User talk:RevelationDirect/Archive 2023

Happy New Year, RevelationDirect!

Happy New Year!

RevelationDirect,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia:TOPTEN" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Wikipedia:TOPTEN and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 10 § Wikipedia:TOPTEN until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 20:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Boxing matches at Boardwalk Hall has been nominated for merging

Category:Boxing matches at Boardwalk Hall has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 16:12, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Boardwalk Hall has been nominated for deletion

Category:Boardwalk Hall has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 16:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop and revert, thanks

Please revert most of your edits removing honorees from named things. WP:SHAREDNAME would not apply to these (please reread the link). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:14, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll certainly pause while we work toward consensus. For background, there has been strong consensus in CFD that WP:SHAREDNAME applies to honorees for named things, see for instance here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. But in some cases, like Calhoun Community College, articles were placed in the parent biography categories even though they still are not defined by their namesake so I was removing some individually.

I was editing fast and may have made a mistake though. Was there are particular article of concern, @Randy Kryn:? - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your detailed reply. The categories that you link were categories grouped under a shared name ("Places named for Billy the Kid") but I don't think their results would apply to things named for an individual as an honoree being included in that individual's category ("Billy the Kid"). They seem similar but aren't (see things like named lunar or Martian craters which include the honorees category). Make sense? Randy Kryn (talk) 11:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If the consensus had been to move all the articles from the nominated categories up into the parent categories ("Billy the Kid Street" going from "Category:Places named for Billy the Kid" up to "Category:Billy the Kid"), the result of all those CFD discussions would have been "Upmerge". But they all ended in "Delete". - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The nominations themselves seem selective. There are many categories of things named for the honoree, the noms occurred at the whim of nominators who picked and chose among many possible other categories. Please consider using the highest possible examples, such as Armstrong (crater) being linked to Category:Neil Armstrong, or George Mason Memorial linked to Mason's category, as criteria for not removing such honoree category links. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:38, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If any similar categories should be nominated in CFD, please point them out to me so we can avoid WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS as I continue editing. I'm glad we agree on the 2nd example though since George Mason Memorial is purpose built specifically as a monument. - RevelationDirect (talk) 21:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you're very good with cats

and i've been wanting to work on PR cats for awhile but the project is so huge .. WP:PRUS .. oh, i'm no expert but I think we can find some models where the cats are set up correctly, ie. where the parent cat states Insular areas in the US or Territories of the US ... and that is quite fine for PR to be a subset / subcat of that. But not in cats where it says States in the US or in the US etc. 'cause PR is not a state nor 'in' the US. Thanks. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 21:03, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing WP:PRUS to my attention. I went back through the NRHP articles I updated in Puerto Rico and fixed quite a few other articles. (In the process I noticed that @Mercy11: had corrected a couple too.) The vast majority of United States categories will never have 5+ articles to justify a Category:Insular areas of the United States subcategory though, so I mostly moved them to Caribbean/North American/Global categories.

I wasn't aware of that local consensus and my going against it was totally inadvertent. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:23, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the future, it would be super helpful to consider moving the article to the right category since the Henry Klumb House belongs somewhere under the Category:Burned buildings and structures tree. (If you turn on WP:HOTCAT, this is a lot quicker.)

I'm just worried that missing categories will cause readers to have trouble finding Puerto Rican articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Agave species

A tag has been placed on Category:Agave species indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:Plantdrew#Category:Agave species. - RevelationDirect (talk) 23:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Award categories

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_30#Categories_of_recipients_of_orders_of_merit is a discussion you might want to contribute to, either pro or con. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou

I find your statements on the discussion of the various categories for migration from the British Empire to Transvaal Colony helpful. I did not intentionally create both these categories. I did not realize the other one already existed when I created the new one. I greatly appreciate what you said.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:11, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to work together! - RevelationDirect (talk) 22:21, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Barn!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thanks for having taken the time to soothe a fellow editor. Best regards, Thinker78 (talk) 04:00, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Small Emigration categories

