Svoboda | Graniru | BBC Russia | Golosameriki | Facebook
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 22 to 42 days

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

Today's discussions and up to 7 days old

[edit]

See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All current discussions

Old CfD discussions

[edit]

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 8 to 21 days

Very old CfD discussions

[edit]

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 22 to 42 days

Very very old CfD discussions (earlier than the ones on this page)

[edit]

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 43 to 63 days

22 to 28 days old

[edit]

July 10

[edit]

Category:PAX (event)

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with only two articles. One the main topic, and the other a list. Now that is just redundant. Articles are also already located in "Penny Arcade (webcomic)" QuantumFoam66 (talk) 23:45, 10 July 2024 (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:Sephirot

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The corresponding article is titled 'Sefirot', which is also used throughout (most) of the related articles and on nav templates. Skyerise (talk) 21:21, 10 July 2024 (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:12th-century Arab historians

[edit]
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 to Category:12th-century historians of the medieval Islamic world. There is a lot going on here, and to be honest I am not sure why this was relisted three times. I think that the first relist was good, but there was consensus afterwards the second week for a regular-direction merge. I will trout Self-trout myself for not tagging Category:12th-century historians of the medieval Islamic world. Anyways, with that paperwork out of the way: there is clear consensus that the category should not exist, and after six weeks it is time for this WP:BARTENDER to make a decision. Merging as proposed seems the best outcome as it has both majority support and is the easiest for further refinement in a subsequent nomination of Category:12th-century historians of the medieval Islamic world. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Isolated category. Upmerge to 12th-century historians of the medieval Islamic world Mason (talk) 17:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on reverse merging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:50, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus on direction of merging.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:26, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:20, 10 July 2024 (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:Former Premier League clubs

[edit]
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: keep and populate. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 05:51, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Currently empty but, until just now, it had only Leeds United in it. A total of 51 clubs have played in the Premier League and all except Leeds were in Category:Premier League clubs. Has someone been having a laugh? If the PLC category is meant to hold all 51 clubs, then FPLC is redundant. On the other hand, keeping FPLC will mean seasonal updates in both categories which no one will want to do. PearlyGigs (talk) 06:15, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There seems to be no set purpose for the Category:Association football clubs by former league and its subcats. Are we talking about defunct clubs, or about clubs that have gone upwards from an amateur league to a professional one, or about all promotions/relegations. Take Category:Former Highland Football League teams for example. This includes Aberdeen, whose first team never played in the league, although one of their reserve teams did. Then there are four other clubs currently in the SPFL, three former clubs which became entities of Caley Thistle, and three fully defunct clubs. What exactly is the scope of that category?
  • As for the FPLC category, it is obviously not being maintained and I doubt if it ever will be. I'd have thought that the scope of Category:Premier League clubs is clubs whose teams have played in the PL, even if for only one season back in the 1990s. Similarly, I would expect to find the likes of Cove Rangers in Category:Highland Football League teams, as well as in the SPFL category.
  • We have to remember that categories provide essential navigation for the readers and so their scope and purpose must be certain. The use of "former" in a category title is bound to confuse and mislead. Does it mean "defunct" (like Wimbledon), does it mean "once upon a time" (like Oldham), or does it mean "not at the moment" (like Leeds). PearlyGigs (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's an excellent point by Perspicax and I admit it didn't occur to me. I agree the proposed discussion is unnecessary within the context of this nomination. The question is whether relegated members of the PL, many of whom will eventually regain promotion, should be categorised as "former" or should be categorised as having played in the league. Remember that when I found Category:Former Premier League clubs, it contained Leeds only, so it was obviously not being maintained. Teterev53 did a partial population after this nomination was raised. PearlyGigs (talk) 08:08, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:17, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and repopulate per above discussion. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:44, 10 July 2024 (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:Blind sports people

[edit]
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 to Category:Blind sports. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete; I think the two categories are unrelated and all of the sportspeople with vision issues are in the second category. If kept then rename to "Category:Blind sportspeople" since there isn't a gap between "sports" and "people". Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:55, 10 July 2024 (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:Revolutionary Communist International

[edit]
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 back, then rename. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The Revolutionary Communist International already had a category under their old name and instead of moving it their current name, a new category was created instead. I believe this was a mistake because the new category doesn't have the old one's revision history. Charles Essie (talk) 16:57, 10 July 2024 (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:Dark music genres

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete vague category, undefinable. Similar difficulties were voiced at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darkness in music. Binksternet (talk) 16:26, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, WP:OR. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I would have expected this to be an extension of a main article called Dark music, which could provide some substance and, per nomination, actually define the concept. We could do with knowing the origin of the term, which might help. PearlyGigs (talk) 21:43, 10 July 2024 (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:Australian cricket writers

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge; only "nationality category" in Cricket writers. One of them seems to be an organization or newspaper. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:01, 10 July 2024 (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:Martial arts writers

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge with parent category (this is the only nationality category and its not needed as the category itself is small) and Purge any non-writers out. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom rationale. Let'srun (talk) 18:35, 10 July 2024 (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:New York City local newspapers, in print

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I don't understand the point of this category. They are newspapers published locally in NYC. I guess WP:OVERLAPCAT applies. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:25, 10 July 2024 (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.

Establishments in German cities by year

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 18#Establishments in German cities by year

Category:1838 establishments in Schleswig-Holstein

[edit]
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 merge as nominated. Further renaming can be the subject of its own discussion (pinging Marcocapelle and PearlyGigs in case either of them wish to do so). HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single-page category. More establishments in Schleswig-Holstein could probably be added, but year categories do not appear necessary. – Fayenatic London 11:27, 10 July 2024 (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:History of Nepal on film

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:43, 10 July 2024 (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:Establishments in the Mrauk-U Kingdom by century

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory and no siblings. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 10 July 2024 (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:Years of the 18th century in Great Britain

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 05:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, the category suggests that it is about the island of Great Britain (as it also contains the early 18th-century years in England and Scotland) but there aren't any sibling categories for the island, so this is merely confusing in relationship to the Kingdom of England (see below). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:57, 10 July 2024 (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:Years in Great Britain

[edit]
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 to Category:Years in the Kingdom of Great Britain. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content, this category contains the period starting in 1707, and per parent Category:Kingdom of Great Britain, and to make a clearer distinction versus Category:Years of the 18th century in Great Britain which also covers the earlier years in England and Scotland if we need that category at all. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:57, 10 July 2024 (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.

