narrower and easier to understand new categories:
Support in principle per nom, but the former should be named Category:Neurological disorders templates in order to align with its new parent Category:Neurological disorders. For the second, I do not understand how substance use disorders suddenly appears in the proposed name, isn't that something totally different? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for commenting @Marcocapelle. Good point regarding "disorder" - agree with you there. Regarding substances - I think that they have been lumped in with psychiatry at present (this is probably because the DSM lists them as psychiatric disorders), and if you explore the category it already has three related templates (alcohol, psychoactive substance and combined substance use). I think it makes things clearer and helps category gnomes to explicitly state the substance use part of things, but I respect if others differ on this point. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:53, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Drug templates is a more obvious place for substance use. I am not sure where alcohol fits best but certainly not in psychiatry. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you regarding neurological disorders and psychiatry templates, so I hope we can make this split.
I am happy to, in order to get these templates moved into better subcats, agree with you regarding a move to "drug templates" for now. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:37, 11 October 2020 (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.