I have found some emigration categories that currently exist with 1 article and were created in 2013. That is 10 years with just one article. I gave to admit that part of me thinks that part of the problem with the current nomination is that it is too large. If it was limtied either to categories of emigrants from a specific country, or immigrants to a specific country, it would be better. I know that would take more time but it would make it possible for people to talk more about the issues at hand. For example Emigrants from Algeria to Egypt is one of the nominated categories. It has one article, a bio of someone who lived in I believe the 16th-century, when he was actually moving within the Ottoman Empire so it seems odd to call him an emigrant at all. A few of the Azerbaijani categories only have topic articles on people of Azerbaijani descent in other categories. One editor was attacked for bringing up Liechenstein as an absurd case, but I belueve there is a Luechenstein category in the nomination.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:09, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

one of the 3 articles in Algerian emigrants to Israel was the son of people from Morocco, born in Algeria, but left when 6 months old and then spent about 7 or 8 years in France before going to Israel. I am thinking just having him in Algerian emigrants, Immigrants to France and immigrants to Israel is the most logical category scheme we could do. That would reduce the remaining Category to 2 entries.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:21, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The one article in Bolivian emigrants to Australia no where in the article says the subject was ever a national or resident of Bolivia. In fact twice in the article it calls her ethnically Bolivian. Is Bolivianess actually an ethnicity? I have my doubts, as I am unconvinced there is a,United States of America ethnicity. I could be wrong. Still assuming that Bolivian-Australian means the person was an immigrant goes against how such hyphenated designations are often used. Which is why we do not generally use then in categories, because they are ambiguous.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:37, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnpacklambert: Thanks for your thoughts. There are at least three issues here:

What Qualifies as a Defining Country: Your example is quite common, displaced people and stateless citizens often go through refugee camps in intermediate countries (where they may give birth to a child) before they end up in their (hopefully) final destination. On the other end of the spectrum, is Yul Brynner changing his country of record to reduce tax liabilities defining?
Whether Small Emigration Categories Should Exist: I thought we had a working consensus to wait until there were 5 articles but, given the current nom, the consensus may be more nuanced or maybe there just isn't one. On the ground these two concepts interact because small cats are vulnerable to emptying if 1 or 2 articles get removed.
Not Emptying Categories on Open CFD Noms: The collaborative process at CFD really requires that we have a stable categories so we are looking at the same thing and not talking past each other. Sometimes, category contents can be changed without disrupting CFD by disclosing the changes in the nom but that's an exception.

Practically, it just makes sense to hold off on changing a specific article's categorization until we know what categories we will have available to apply. (After the CFD nom closes, I think #1 is worth doubling back on to reach consensus, maybe at this WikiProject.) - RevelationDirect (talk)

Does this mean that editors who do find articles that would fir in any of the nominated categories and add them should put a notice of such? Also if 8t is clear to me someone was say an Australian Emigrant to Malaysia, not Eingapore, since they moved in 1964 before Malasia kicked out Singapore, can I at least at them to Malaysian emigrants to Singapore, even if I leave then in the Australian emigrants to Singapore Category as well. On another note, I have to admit I wish that there was a way to see what articles were added or taken away from categories over time.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
someone said there are just under 4,000 categories with emigrants to in the title. With roughly 100 places to emigrate from, there could be I think in the neighborhood of 10,000 categories, so we are at less than a third of potential categories. I think the potential numbers are higher than that. The scope of potential categories is really big.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:08, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fred Rose (politician) is currently in both Polish emigrants to Canada and Canadian emigrants to Poland. Does it make sense to call someone coming back to the place they were an original national of an immigrant?John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:15, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
2 of the 3 people in the Canadian emigrants to South Africa came there before South Africa was formed as a country. The 3rd layer went back to Canada and then to the US. I would argue none of them fit in a reasonable criteria for the category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:21, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Canadian emigrants to Sri Lanka has an article on a person who really moved from Canada to British Ceylon. I think a strong argument could be made that the article should not be in the current category at all. Which probably should only apply after Sri Lankan independece.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:25, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like Armando Navarrete Navarrete is the only article in Chilean emigrants to Honduras. The thing is he lived in the US a while between, and is Chilean emigrants to the United States. I really think he should just be in Chilean emigrants, Immigrants to the United States and Immigrants to Honduras.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:33, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If a category is nominated for elimination at CFD and you try and improve it and save it, why bother to do that work if you're not going to point out that improvement to get other editors to reconsider? But that's just my opinion; I haven't heard anyone else say that. Other editors definitely oppose emptying categories in CFD though (and they feel strongly). If you look at the list of empty categories, there are several emigration ones represented.

I'm participating in the emigration nominations because I share the view that the exception for "a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme" is when it completes otherwise well populated sets (like small state categories for Wyoming & Delaware or small national categories for Andorra and Nauru). I don't think it is "accepted" if there are scores of nearly empty categories.