YearParamUsageCheck

[edit]
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 the first to Category:Time, date and calendar templates, delete the second, merge the third to Category:WikiProject Years, and rename the fourth as nominated. ✗plicit 12:51, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I recently WP:BOLDMOVEd {{YearParamUsageCheck}} to {{year parameter usage check}} per WP:TPN. Part of this is cleanup from that move, but some is cleanup for other reasons. Category:YearParamUsageCheck templates is unhelpful, because it only contains two templates (note that {{year parameter usage check}} and {{year parameter usage check/core}} are two parts of the same template). Interlinking in the see also is sufficient; the category can be merged to Category:Category header templates. Category:Templates using YearParamUsageCheck can be deleted – it only contains one template – {{year by category}} – plus its documentation and sandbox. Category:YearParamUsageCheck tracking categories‎ should be renamed to Category:Year parameter usage check tracking categories‎ to match the template's name. Finally, Category:Wikipedia YearParamUsageCheck can then be deleted, as it will only contain the newly-renamed Category:Year parameter usage check tracking categories‎. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:07, 10 July 2024 (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:Classical accordionists by nationality

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. This category layer is redudant Mason (talk) 00:16, 10 July 2024 (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.


July 9

[edit]

Religion in China Redux

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Religion in China Redux


Category:Horrid Henry characters

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The only article in the category is already present in Category:Horrid Henry, and is not centric on the character themselves. Could be made into a "character redirects to list" category, but it does not seem like there are enough redirects for that. (Oinkers42) (talk) 22:43, 9 July 2024 (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:Nexter Systems

[edit]
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. This does not qualify for C2D as the move was not a result of a RM. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with article name per WP:C2D. Have moved article to match subject company's new legal name, effective 8 April 2024 (see KNDS_France#cite_note-14). Huntthetroll (talk) 22:07, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: This category should match the article, which more importantly matches the current (as of 2024) official name of the extant organization. I have also prepared a CfD on Commons to change it there as well. Josh (talk) 23:13, 9 July 2024 (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.

EstcatCountry categories

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Tracking categories which are not actually used by the template in question, {{Establishment category in country}}. Delete. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 21:57, 9 July 2024 (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.


Eiei-year tracking categories

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I originally nominated these categories for C2D per {{Educational institutions establishment category by year}}, but these categories are not used by that template. Delete 'em all. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 21:48, 9 July 2024 (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:Models from London by borough

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:Models from London by borough

Category:First women admitted to degrees at Oxford

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:First women admitted to degrees at Oxford


Eponymous Formula One driver categories

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Included in this nomination are the following categories:
Nominator's rationale: These single-article (minus the eponymous article) Formula One driver eponymous categories are unnecessary per WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 05:34, 9 July 2024 (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.

Buildings and structures by decade 530s‎-990s

[edit]
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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: merge, in this period this is a redundant category layer with only occasional articles next to the religious buildings subcategory. The articles need to be moved manually because some of them are already in e.g. a fortifications by century subcategory or in an establishments by year subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:32, 9 July 2024 (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:Old style serif typefaces

[edit]
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: no consensus. ✗plicit 02:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's Rationale: In Vox-ATypI classification#Classicals, Old style serif typefaces can be categorized into 3 subclasses. All of these 3 subclasses has their own categories in French Wikipedia. However, only 2 out of 3 of those French Wikipedia categories has a corresponding category in English Wikipedia:
  1. Venetian (fr:Catégorie:Police d'écriture humane, currently corresponding to Category:Old style serif typefaces)
  2. Garalde (fr:Catégorie:Police d'écriture garalde, currently corresponding to newly-created Category:Garalde serif typefaces)
  3. Transitional (fr:Catégorie:Police d'écriture réale, currently corresponding to Category:Transitional serif typefaces)

I suggest that the Category:Old style serif typefaces be renamed to Category:Venetian serif typefaces. Also, I proposes that any articles that are already in both Category:Transitional serif typefaces and Category:Old style serif typefaces be removed from the Category:Old style serif typefaces (as it's redundant).Jothefiredragon🐲talk🐉edits 04:57, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:24, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:50, 9 July 2024 (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.

Mid-Ohio Conference football templates

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Mid-Ohio Conference football templates

Category:Registrars of the Order of the Garter

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:Registrars of the Order of the Garter

Category:History of Malaysia since Independence

[edit]
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 to Category:History of Malaysia (1963–present). (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 11:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per parent Category:Contemporary history by country that I just added. Else at least change "Independence" to "independence". Marcocapelle (talk) 08:25, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Spelling change - what might seem contemporary in some contexts may not be understood clearly as to the specific starting point is actually contemporary or not JarrahTree 08:38, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:History of Malaysia (1957–present). That matches most other categories in Category:Contemporary history by country. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:01, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more comments on the alt rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 10:41, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename target still needs to be decided upon.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:16, 9 July 2024 (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:Phobias

[edit]
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: split. No further action needs to be taken, as it has already been done. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category contains both anxiety disorders such as claustrophobia and forms of prejudice such as mormonophobia (a redirect to anti-Mormonism). I would like to remove the latter from this category and place them instead in (appropriate sub-categories of) Category:Prejudice and discrimination. gnu57 20:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The immediate proposal has been WP:BOLDly adopted (as it did not actually require a CFD to take place), but the D in CFD is for discussion and I am relisting so that User:Quantling's point can be discussed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it does not. There are some sources [1], but they are not WP:MEDRS. My very best wishes (talk) 15:10, 13 July 2024 (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:DVD interactive technology

[edit]
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: no consensus. There is weak consensus that the category should not exist in its current form, but I find there is no consensus either to delete or rename the category, possibly because the debate became bifurcated between these two options. Given that the CFD ran for over a month, it does not seem to me that a third relist will be productive, so I will instead say that there is no prejudice against speedy renomination.

