Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories

See also: WT:CAT and WT:CFD

Category:Diamond League winners

The editor @Apple15367: has recently added this category to a large number of articles. Out of curiosity, and because I'd come across them misapplying (in good faith) another category, I had a look at some of these articles. They don't seem to mention the Diamond League, which is a complex of different athletics events. The two I looked at in detail don't even seem to mention the Diamond League component events in which the person was a winner.

I started to word a WP:CFD, but then realised that the category, which has existed since 2020, may not be inherently deletion-worthy, although I think that it is being misapplied. Athletics is not my natural habitat, so I'm asking categorisation geeks here for a view on this.

The text I had written before stopping the CfD nomination (I'd argued myself out of it) was:

This does not seem to be a useful category. I noticed it being added to a large number of articles recently. The Diamond League does not appear to be mentioned in their articles. Consider Pamela Dutkiewicz: yes, she is listed in 2018 Diamond League, but there is no mention in her article of the Diamond League or of the Birmingham 2018 British Grand Prix (athletics) event, within the Diamond League, corresponding to that table entry. Similarly Ihab Abdelrahmans article doesn't mention the 2014 Shanghai event, or the 2015 Doha and Rome events, or the 2016 Eugene event, which are the Diamond events in his "What links here", though it does have a Diamond League entry in his External Links. Perhaps someone has gone through the Diamond League events pages and added the category for all the names mentioned there, but is this sufficient? If a category is significant for a person, the relevant events should be mentioned on their page. Perhaps this is not so much a case for deletion of the category but for caution in its use?

Any views on the use, or existence, of this category? is it WP:Overcategorisation? Is there a relevant guideline? PamD 21:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

PS I am not Pamela Dutkiewicz: it's just that face with a list of names from which to pick an example I tend to gravitate towards similar names! (Just in case anyone wondered). PamD 21:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Category and Article Matching

Greetings. I have one question:

A few months ago, Edenvale, Gauteng was renamed to Edenvale, South Africa and Kempton Park, Gauteng was renamed to Kempton Park, South Africa. So, should I request for Category:People from Edenvale, Gauteng to be renamed to "Category:People from Edenvale, South Africa" & should I request for Category:Suburbs of Kempton Park, Gauteng to be renamed to "Category:Suburbs of Kempton Park, South Africa"? GeographicAccountant (talk) 19:16, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Biology-related category loop

I noticed a category loop. Specifically, Category:Primatology ⊂ Category:Biological anthropology ⊂ Category:Human biology ⊂ Category:Humans ⊂ Category:Hominina ⊂ Category:Hominini ⊂ Category:Homininae ⊂ Category:Hominidae ⊂ Category:Apes ⊂ Category:Primate taxonomy ⊂ Category:Primate taxa ⊂ Category:Primates ⊂ Category:Primatology ⊂ Category:Biological anthropology ⊂…, which has length twelve. (There are also overlapping loops, such as one using Category:Biological anthropology ⊂ Category:Anthropology ⊂ Category:Humans instead of Category:Biological anthropology ⊂ Category:Human biology ⊂ Category:Humans.) How shall we fix this? I personally favor changing Category:Primate taxonomy ⊂ Category:Primate taxa to Category:Primate taxonomy ⊃ Category:Primate taxa, but because the category loop is so long (twelve members), there are many other possibilities for others' consensus to settle on. Care to differ or discuss with me? The N^th User 20:07, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Shortcut index#CAT decapitalized

Check the discussion I started at Wikipedia talk:Shortcut index#CAT decapitalized. Web-julio (talk) 06:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Category:Maintenance categories

Would any contributors mind clarifying the purpose of this category with respect to Category:Wikipedia maintenance?

I understand that it contains categories of course, but is the intent for Category:Wikipedia maintenance to be emptied of categories? Or perhaps a catch-all category, while Category:Maintenance categories is for commonly useful maintenance categories (generally omitting technical ones like the 'Page displaying...' series)? Something else? Tule-hog (talk) 23:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Diplomats categories

I noticed we have a lot of over categorization in Diplomats categories, partly because many people in Fooian diplomats are also in multiple fooian Ambassadors to Boo, often for multiple boos. I posted something about 1 such case in which the 2 Fooian Ambassadors to Boo categories each only had 1 article, the person is in Fooian diplomats, so we could move from 2 1 article not helping navigation categories and 1 large Category in that case Ambassadors of Greece, Ambassadors to Brazil and Ambassadors to another country that I forget. I posted it on User Smasongarrison's talk page, so you can go there to see the exact details of what I think would nee to happen, it would require a CfD nomination, but I do not think we really need a person in 2 1 article categories. This got me thinking more broadly about how the ambassador and diplomat categories are organized. I discussed the matter with S. Mason Garrison and she thought it would be good to post about it somewhere that more would notice. I am about to posy that idea below.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:25, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

