Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 December 26: Difference between revisions

Line 49: Line 49:

==== Category:Lists of portraits by subject ====

:”The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style=”color:red”>”’Please do not modify it.”'</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category’s [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.”

:”The result of the discussion was:” ”’Keep”’ [[User:Pppery|* Pppery *]] [[User talk:Pppery|<sub style=”color:#800000″>it has begun…</sub>]] 02:19, 10 January 2026 (UTC)<!– Template:Cfd top –>

:* ”’Propose merging”’ [[:Category:Lists of portraits by subject]] to [[:Category:Lists of portraits]]

:”’Nominator’s rationale:”’ ”’merge”’, the target is otherwise empty. [[User:Marcocapelle|Marcocapelle]] ([[User talk:Marcocapelle|talk]]) 17:48, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

*”’Keep/oppose.”’ [[List of self-portraits in the Uffizi Gallery]] was mistakenly filed in the child category instead of the parent category. I have corrected it. [[User talk:The_Nth_User|Care to differ or discuss with me?]] [[User:The_Nth_User|The N<sup>th</sup> User]] 20:56, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

*”’Keep”’. As always, please try to populate first. The target now has 6 pages plus the subcat. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 10:02, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

—-

:”The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <span style=”color:red”>”’Please do not modify it.”'</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category’s [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.”</div>

==== Category:Lawsuits against the Devil ====

December 26

Category:UANA Water Polo Cup

Nominator’s rationale: The competition has been rebranded. Maiō T. (talk) 13:32, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ruined castles in Syria

Nominator’s rationale: Underpopulation; it has one article and zero subcategories. Qasr Bardawil has no page, and I couldn’t find anything else to add. Care to differ or discuss with me? The N^th User 20:53, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of portraits by subject

Category:Lawsuits against the Devil

Nominator’s rationale: The category has 1 article that actually fits the category and 3 fictional stories that are not lawsuits against the devil. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:56, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:C Sharp programming language family

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 January 2#Category:C Sharp programming language family

Category:American black bears

Category:United States prison case law

Nominator’s rationale: Yes, it’s a mouthful compared to the current title. However, this case law applies to both prisons and jails after someone has been convicted of a crime. (The difference is that prisons only hold people sentenced for 365 days or more.) The fact that these cases are typically considered in connection to prisons is not actually defining. lethargilistic (talk) 07:33, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I think in common usage prison is used to include prisons and jails enough to just use prison. I am also pretty sure the common way to refer to this is prison law. There are lots of cases where things are called prison and jail is being included. If we must include jail just call it “prison and jail law” and do not use an obscure term.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:28, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I would oppose “prison and jail” as an alternative because these cases do not apply to pretrial detention in jails. The defining characteristic is that they are about the treatment of incarcerated people after they have been convicted. I’d also point out that advocating for incarcerated people is what is often called “prison law” or “prisoner law”; that’s a broader category of issues than just how the state is allowed to treat incarcerated people after conviction. lethargilistic (talk) 07:29, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now, there is no reason to make a distinction while Category:United States pretrial detention in jail case law only contains one article. Better merge that category into here. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:30, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That category explicitly does not apply to people who have been convicted. People who are not yet convicted have different constitutional rights than people who have been. lethargilistic (talk) 20:25, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have populated the pretrial category with some other examples that came to mind immediately. Bell v. Wolfish reminded me that, technically, all federal detention facilities are “prisons” with various sub-classifications and that the analog for the states’ “jail” as I used it above would be the feds borrowing a cell in a state jail or placing them in an “administrative facility”. Therefore, the proper name for Category:United States pretrial detention in jail case law should be “United States pretrial incarceration case law.” When I named these categories, I was not thinking about classification details particularly, so the current names really ought not be treated as pre-existing consensus. What we should be prioritizing is the WP:DEFINING distinction between them because that is what determines what rights apply. If these were merged, trying to separate the categories again at a later date would be very difficult because of the colloquial (and understandable) conflation between these two kinds of incarceration and the kinds of facilities that are used for them. lethargilistic (talk) 21:01, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

World War I tanks

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 January 2#World War I tanks

Category:Anti-LGBTQ law

Nominator’s rationale: All of the articles in this category (except the US one that contains content not about laws) simply duplicate the criminalization category (which is more broad than criminalization of sex acts). Any other legislation that might be deemed “anti-LGBT” would be better categorized under Category:LGBT-related legislation. (t · c) buIdhe 03:28, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As the category maker, my idea was similar to below that Anti-LGBT laws covers more then criminalization of homosexuality. I can agree to keep the criminalization of homosexuality articles just in that cat, and upmerge relevant ones from the UK /USA articles. But anti LGBT covers all the anti-trans bills and laws present in the past and in more recent waves of transphobia, plus it covers more general LGBT community stuff and not just homosexuality, such as the Hungary pride parade ban, etc. May i Suggest: Upmerge the USA and UK ones with actual law related things into the criminalization of homosexuality category if linked to that, remove the criminalization of homosexuality articles from the anti-lgbtq one, and then add/modify to include non-criminal of homosexuality ones into the anti-lgbtq one (like the anti-trans ones, etc). I can do those edits while i contine on my edits for this category in general (like sorting into appropriate country categories, moving articles/categories out that dont deal specifically with law/legislation) HighlandFacts (talk) 16:23, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HighlandFacts How to deal with laws that had both positive and negative impacts on LGBT rights, or those where it’s disputed if it’s antiLGBt or not?

I don’t think that laws can be separated entirely into “pro” and “anti” LGBT without FV, OR and VER issues. For example two articles in the category chosen at random (2022 Hungarian LGBTQ in education referendum, Article 365 of the Sri Lankan Penal Code) don’t claim that the law in question is anti-LGBT. (t · c) buIdhe 16:35, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is quite obvious that we do not need them both, but the title Category:Anti-LGBTQ law seems preferable as more accurate. If it isn’t about law then it does not belong in the tree of Category:LGBT-related legislation altogether. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:11, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marcocapelle, Criminalization is explicitly about laws (my comment is to indicate that it can include things like making it illegal to publicly identify as gay), and it’s more precise. Additionally, anti LGBT is not a good category because some laws have simultaneously expanded and reduced rights for LGBT people, not to mention potential pov issues if there is a dispute whether the law is anti LGBT or not. (t · c) buIdhe 14:57, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keeping two parallel categories, as suggested by User:HighlandFacts, does not sound like a very good idea to me, because of the large overlap between the two categories. But they have a good point that anti-transgender law and anti-LGBTQ law in general are better covered by the new title than by the old. Reverse merge for that reason. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:06, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Put into a subcategory relation: All articles in Category:Criminalization of homosexuality fit into Category:Anti-LGBTQ law, but the reverse is not universally true. The analog applies for in the United Kingdom. Care to differ or discuss with me? The N^th User 22:36, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]