I'm not a CFD regular so if I have punted any of the technical steps here please feel free to go ahead and fix them or bug me on my talk page (an idiot's guide would be appreciated). Stifle (talk) 08:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: More common name, I don't hear "DVD interactive technology" as often. Also, the original name omits the usage of "games". QuantumFoam66 (talk) 05:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:02, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:09, 9 July 2024 (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:Populated places disestablished in New Brunswick in 2023

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:Populated places disestablished in New Brunswick in 2023

Category:Hispanic and Latino American socialists

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between specific ethnicity and specific political orientation, per egrs Mason (talk) 00:05, 9 July 2024 (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.


July 8

[edit]

Category:Slavs by political orientation

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: redundant category that conflates nationalities with ethnicity Mason (talk) 23:49, 8 July 2024 (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:Critics of socialism

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping category Mason (talk) 23:45, 8 July 2024 (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:Constitutionalism

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 16#Category:Constitutionalism


Category:Jewish classical liberals

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need an intersection with ethnicity and liberal/tarians? This doesn't meet the criteria for EGRS as far as I can tell. And the parent of one of the cats was recently deleted/merged Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_June_3#Classical_liberals. Mason (talk) 23:38, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:03, 9 July 2024 (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:Acquired citizenship

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:Acquired citizenship

Category:District 1 of Zürich

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Same district Solidest (talk) 22:39, 8 July 2024 (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:Jazzland Records (1960) albums

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:Jazzland Records (1960) albums

Category:Fictional villains

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It is always correct to use the word "Villains" only in a fictional context. Such classification is not used in encyclopedias to characterize real humans. Solidest (talk) 22:08, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, it was already nominated for merge once Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 August 10#Category:Fictional villains, but AHI-3000 did a split again a year ago. Solidest (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2024 (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:Bangladesh–Bahrain relations

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicates. Solidest (talk) 18:46, 8 July 2024 (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:Boxing matches at Madison Square Garden

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 16#Category:Boxing matches at Madison Square Garden

Category:Bengali cinema

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:Bengali cinema

Category:Mughals

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This newly created category seems redundant with Category:Mughal Empire and it's many subcats. Gjs238 (talk) 14:13, 8 July 2024 (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:Jersey equestrians

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete "Jersey equestrians" and dual merge "Jersey male equestrians" per nom. Only one category layer and one article. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:30, 8 July 2024 (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:Baltic Germans

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:Baltic Germans

Category:Thai television series debuts by decade

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:Thai television series debuts by decade

Category:Cartoon Network Studios pilots and shorts

[edit]
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: split. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There isn't anything related between a short and a television pilot. This might mean there isn't enough content to justify both categories but that isn't a reason to create this unrelated category. Gonnym (talk) 06:44, 8 July 2024 (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:Public art by indigenous artists from the Americas

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation to related articles. There is no need to merge, the article is already in other subcategories of the parents. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:18, 8 July 2024 (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:Urban development in India

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 21:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: downmerge, no clear distinction, Urban development redirects to Urban planning and there is no tree for Category:Urban development by country. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as per nom. Gjs238 (talk) 14:06, 8 July 2024 (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.


July 7

[edit]

Category:Converts from atheism or agnosticism

[edit]
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: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 21:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge (or reverse merge), it is unclear how these two categories are different from each other. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support merge. I think that converts from FOO is supposed to model other religion converts categories. I'd be interested in anyone from the religion/athesist categories chiming in in case we're missing something. Mason (talk) 02:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's part of an overarching category sceme with a certain logic. Former Fooians can become converts to some other religion, e.g. Barism.
  • But if the new religion or lack thereof of the former Fooians cannot be determined, we cannot diffuse them to a subcategory called converts to Barism from Fooism.
  • Or, it may be that a former atheist or agnostic has embraced some form of theism, but not converted to a specific institutionalised or traditional form of it. Category:Converts from atheism or agnosticism is a containercat that currently only allows us to diffuse former atheists and agnostics as converts to Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism. But of course, those are far from the only options on the 'market', so to speak.
I think this indeterminacy, as well as lack of options to diffuse to, is what requires these categories to remain separate. (Honestly, I understand where the idea to merge them comes from, and I had to think for quite some time before figuring out why I had a hunch that it might not be a good idea, and writing this down haha). NLeeuw (talk) 17:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: A good example of a former Fooian whose current religion or lack thereof cannot be determined is Wesley Snipes. Raised as a Christian, converted to Islam, then left Islam, and we don't know what he considers himself these days. The default assumption may be that he is therefore an atheist or agnostic these days, but no RS says that, so such a conclusion is OR.
Similarly, there has been quite a lot of controversy around Antony Flew, a life-long atheist who appears to have embraced some form of theism just before he died and co-wrote a book titled There Is A God with a Christian. That Christian co-author has claimed that Flew converted to Christian theism just before he died, and that the book is "evidence" of Flew's wholehearted, sincere embrace of the Christian religion. Meanwhile, several atheists came out and called foul play, alleging that the co-author put words in Flew's mounth in order to construct a deathbed conversion story that is really convenient for propaganda purposes, and that Flew seems to have not embraced Christianity specifically, but a more general vague theism. Who can say? Flew is not there anymore now to explain. That's why he is in Category:Former atheists and agnostics, but not in Category:Converts to Christianity from atheism or agnosticism, as his religious views just prior to his death cannot be precisely determined, and thus diffused. NLeeuw (talk) 17:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose or widen the scope of the merge. The category Category:People by former religion has quite a few categories in it, including this one, of people by former religions or former non-religion. If we merge this one it would make sense to merge all of them. However, I feel like both categories are useful, as "Convert" categories show what they converted too, while the "Former" categories (which include the Converts as a subcat) are for those where the conversion "destination," for lack of a better word, is unknown. Relinus (talk) 15:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's also worth noting categories like Category:Converts to Christianity, or Category:Converts to Islam, etc. all have many subcategories named "Converts to ____ from ___" which include the subcategories of Category:Converts from atheism or agnosticism, namely Category:Converts to Buddhism from atheism or agnosticism‎, Category:Converts to Christianity from atheism or agnosticism, Category:Converts to Hinduism from atheism or agnosticism‎, Category:Converts to Islam from atheism or agnosticism, and Category:Converts to Judaism from atheism or agnosticism‎. It's not clear how this would be dealt with in the merge proposal. Relinus (talk) 15:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well said. You explain some of what I was trying to say better than I could. NLeeuw (talk) 17:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not understand the logic. Of course there are people who do not fit a "converts to" subcategory deeper in the tree. But how does it matter whether these people are in a general "converts" category or in a general "former" category? They are both general categories. In terms of widening the scope of the nomination, I am definitely planning to follow up with sibling categories if this goes ahead. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Because the discussion is on merging the convert/former categories into one category even though they are both needed for the reasons stated above, namely that, as you say, "there are people who do not fit a 'converts to' subcategory deeper in the tree" but who would still fit into the "former" category. Since every religion/non-religion has both a "former" category and a "convert" subcategory, removing one or both for only atheism/agnosticism doesn't make sense. You would need to do the same for all religions, ie. merging Category:Converts from Buddhism and Category:Former Buddhists, etc. (That was what I meant by widening the scope of the merge, however, I would actually oppose that too, since it doesn't make sense either.) Relinus (talk) 19:40, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Relinus: until your bracket we seem to agree. I already mentioned I will do a follow-up nomination for all religions if this goes ahead. I do not understand why within the brackets you suddenly jump to a different conclusion. Why doesn't that make sense either? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:24, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:13, 7 July 2024 (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:Jurists from Denmark–Norway