• The problem I noticed is that "Fooian diplomats" are including at least 3 things. 1-diplomats for foo. 2-diplomats who were nationals of foo who either gave up that nationality, or while still holding that nationality worked as diplomats for another country. 3-diplomats who are nationals of foo who work as diplomats for international organizations or non-national entities that employ diplomats, such as the United Nations, the European Union, etc. I believe we should create a "diplomats for foo" tree, in which we have Diplomats for the United States, Diplomats for Nigeria, Diplomats for Uganda, Diplomats for Nepal, Diplomats for France, Diplomats for Bulgaria, etc. I think "for" is better because "of" we usually use in a title, like "King of England", etc. Most of categories of that type are specific offices. We have some categories that use "in", however most diplomats do much of their work outside the home country (there are staff in the home country, although not often for their wole career), so in would be confusing and misleading. At the same time I think we should leave "French diplomats", "Ugandan diplomats" etc. to hold nationals of that country who were diplomats for international organizations. One example of the Later is Filip Grzegorzewski who was head of an EU cooperative office is a Polish national who worked as a diplomat, but is not a diplomat for Poland. I think these are 2 separate things. I also think the high rate of the Diplomats for x also being x nationals who are diplomats means we really should apply overlap cat rules and not place Diplomats for x in the x nationals who are diplomats Category for the same country. With the diplomats by city I would leave these under the diplomats by country. I would leave people in both say Diplomats for France and Diplomats from Paris. This is partly because in reviewing Diplomats from Krakow I realized a few were diplomats for Israel and 1 a diplomat for the Soviet Union, so there are several cases where people are defined by a city they were raised in which is not In the country they served as diplomats for. I am not sure if the intersection of city domeone is "from" and being a diplomat is defining, but that is a question others can take up independently. I think we would then make "Ambassafors of x" a diffusing sib-cat of "Diplomats for x" so that anyone is "Ambassadors of Brazil" would not also be in "Diplomats for Brazil".John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  Alternately if we really think the 4 entries in Brazilian Ambassadors to Uruguay are enough to keep the category, we could either just have him stay in Brazilian Ambassadors to Uruguay and Ambassadors to Venezuela. I really do not think we should have so many 1 article Fooian ambassadors to Boo categories. We have hundreds if not thousands 1 article categories of that form (some of which the 1 article is a list of fooian Ambassadors to boo). The last few upmerge proposals for such categories have succeeded,but there are so many 1 article categories of that type no one seems to want to do it. Is there any way we could at least stop the creation of new 1 article fooian Ambassadors to Boo categories, or at least make it so the creation of new such categories would require discussion to show that there is support to create such a narrow intersection category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

• Finding articles where we could do the merging to Ambassafors of x, Ambassadors to y, Ambassadors to z, and keep the sane number of categories is like shooting fish in a barrel. Leonel Martiniano de Alencar, 1st Baron of Alencar is currently in Brazilian diplomats, 1 Brazilinan ambassadors cat with only him, and 1 Brazilian ambassadors cat with 4 articles. When you have under 5 articles in a category its aid to navigation is minimal. So if we upmerged him while diffusing we could get to Ambassadors of Brazil, and then Ambassadors to for the 2 countries he was assigned to.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
• I just realized we have a whole United Nations officials by nationality tree. This would make sense to make a sub-cat of Diplomats by nationality, but are a very different thing than would be coveted by Diplomats by country of origin. That is patterned after Ambassadors by country of origin. I think "sending country" or "country served" would be a much better name. "Country of origin" might be misread as country of birth, but some percentage of both Ambassadors and Diplomats serve as agents to a country they become nationals of long after birth (a few may not even be actual nationals of the country they serve). This US probably most pronounced with Pakstani and Israeli diplomats and Ambassadors, but I am sure happens with other countries as well.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Women diplomats and women ambassadors

Do we really need both these categories? I think the intersection of being a diplomat and being a woman is defining. Having the women ambassadors cat makes last rung issues more likely. It also leads to overcatehorization and small categories. The Brazilian woman diplomats cat has 6 articles, the Brazilian women ambassadors category 4. 2 articles are in both, so we have 2 categories for a tree that has 10 entries. This seems excessive. I think women diplomats is enough and we do not need the additional woman ambassadors categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

I think the only way to justify having the women ambassadors tree is of we had other sub-cats of women diplomats. Another might be women consuls. I have doubts that we could create a reliable sourced article on that is more than a list. Considering how small the consuls Category is I have doubts we could really create divide women consuls by many nationalities. I really think women diplomats is the only set of categories we need. At present out diplomats tree may well have more total categories than total articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:34, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Major issue with overly small Ambassadors of x to y categories

