WikiProject Categories | |||||||
|
V | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 45 | 46 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 20 | 21 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
FfD | 0 | 2 | 4 | 11 | 17 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 24 |
|
Threads older than 21 days may be automatically archived. |
WP:C2E
I have just started:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Populated_places_in_the_Sidon_District
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Populated_places_in_the_Tyre_District
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Populated_places_in_the_Jezzine_District
Ugh, then I see that I should not have added the "the"; I should have called them
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Populated_places_in_Sidon_District
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Populated_places_in_Tyre_District
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Populated_places_in_Jezzine_District
Is there a quick way to change this? Or do I need to do it by hand? Huldra (talk) 20:46, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- Huldra, you can follow the process at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#Add requests for speedy renaming and merging here and give C2E as the reason. That should be fairly quick. TSventon (talk) 04:54, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, User:TSventon, have done do, Huldra (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Fixing broken CfD closure
Coming across this bot edit, it appears that there was an error in the closure of the CfD. Instead of merging the Thai people categories to Category:Thai people of Chinese descent, the bot instead merged to Category:Thai politicians of Chinese descent (contribs). Is there a relatively easy way to fix this semi-automatically? (I originally asked at User talk:Good Olfactory, who doesn't appear to be currently active.) --Paul_012 (talk) 21:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- As this was (erroneously) listed as such as CfD, I would propose to list the categories as Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy, if there are no objections we can process them in two days.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:41, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think that would work, since most of the pages were correctly placed under Category:Thai politicians of Chinese descent before the error. I guess I could manually compile a list from the bot contribs and go through them with AWB though (or have a bot do so). --Paul_012 (talk) 13:11, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- Done. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:30, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
Gender - sex confusion in category titles
I'm not sure if this is the correct venue as I seem to have wandered into a meander of redirects to get here....
I've noticed quite a few recent category moves to correct erroneous use of sex instead of gender, such as "Female Fooian writers" being moved to "Women Fooian writers". This however seems to be a fairly random process which I think could be streamlined and done more systematically by including "incorrect categorization by sex instead of gender" as an explicit speedy criterion and even doing it (semi-)automatically by bot or script. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:48, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- I've been looking unsuccessfully (out of curiosity, not opposition) for some discussion of this bulk change. --Northernhenge (talk) 22:51, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- @JJMC89: --Northernhenge (talk) 22:53, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- Aside from my bot completing the moves, I am not involved. The moves are likely being made under C2C like the singers at Special:PermaLink/1045159327#Current requests. You can check the history of WP:CFDS to see the requests. Knifegames seems to making requests for the music-related ones and may be able to provide more insight. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Roger (Dodger67) & Northernhenge! Yes, I figured there must be a way to streamline that work, but unfortunately *I* don't know how to do it, ha; I decided I'd only tackle the music-related categories, & for now that's all still on my user page here, broken down into:
- "women in music cats": This is all the categories I had renamed (I think 474), with links to (uneventful) CfRs for the first two batches (in July and August)––I kept the big list so I could track my own cleanup progress (correcting category explanations, classifications, etc.), removing redlinks as I went, & I think that's all (at last!) finished now.
- "markup / remainders": I've only found 5 more "female" categories in music, & those are listed there because I wasn't entirely sure how to handle them; for example, a couple people brought up being comfortable with the moves because the categories were unlikely to include children, so I don't want to switch over something like Category:Fictional female musicians without first checking to see if they're all "women"––but (to be frank!) I also don't care enough to prioritize that work right now…
- "using "women" as a modifier": One user had questions about grammar, accuracy, etc., & I gave thorough explanations in response to their comments, both of which are copy/pasted there; in establishing precedent, that sub-subsection includes a full breakdown of the "women/female x"-formulated subcats under Women by occupation.
- It would be amazing to have an explicit speedy criterion making it easier for others to tackle that work! But I can't let myself resume doing it, as my drive to *complete* takes over a bit too much... Knifegames (talk) 21:48, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
- Here's the explanation you gave on that page:
that "women" is more accurate (see Sex and gender distinction) and because it's the only way to ensure consistency: "women" refers to both cisgender and transgender women, so when "female" is used to describe that group, the word is just being used colloquially to mean "women".