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 21:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining for the only person in here. Extremely small category with only 1 person, who doesn't have any mention of Denmark–Norway in the text. I urge the category creator to stop making categories that only have one person in them. Mason (talk) 22:38, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:58, 7 July 2024 (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:Arab businesspeople

[edit]
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: split as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 21:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Yet another Arab category that incorrectly conflates ethnicity with nationality. I am not opposed to the general notion of an Arab businesspeople category, but the current contents are only nationality subcategories and Khadija bint Khuwaylid. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Split per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:40, 8 July 2024 (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:Palestinian bedouins

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 16#Category:Palestinian bedouins

Category:Shrines dedicated to empress Jingū

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The "e" in "empress" needs to be in capital to bring consistency with the article on Empress Jingū. MOS:JOBTITLE can be used as a guide to determine when such titles need to be in upper case. Keivan.fTalk 20:51, 7 July 2024 (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:Urban development in Ethiopia

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory and there is no tree for Category:Urban development by country. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:35, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I had used Category:Urban development in India > Category:Urban planning in India as templates when creating these. Gjs238 (talk) 20:38, 7 July 2024 (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:Video games with expansion packs

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 16#Category:Video games with expansion packs

Category:Urban projects in Ethiopia

[edit]
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 to Category:Urban planning in Ethiopia. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No such category tree. Merge to Category:Urban planning in Ethiopia Gjs238 (talk) 20:18, 7 July 2024 (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:Brainwashing theory proponents

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 16#Category:Brainwashing theory proponents

Category:Bedouin businesspeople

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 16#Category:Bedouin businesspeople

Category:Video games based on Fantastic Four films

[edit]
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 to Category:Video games based on Marvel Comics films and Category:20th Century Studios video games. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT, it only contains two articles. Should also be merged into Category:Video games based on Marvel Comics films and Category:20th Century Studios video games. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:39, 7 July 2024 (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:Clone High characters

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article. Unopposed to a split if more come in the future. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:06, 7 July 2024 (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:S.L. Benfica (table tennis)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge No evidence that it can be expanded. Most other subcategories are similarly small and should also be merged. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:24, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding small siblings.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 20:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on GiantSnowman's proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 14:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mosques by decade 620s-970s

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, sparsely populated category tree, many decade categories do not exist at all, not the least because exact dates are often unknown. It will become a lot easier to navigate between mosques articles when they are moved to century level. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:03, 7 July 2024 (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:WikiProject Colonialism participants

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:35, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonialism was redirected and is no longer a project or task force. Gonnym (talk) 09:57, 7 July 2024 (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:WikiProject Dacia participants

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia:WikiProject Dacia was redirected and is no longer a project or task force. Gonnym (talk) 09:50, 7 July 2024 (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:Counts of Geneva

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 16#Category:Counts of Geneva


Category:Pioneers of Israel

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 15:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This seems like it could plausibly renamed, refocused, or deleted. Obviously it's a coherent group, but is it an encyclopedic one as it stands? Remsense诉 03:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Read the Encyclopedia of the Founders and Builders of Israel by David Tidhar. This category is a gold mine of information. It will help numerous people interested in studying the development of the state of Israel. These are the pioneers. Dag21902190 (talk) 03:19, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of the issue is that "pioneer" is generally a term of adulation. I think at a bare minimum, the name of the category needs to be changed in order to conform with our policy concerning neutral point of view. Remsense诉 03:22, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dag21902190 Another issue is you seem to be treating this category page like it's an article, which is not correct. Remsense诉 04:09, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categories are meant to have a summary explaining what is in the category. Dag21902190 (talk) 04:13, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, a one-sentence summary usually. Remsense诉 04:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pioneer has a definition, and just like the pioneers of America, these are the pioneers of Israel. It is not a term of adulation. It is a fact. Dag21902190 (talk) 04:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you cleanly define it in one sentence for me? Categories are meant to be fairly self-evident: if you need to write an article to fully flesh out your definition, it might not be a good category. It seems like you want to write a list article, which would need to stand up to our policies about verifiability, notability and neutral point of view. Your present prose does not, it is very much adulatory.Remsense诉 04:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
“Pioneers” are people who are among the first to explore or settle what becomes a new country or area. For example, a colonist/colonizer. Just because you interpret the term as adulation, doesn’t make it adulation. Best regards. I deleted the additional summary because of what you said. Dag21902190 (talk) 04:36, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you interpret the term as adulation, doesn’t make it adulation

Unfortunately that tends to be how language works, as we're talking about the connotations of language.
I don't quite understand your definition in any case, as none of the people in the category were among the first to explore or settle what is now Israel. Remsense诉 09:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know what a colonizer is? What do we call the first Europeans to settle and develop America? Were they the first people to explore or settle America? Obviously they weren’t. You cannot take a long-used term, and pretend it can’t be applied to the very thing it defines. I hate to break it to you, but you sound like an anti-Israel shill. I understand if English isn’t your first language, but just because you interpret the word “pioneer” as adulation, doesn’t mean it should be changed. Dag21902190 (talk) 13:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

“Pioneers” are people who are among the first to explore or settle what becomes a new country or area.