At the article level, I mostly focus about historic buildings and awards though; I don't often edit biography articles or ones about migration. To a point, I'm OK with thinking out loud on my talk page, but I can't offer you that much insight into the specifics you're raising here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:04, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I have added back at least one article to all the categories I emptied over the last two days. I still think most if not all these articles do not fit the logical limitless of the categories at question. For a bit I thought I had found someone to add as a second article in Category:American emigrants to Tanzania, but like the current article she emigrated before Tanzania was formed.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Small categories

I am beginning to think that we need to bite the bullet and set an absolute minimum of size below which we will never allow any categories. I think for this purpose it might work to be 3. We could say, generally categories unless part of a small scheme can have 5 or more categories. When part of a large scheme they must have at least 3 categories, and if they exist for more than a week with keys than 3 categories they can be nominated for upmerger or other ways to solve the issue and the only acceptable argument to salve the category is to expand it beyond that size. We have cases where in either emigrants or immigrants none of the sub-cats for a particular country have more than 3 articles, in a few cases none of the subcategories have more than 2 articles, and in dome very rare cases none of the categories have any more than 1 article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:05, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think even I would go that far. If you look at Category:1940s establishments in Puerto Rico, there are 2 small subcats because WWII limited new things on the homefront, and I think it makes sense for readers to complete that set since it's otherwise well populated. What I find unhelpful for navigation is widespread smallcats, like with Category:College wrestling coaches in the United States.

A week ago, I thought I had a clear understanding of the working smallcat consensus at CFD but now I'm not so sure. Before I suggest any changes to smallcat, I'm going to take my own advice and see where the consensus moves with the unexpectedly controversial 6/13 nomination. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:16, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration Committee procedural assistance

Hello @Dreamy Jazz and Firefly: I request additional space at ArbComm to answer questions and respond briefly to new developments. I used up much of my existing word count on quotes from another party and describing a pretty complicated nomination. Most immediately, I would like to reply to @Barkeep49:'s question since I was pinged.

I defer to the committee on what, if any, word count extension is appropriate. - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:24, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RevelationDirect: You can have at least 1,000 words total. Apologies for the delay; we're working on a possible extension for all parties. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 12:37, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you; that's quite reasonable! - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:42, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SmallCat dispute case opened

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 4, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 12:55, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What a star

		The Categorisation Barnstar
		You are hereby commended (again) for preserving the work of others, by habitually making a list of an inappropriate category's current contents in a relevant article before nominating the category for deletion. – Fayenatic London 06:36, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed decision posted for the SmallCat dispute case

The proposed decision in the SmallCat dispute has been posted. You are invited to review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hello. Help improvements for acticle Akane Yamaguchi. Thanks you. 113.161.210.125 (talk) 02:13, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That biography is honestly outside my areas of expertise but the article already looks pretty developed. Good luck! RevelationDirect (talk) 02:20, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shinto architectural categories

I have been putting in the work of categorizing the major shinto shrines by their architectural styles. I noticed that my instinct on the categorization leads to circular categorization since for example Category:Taisha-zukuri goes into Category:Izumo Grand Shrine. Is there a specific thing to do here? My thought is to exclude the shrine category from the architectural category, but I am not sure. Most of the big ones are styles named after the first major shrine with the style Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 05:55, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Immanuelle: Keep in mind that I know a lot about American historic buildings and Wikipedia categorization but almost nothing about Shinto shrines so I'll take your word on how the architecture is named here. But that sounds very similar to an archaeology type site where they are named after the best or first discovered instance of that type of dig. If you want to add this to Wikipedia though, people don't take your word for it but require you to link to reliable sources that say something like "XYZ Shrine's architecture style is widely imitated and called XYX architecture" so you can create a WP:CATMAIN. From there, a category is only appropriate if reliable sources generally agree on which shrines follow that style. WP:BEFORECAT is always helpful but you might also want to look at WP:OC in order to avoid some of the issues being raised in WP:CFD. Good luck! - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:02, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Houses in Washington Parish, Louisiana

A tag has been placed on Category:Houses in Washington Parish, Louisiana indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:28, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Populated and removed tag. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Stables, Louisiana

A tag has been placed on Category:Stables, Louisiana indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:29, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, meant for for Stables, Louisiana; tagged as G7. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:58, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 22 § X in fiction X

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 22 § X in fiction X on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 16:33, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]