This is one of the most widespread cases of narrow Category rules being ignored. Just in Ambassadors of Brazil 26 of the 62 sub-cats have 1 article, several more only have 2. Lots of people were Ambassadors to multiple countries so I am not sure that upmerging those 26 1 article categories would even add 26 more people to the parent category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:04, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

On further review Sérgio Arruda is in 4 1 article ambassador categories (and 1 2 article one) so a full upmerge of the 26 1 article Ambassadors of Brazil categories would at most at 23 articles to the parent category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

• Jorge D'Escragnolle Taunay is in 7 ambassador categories. Some of these involve multiple postings at once. I an not sure his non-resident postings are even defining. 6 of them he is the only entry in the category. So I think this reduces to 18 the number of articles we would add to Ambassadors of Brazil by upmerging.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:10, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  With Sérgio de Queiroz Duarte bring in 2 catehories with 1 article, that takes us down to 17.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  Maria Edileuza Fontenele Reis is in a further 2 1 article categories, so this move only covers 16 biographies.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Haron Amin

In the lead on the Biography of a living person Haron Amin we have a citation needed category for 3 of his ambassadorial assignments. Since this is a BLP we should remove uncired information. At least 2 of those categories he is the only person in. I do not want to unilaterally empty these categories, but it looks like it does need to be done. Having these narrow intersection categories makes normal editing difficult.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Pashtun diplomats

We have categories for Pashtun diplomats and even Pashtun ambassadors. We have no Diplomats by erhnicity category. I beliebe we previously deleted a similarly named category. We either need to create diplomats by ethnicity as a parent for this cstegory, or we should delete this category since it seems to be a type of category we previously decided was not justified.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Brito Sozinho

Brito Sozinho is an example of why categorizing Ambassadors by every country assigned is not a good idea. He has per his article been ambassador of Angola to 15 countries. He is currently in only 6 categories for being an ambassador, plus the Angolan diplomats Category. 5 of those categories He is the only article in, the 6th has 1 other article. I hope to at least convince people not to make any more categories. I think all 6 categories should be upmerged to Ambassadors of Angola. I think we should ask for sourcing that shows his serving in that country is really significant before we put him in any Ambassadors to categories. He is at present ambassador to 4 or 5 countries, so it is not clear that all are defining.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Ambassadors of Armenia

If I counted right thus Category has a total of 43 Biographical articles spread across 57 categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Do honorary consuls belong in diplomat categories at all?

On reviewing Diplomats categories I came across Patrick Bitature, a Ugandan businessman, in Category:Australian diplomats. This placement shows the diplomats categories as they currently exist are a hodge podge mix of by nationality and by country categorization. This one though I think is a step too far. Bitature is not an Australian National. He is also not an employee of the government of Australia. He holds the title "honorary consul". This is basically an award given by one country to nationals of another country, who may have helped with expanding trade, or they may want to help, or they just want to honor. It does not involve actually working as a diplomat in a concrete way. So it is not like normal consuls. I think it ends up being a non-defining award that does not conform to the over cat by award guidelines. It is not really a sign that someone was a diplomat, and so I do not think we should place people directly in diplomat categories. Even in the likely event we create Category:Diplomats for Australia, or a similar scope Category with a different name, I do not think we should place honorary consuls in that category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:20, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

We have a whole tree of honorary consuls. I guess I will shunt further article I find there. I do not think they should be placed in the diplomats by country tree. The regular consuls tree is not very developed. I will seek to add people to it as applicable as I go through the diplomats tree.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Ambassadors of the Bahamas

This category tree has 25 sub-cats with only 11 articles between them. There is no reason to have subdivided at all 11 articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:42, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Colonial officials

I think we should make a Colonial officials tree. Our current set up does not have anything quite like this. We either have categoriesimited to governors, etc. Or we have categories for either all residents of a Colony or all non-indigrnous residents. Someone who was a farmer in Kenya, a back woods trapper in Virginia or a sheep herder in New South Wales would bot count. However I think there is a need for this category. Especially since some colonial officials end up in the diplomats tree. The line is a little blurry at times, but I think we can distinguish the British Consul in Anywhere outside the British Empire from agents of British authority in Colonies. I am also not quite sure what to call these. Colonial officials of the British Empire or Colonial official for foo might he good choices. I think thus we would get Colonial officials of Japan or maybe Colonial officials for Japan. We do not care what nationality these people are, just that they act as government officials for the colonial government.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:26, 28 December 2024 (UTC)