None of the people in the category were among the first to explore or settle what is now Israel. Your definition doesn't work, is my point.

just because you interpret the word “pioneer” as adulation, doesn’t mean it should be changed.

Correct: it should be changed because it's not just me. As a verb, pioneer absolutely has distinctly positive connotations; some related, more neutral verbs are colonize, settle, construct, and establish. The interplanetary space probe was named Pioneer 6 and not Colonizer 6 or Establisher 6 for a reason, I'm afraid. Remsense诉 20:57, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It’s very clear that you don’t want the word pioneer being used because you don’t view the early settlers in a positive light. I will maintain, despite your attempt to bring in the naming of a satellite, that pioneer is the correct word to be used. American pioneers weren’t the first to settle America, yet they are defined as pioneers. All you have to do is search up the definition of pioneer on Google, and the first two examples of synonyms are “colonist” and “colonizer”. Your interpretation of the English language does not, and should not, mean you can redefine a word, because you view it as adulation. Dag21902190 (talk) 21:07, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American pioneers weren’t the first to settle America, yet they are defined as pioneers

There's been plenty of ink spilled about how "pioneer" is also wrong in an American context for exactly the same reason. Academic use sharply declined as a result.
I also shouldn't have to ask you not to accuse me of behaving in bad faith without a lick of evidence, as I've given you no reason to assume my motives are anything but what I've already said they are: Wikipedia has content policies. Remsense诉 20:27, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Aaron Aaronsohn is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  2. Sarah Aaronsohn is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  3. Baruch Agadati is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  4. Gershon Agron is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  5. Israel Aharoni is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  6. Abba Ahimeir is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  7. Akiva Aryeh Weiss is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  8. Yigal Allon is in Category:Ashkenazi Jews from Ottoman Palestine
  9. Binyamin Amirà is in Category:Immigrants to Ottoman Palestine
  10. Divsha Amirà is in Category:Immigrants to Ottoman Palestine
  11. Zalman Aran is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  12. Meir Argov is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  13. Haim Ariav is in Category:Immigrants to Ottoman Palestine
  14. Yitzhak Arieli is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  15. Haim Arlosoroff is in Category:Jewish National Council members
  16. Ami Assaf is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  17. Daniel Auster is in Category:Jews from Mandatory Palestine
  18. Genia Averbuch is in Category:Immigrants to Ottoman Palestine
  • Comment Can the scope be simply defined first, before we consider if the category should be retitled, merged, or deleted? I think an issue with the term "pioneer" here is that it can be unclear and may be applied to many individuals that aren't intended. Kingsif (talk) 11:54, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Everyone here needs to take a deep breath. This is Wikipedia. Accusing people of anti-XYZ bias or destroying hard work is unproductive and does nothing to strengthen your point. With that out of the way, there is clear consensus that this category needs to change. Whether that change is in the form of deletion or not is to be determined (hence relisting), but if it is kept we need a defined scoped and potentially a better name.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 05:05, 7 July 2024 (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:12th-century Almohad caliphs

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Recommended by Nederlandse Leeuw (talk · contribs) in Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_June_11#Category:Government_of_the_Almohad_Caliphate:

Category:12th-century Almohad caliphs‎ (4 P) and Category:13th-century Almohad caliphs‎ (10 P) are probably best upmerged to Category:Almohad caliphs, and to Category:12th-century caliphs + Category:12th-century monarchs in Africa & Category:13th-century caliphs + Category:13th-century monarchs in Africa, respectively. A subdivision by century for a dynasty that lasted just under one century and a half tends not to aid navigation very much. But I suggest that for a follow-up.

–LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 12:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:06, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Triple merge. The important thing is that the Almohad caliph category includes these 14 entries and no others, and dividing that category further by 2 centuries doesn't seem necessary. JoeJShmo💌 10:12, 7 July 2024 (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:Green Party of England and Wales donors

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Donating to a political party is rarely if ever defining. There is only one article in the category. (t · c) buidhe 01:42, 7 July 2024 (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:18th century in Mozambique

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:18th century in Mozambique


July 6

[edit]

Category:Tourism in the Republic of Artsakh

[edit]
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: manual merge. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Because the Republic of Artsakh no longer exists, these categories should be merged into the present-day Azerbaijan. The top-level category should also be merged, as it also contains only the main article and one subcategory. It is possible that some of the pages are already elsewhere in the Azerbaijan categories — this would need to be checked manually. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:36, 6 July 2024 (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:Dobrujan Tatar

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Category:Dobrujan Tatar

Category:People from the Savoyard state

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Category:People from the Savoyard state

Category:EBU stubs

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Category:EBU stubs

Category:Film series characters originally introduced in a film

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category of dubious utility, created just to hold a single article. I have to assume that the intended distinction here was "film series characters originally introduced in a film vs. film series characters originally introduced in other source material that a film series was adapted from", because that's the only way this makes a lick of sense -- but that isn't a useful or defining distinction, and would be an utter nightmare to try to maintain since every film character who has an article at all would have to be in either this category or an "adapted medium" sibling. We have no other "film series characters originally introduced in [type of medium]" categories that I can find. Bearcat (talk) 21:03, 6 July 2024 (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:Named roads

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization on a non-defining and unmaintainable characteristic. The category's name itself is obviously silly, because nearly all roads that exist at all have names and the few roads without names are profoundly unlikely to be notable at all -- but the usage note on the category is far more specific, identifying the category as "about the roads that are named after famous personalities", which is just a straight-up violation of WP:SHAREDNAME, and still approaches indiscriminacy anyway since a lot of roads are named after people, with it becoming very subjective whether any given person is "famous" enough to categorize the road as "named after a famous person" or not. Bearcat (talk) 20:51, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:21, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The idea was to create a category for eponymous roads in India.Most of the roads in India follow a standard numbering system(like NH1,2 …; SH1,2… etc) .Roads are named after people only in few exceptional cases.So the idea was to create a category solely for eponymous roads in India.But if this seems to violate any Wikipedia policy you can delete it. Tmanthara (talk) 04:22, 7 July 2024 (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:Cricket administration in Mexico

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article in each of these categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:56, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Pichpich (talk) 22:08, 11 July 2024 (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:Cricket administration in Bermuda

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:00, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:26, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Pichpich (talk) 22:09, 11 July 2024 (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.