I'm not convinced at all by this - I don't believe there's any consensus view that transgender women are women, but they're not female. And speaking of accuracy, an article about a 6-year-old singer would be much more at home in a category called "Female singers" than "Women singers". My bigger question, though, is the same one Northernhenge has, about the process by which this mass change occurred. Was there a discussion about it, or did you just decide by yourself to make this change? Korny O'Near (talk) 01:59, 21 September 2021 (UTC)- Korny O'Near, see WP:EGRS - we are required to accept the self-identification of the subject's gender, it's not subject to consensus. The point of this discussion is to streamline the change and apply it more consistently. No one else has so far raised any objection to it. It is in fact by definition wrong to use "female/male" instead of "woman/man" for people except when discussing them in biological terms. That is literally the difference between sex and gender. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:27, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
It is in fact by definition wrong to use "female/male" instead of "woman/man" for people except when discussing them in biological terms.
This may be your opinion or normative view, but I think it finds little support in actual usage (or in lexicographic authorities, for that matter). The OED entry for female includes senses like "Of or relating to a woman or girl.", "Engaged in or exercised by women; done by women.", "Of a quality, attribute, etc.: peculiar to or characteristic of a woman or women." etc. These senses are plainly still in current use. e.g. This BBC article talks about a reality show having a "predominantly young and female audience particularly valuable to advertisers" - there's no salient biological context here, they're just saying its viewership includes lots of young women. Like many words, female has multiple definitions. The relevant definition at any given juncture will depend on context. It's like asking whether a tomato is a fruit, or whether a strawberry is a berry. There is no one universal "correct" answer - it depends on whether we're speaking in a biological context, a culinary context, an agricultural context, etc. Colin M (talk) 23:07, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hello Korny O'Near! I think Roger (Dodger67) has already addressed your first note, but for the record we're in complete agreement that transgender women are not female. Regarding accuracy, I think the more relevant category for a 6-year-old is "child", as in Category:Child singers by nationality. I haven't known reliable sources fo confirm details about a 6-year-old's sex, and as I said above, I've held off on renaming some categories that I think include children; I'll be sure to keep articles about girls and women apart.
- Regarding "the process by which this mass change occurred", apologies that my above comment might've been too long for the relevant links to be clear! The first two batches went through traditional CfRs in July and August.
- Let me know if you have any more questions! // Knifegames (talk) 07:12, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- Roger (Dodger67) - thank you for your response, though I confess I didn't really understand it. Should a category like Category:Male models be renamed to "Man models", since the former is "by definition wrong"?
- Knifegames - thank you for those links, although of course those are discussions about very particular renames ("African-American female composers" and "American female classical composers"), not discussions about a more general renaming. The last general discussion about changing "female" to "woman" in category names might have been this one in 2013, where the result was "no consensus; in general, users seem open to some case-by-case fixes." And interestingly, in both of those recent composer-related discussions, some people's rationale for supporting the rename was that children are unlikely to be composers, so that the issue with the word "women" not including girls would be moot. Of course, that's not the case with a "singer" category. Just to be clear, though, was this recent mass change of "female" to "women" in category names done without any discussion? Korny O'Near (talk) 13:58, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- Korny O'Near, see WP:EGRS - we are required to accept the self-identification of the subject's gender, it's not subject to consensus. The point of this discussion is to streamline the change and apply it more consistently. No one else has so far raised any objection to it. It is in fact by definition wrong to use "female/male" instead of "woman/man" for people except when discussing them in biological terms. That is literally the difference between sex and gender. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:27, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- Here's the explanation you gave on that page:
Comment - I don't have a dog in the category naming dispute at issue here, but did want to point out two principles that apply generally: (1) except where recent RS take a different approach (e.g., awards given pre-transition), WP uses the latest reliably sourced self-ID of BLP subjects to categorize them, and never any other principle of classification (e.g., sex assigned at birth); and (2) "women" and "female" are both, in the context of category names, labels for gender rather than sex (again with limited exceptions such as "women's reproductive health"). That is all. Newimpartial (talk) 01:25, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Knifegames: any further comment on this? Korny O'Near (talk) 01:23, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Proposed rework of "Fictional Characters with Multiple Personalities" category
It was suggested on the talk page for Gollum from The Lord of the Rings that the Category:Fictional characters with multiple personalities category is malformed in its current state and needs to be reworked to only include accurate depictions of dissociative identity disorder, with the characters who do not meet the real-world diagnostic criteria -- for example, the Hulk or Sam Raimi's iteration of the Green Goblin -- should be removed using the precedent set by Gollum -- whose removal was predicated on a 2004 psychology paper saying that Gollum can't have dissociative identity disorder due to his split personalities being aware of one another and capable of interacting with each other. 2001:569:F875:3D00:510C:3AC8:DC1:83AD (talk) 22:28, 27 September 2021 (UTC)