Organisations based in Macau

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Organisations based in Macau

Category:Independent film stubs

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Category:Independent film stubs

Category:Zimbabwean Queen's Counsel

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:49, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one category about the former country of Rhodesia. Since Zimbabwe isn't a Commonwealth Realm, this category won't have any articles in it. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:27, 6 July 2024 (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:Maltese Queen's Counsel

[edit]
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 to Category:20th-century King's Counsel. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge; only one article. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:26, 6 July 2024 (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:Sandžak

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Category:Sandžak

Template:Sex-documentary-film-stub

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:42, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Stub template of unclear utility. It's only used on three articles total, which obviously isn't enough to give it its own dedicated category -- so instead it just sorts the three articles directly into Category:Documentary film stubs, where it just represents duplicate categorization because all three films are also in the Category:1960s documentary film stubs subcategory alongside it, and Category:Sexuality stubs, which is too broad and overgeneralized to be a useful place to look for films. So all this is really adding is superfluous stub categories that the three films don't really need to be in. Bearcat (talk) 14:05, 6 July 2024 (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:Cricket administration in North America

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. It is sufficient to have Category:Cricket administration by country. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:57, 7 July 2024 (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:Former Muslims turned agnostics or atheists

[edit]
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: manual merge. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Parent is Category:Converts from Islam and the sibling category is Category:Converts to Islam from atheism or agnosticism Mason (talk) 03:10, 6 July 2024 (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:Recipients of the Irving G. Thalberg Memorial Award

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Delete per WP:OCAWARD Nayyn (talk) 02:09, 6 July 2024 (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:GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Comic Book winners

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Delete per WP:OCAWARD and as there is a list article already Nayyn (talk) 02:09, 6 July 2024 (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:Historical geography

[edit]
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: option 2. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:03, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't imagine that these are fundamentally different concepts. I have tagged both categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Option 2 Main article is Historical geography, while Geographic history redirects to History of geography. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding a representative sample of subcats to encourage further participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 09:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am going to tag all of the subcats; if there is no further participation I would expect this to be closed as option 2.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:22, 6 July 2024 (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.

Bengali–Assamese script

[edit]
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: partial merge as suggested by Marcocapelle. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:11, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is a single Bengali–Assamese script shared between the two languages, even though they use different alphabets. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:11, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong, there are multiple scripts for both languages (note the plural "scripts"), and the Bengali–Assamese script is one of these scripts used and shared by both languages (with minor differences), but there are other scripts (like Naoriya Phulo script). Look at the category content, they clearly cannot be merged as their listed scripts are not the same. They are not all the same single script. Only the Bengali-Assamese script (just named "Bengali script" in Unicode and also named "Eastern Nagari") is unified; the other scripts are distinct. As well within the "Bengali alphabet" and "Assamese alphabet" (which are relevant parts of the shared script specific to each language) are not the same (just like there are multiple Latin-base alphabets). verdy_p (talk) 02:21, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are only two articles about scripts in both categories, the rest has been added as a matter of loose association. Propose to move these two articles to the two parent categories and then delete the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:01, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:28, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:19, 6 July 2024 (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:Cricket organizations

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Serves no purpose, as the only contents are a subcat that is in the same parent cat as the category being discussed. Gjs238 (talk) 12:39, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:19, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Are Marcocapelle's changes sufficient to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:18, 6 July 2024 (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:Jesuit musicians

[edit]
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: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non defining intersection between occupation and religion Mason (talk) 23:52, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:16, 6 July 2024 (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:Films directed by Wayne Kramer (filmmaker)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Category:Films directed by Wayne Kramer (filmmaker)

Category:Buddhist monks from the Western Regions

[edit]
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: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, for English speaking readers of Wikipedia the term Central Asia is more familiar than Western Regions. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, as it is in effect a "former nationality" category. The article Western Regions refers to a historical period (up to 8th century CE) as well as a geographical range. All the current member pages are from that period, and renaming to "Central Asia" would lose this. "Western Regions" is named with reference to China, and its significance for Buddhism seems to be that Buddhist monks from this region took their texts into China during that period. – Fayenatic London 08:45, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:42, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:58, 6 July 2024 (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:Television series by Fox Television Animation

[edit]
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: split as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Given Fox Television Animation is a former name/entity of what is currently 20th Television Animation since 2020, I propose splitting up this category to differentiate the two eras of this studio's works. All of its productions from 1999 until 2020 should remain here, while any works made since the 2020 rebrand, I propose be moved to a new Category:Television series by 20th Television Animation. For series made under both, both cats ought to be present. The category as it is can be misleading with the cat name using the former "Fox" brand despite the description using the rebranded one under Disney. An example that supports this, as noted in the prior RfD here, is that we have separate cats at "Category:20th Century Fox films" and "Category:20th Century Studios films". That RfD suggested a split rather than a rename as initially proposed last November, but was closed with no consensus as no one else responded. Trailblazer101 (talk) 18:52, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:56, 6 July 2024 (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:Conscientious objector Medal of Honor recipients

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to parent categories per WP:NARROWCAT. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:43, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:55, 6 July 2024 (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:Whirly-Girls

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Category:Whirly-Girls

Category:Fictional illeists

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Category:Fictional illeists


July 5

[edit]

Category:Fransiscan Seminary Maua

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:42, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Inconsistent with any alumni categorization scheme. Gjs238 (talk) 20:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Couldn't this be renamed and added to the proper categories? Mason (talk) 22:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps if we knew of more than 1 notable alumni: Fransiscan Seminary Maua#Notable alumni. Gjs238 (talk) 00:49, 6 July 2024 (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:Teacher's Pet (TV series)

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:42, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only two articles. No good merge targets. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:27, 5 July 2024 (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:Zero-level elevation points

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 13#Category:Zero-level elevation points

Category:Athletes by location in Greece

[edit]
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 as nominated, but keep Category:Athletes by location in Greece. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:11, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge; only one category. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:52, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Category:Athletes by location in Greece, I've populated it so the nomination is no longer valid. Should do the same for the rest. --Habst (talk) 14:33, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Habst, if you can populate the rest as well, I will withdraw the nomination. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we populate the rest?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:48, 5 July 2024 (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:Historic buildings and structures in Ireland

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:44, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING (WP:SUBJECTIVECAT)
In addition to being subjective, these categories really haven't been used. The only loose articles are in the parent category which has two buildings and two former buildings (1, 2, 3, 4). I added more categories to all 4 to make it easier for readers to find them and the existing Irish and UK heritage register categories are a more defining and neutral way of grouping articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:28, 5 July 2024 (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.

Sportspeople and century categories

[edit]
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: no consensus for the 19th century categories (see WP:TRAINWRECK). There is no prejudice against speedy renomination, though individual discussions (or at least smaller discussions) would clearly be more productive. Delete the 20th and 21st century categories. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 04:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per a number of previous CfDs (e.g. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_12#20th/21st-century_sportspeople), organizing sportspersons by century is seen as not helpful. At the end of that discussion, someone proposed that more of these categories should be subsequently nominated, but I don't believe that has happened, so I am doing so now. I am bundling a number of categories together and I think the dynamics of them are generally all the same, but note that I have excluded Category:20th-century sailors, which seems to have naval officers mixed into it; the bizarre subcategories of Category:20th-century English cricketers, which seems to merit its own nomination; and some of these ethnic/national categories like Category:Czechoslovak sportspeople who only existed in the 20th-century, but I don't think these should be deleted, as they are clearly part of a different scheme. There are also similar schemes for chess and Go, which I've left alone as they are more extensive and not actually sports, so it introduces noise about including them in any sports-related category. From what I see, this will not leave any orphan categories or something that cannot be logically navigated from another scheme and for what it's worth, I created at least one of these and think they should all go. Lastly, I of course have no prejudice against listifying some of these, but I'll leave that up to anyone who feels particularly motivated to do it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:02, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per request, I am pinging anyone I've seen participating in previous discussions, including some that were deletes on some of the above categories and someone saw fit to recreate, such as Category:20th-century cricketers which was recreated by User:Smasongarrison without any apparent consensus to un-delete, but said user can tell us below if there was and I've missed it. Please inform us why you recreated this deleted material. Any omissions are accidents, except in the case of deceased users (RIP). ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fayenatic london, BrownHairedGirl, Good Olfactory, Autarch, Debresser, Explicit, Johnbod, Oculi, Mayumashu, Alansohn, Neonblak, Bradjamesbrown, Black Falcon, Davshul, Djsasso, Resolute, Ravenswing, RGTraynor, Pparazorback, RandySavageFTW, PeeJay, PeeJay2K3, DoubleBlue, Necrothesp, David Eppstein, Lugnuts, Grutness, Peterkingiron, Icarusgeek, Hugo999, Omnis Scientia, Deltaspace42, Marcocapelle, Joseph2302, Qwerfjkl, ForsythiaJo, Bearcat, and Place Clichy: ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per request, here are some relevant CfDs re: sportspersons and by-century categories. Any omissions are purely ignorance on my part. Other users please do inform me if there are relevant CfDs on this topic that I've missed. As I noted above, there is a broad consensus against these in most, if not all, cases, and some users have seen fit to recreate categories where there was an explicit consensus to delete them.
―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The 19th century categories aren't modern, and have numerous recent CFDs in support of keeping them Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 25#Category:19th-century tennis players, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_January_10#Category:19th-century_referees_and_umpires. You also omitted several more recent CFDs, including this one I pointed out Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 29#Category:20th-century sportspeople by nationality. The goal of these categories is to keep the many century category clear. Please tag the participants from those CFDs.Mason (talk) 01:16, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So keep what? All of them? Just the 19th-century ones? The triple intersections of century, nationality, and sport such as Category:20th-century English cricketers? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't misgender me. For the record, I remade the parent category for cricketers because the nationality subcategories existed, and had existed for quiet sometime. Mason (talk) 01:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have amended the above, so pardon me for the gender-neutral pronoun usage. Maybe I was unclear: you saw that there was consensus to delete the category and yet you recreated it. Was there some consensus to recreate it that I didn't know about or did you just personally decide that even though you knew there was consensus to delete it, you would recreate it anyway without any consensus to do so? Please also actually answer the questions I asked so I know what your !vote is. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have already answered you question in regards to why I recreated the category: "I remade the parent category for cricketers because the nationality subcategories existed, and had existed for quiet sometime". That combined with the recent Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 29#Category:20th-century sportspeople by nationality, which I had also provided you, indicated that opinions might have shifted. I think that this mass nomination is a mess, and should not have been bundled. I am voting keep on procedural grounds. There are way too many different components happening here, there is no way to have a considered conversation. Further many of these deletions will isolate people/categories that have been diffused here to keep other categories organized. Mason (talk) 22:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. From what little I can recall, my rationale in creating this category was that baseball was a very different game in the 19th century and it was very useful to have a separate category for a relatively small subset of baseball players. Gamaliel (talk) 03:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, are you !voting to keep all or just 19th-century baseball ones? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just the 19th century. I don't do enough work in sports articles to properly gauge the usefulness of 20th century categories. Gamaliel (talk) 14:27, 5 July 2024 (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:Ardit Sadiku

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redudant category layer. There's not even a epon page for this category. Ardit Sadiku Mason (talk) 00:20, 5 July 2024 (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:20th-century Nepalese film directors

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:38, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Modern occupations aren't diffused by century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_March_2#Film_directors_by_century Mason (talk) 00:17, 5 July 2024 (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.


July 4

[edit]

Category:Golden Piton winners

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: wp:OCAWARD — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nayyn (talk • contribs) 23:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an example of how WP:OCAWARD is being interpreted by CfD incredibly narrowly. It is clearly a useful category for those interested in mountaineering / climbing, and defining to those who are in this sport. The same arguments made by Aszx5000 above could be made for a number of other award categories that have been removed by CfD for the rationale WP:OCAWARD. The benefits to those reading Wikipedia and learning from the site about these topics far outweigh the possible "harm" supposedly caused by the existence of this category as per WP:OCAWARD. Nayyn (talk) 01:17, 6 July 2024 (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:Gilgit-Baltistan stubs

[edit]
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: implement Marcocapelle's proposal. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:12, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete or merge, poorly populated stub category and we do not have any similar Pakistani province stub categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:34, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle: what do you envision happening with the stub templates in the category? (For ease of reference, they are {{GilgitBaltistan-sport-stub}}, {{GilgitBaltistan-edu-stub}}, and {{GilgitBaltistan-stub}}.) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:36, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for input on Marcocapelle's updated proposal. If there is no further participation; I would close this as rename.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 14:36, 4 July 2024 (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:Tourist attractions in Ontario, California

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Does not aid navigation with only 1 article. User:Namiba 14:13, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:03, 4 July 2024 (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:9th-century biologists

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Isolated category. Upmerge for now. Most of the people in the category aren't defined as being biologists. Mason (talk) 13:39, 4 July 2024 (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:British place-names containing Brittonic */kɛːt/

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, not a defining characteristic of these places. By all means mention these four as examples in a language article. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, fair enough. I created this category, but I see your point. I'll make a list article :-) Alarichall (talk) 22:54, 5 July 2024 (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.

Decades in (Portuguese) Mozambique

[edit]
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: option A with FL's additional proposals. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:31, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Option A
Option B
Nominator's rationale: merge or reverse merge, these are clearly duplicate decade categories. In option A the 20th century categories should follow in tandem. I have a weak preference for option A, "Portuguese" is an unnecessary addition because it was Portuguese until 1973 by implication. Also, at least in the 20th century, Portuguese Mozambique covered about the same area as the current republic (that was very different in earlier centuries though). If this goes ahead one way or the other then presumably establishments and disestablishments subcategories may be speedied per C2C. This is follow-up on a discussion with User:Fayenatic london. I will tag both sets of categories. See also yesterday's pre-20th century nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:26, 4 July 2024 (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:Tourism in Faisalabad

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:18, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:00, 4 July 2024 (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:History of Malaya

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, the category seems to be about the Federation of Malaya. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 10:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:39, 4 July 2024 (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:Mongol states

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 11#Category:Mongol states

Category:Baseball players from Ames, Iowa

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 12#Category:Baseball players from Ames, Iowa

Category:Fictional chimney sweepers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Most articles in here are works of media, which don't belong here anyway, while the one character that does can be merged to Category:Fictional domestic workers. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:36, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on renaming?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 15:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same question: thoughts on renaming?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

29 to 35 days old

[edit]

July 3

[edit]

Category:British co-ed groups

[edit]
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 to Category:British mixed-gender vocal pop groups. No consensus regarding whether this should continue to exist. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "British co-ed groups" simply do not exist, featuring an American term that makes no sense in a British context. Sources discussing mixed-sex British pop groups never describe them this way. Category, if kept, should be renamed to something that can be supported by sources. Escape Orbit (Talk) 11:19, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As Marcocapelle asks, is it defining?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Escape Orbit: do you have thoughts on the alternative rename proposed above? HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hiddenstranger's suggestion of Category:British mixed-gender vocal pop groups seems like a better one to my alternative name. Although Marcocapelle makes a good question. The number of groups that this defines must be very small. Escape Orbit (Talk) 12:20, 11 July 2024 (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:3rd century in Africa (Roman province)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:3rd century in Africa (Roman province)

Category:Family of Boris Johnson

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 11#Category:Family of Boris Johnson

16th to 19th century in (Portuguese) Mozambique

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 11#16th to 19th century in (Portuguese) Mozambique

Category:Commercial photographers

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining type of artist. there's no commercial artist category Mason (talk) 20:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not sure what this category is for... Here's the first sentence of one of the articles, Tom Hussey (photographer): Tom Hussey is an American photographer specialising in commercial advertising and lifestyle photography. Maybe there's a better way to categorize these people. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:01, 4 July 2024 (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:Pro-Confederate clergy

[edit]
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 to Category:19th-century American clergy. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between occupation and political orientation. This category is not the same as Category: Confederate States Army chaplains‎ Mason (talk) 13:29, 3 July 2024 (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:Czechoslovakian Wikipedians

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:51, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Contains only subcat Wikipedians from Czechoslovakia, which can go directly in the parent categories. Presumably the subcat should not be renamed to Czechoslovak Wikipedians, as that would be an anachronism. – Fayenatic London 10:07, 3 July 2024 (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:Works about villains

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 11#Category:Works about villains

Category:Transit authorities with natural gas buses

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:51, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is not a useful category - the type of fuel used by an agency's buses is not a defining characteristic of those agencies. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This is so oviously WP:OCTRIVIA. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:26, 4 July 2024 (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:Deep Space Network

[edit]
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 to Category:Deep space networks. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The category was originally created for the NASA Deep Space Network. Expansion to "the deep space networks of all countries and organizations" was made explicit in 2013, but the category has never yet been renamed. Nurg (talk) 05:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestion perhaps rename to Category:Space networks. This could extend to 'near space' networks such as Near Earth Network and LEGS. The category is not overwhelmingly large, and the near space networks are likely of interest to the same readers. LouScheffer (talk) 17:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Lou. I am happy for it to be expanded to include 'near space' networks, as it seems there is no category specifically for them currently. Nurg (talk) 23:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The proposed name is a more accurate description. LouScheffer (talk) 15:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. We don't have a main article, but this is a good description of these topics. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:06, 4 July 2024 (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:Argentine commanders in the Falklands War

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The single article in the category isn't a commander. Gonnym (talk) 17:50, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's (semi-)proposal to populate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:29, 3 July 2024 (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.


July 2

[edit]

Religion in China Redux

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 9#Religion in China Redux


Category:Colonial Puerto Rico

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename in accordance with the category description, it only refers to the Spanish colonial period, not to the American period which can (especially in the beginning) can be regarded as colonial too. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:28, 2 July 2024 (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:Hijacked journals

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:Hijacked journals

Category:Hieronymus Praetorius scholars

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This cat was created with the sole purpose of being added to the categories of musicologist Jeffery T. Kite-Powell (same user created the cat & expanded the Kite-Powell article). I'm afraid that Hieronymus Praetorius is so impossibly niche that there are probably less than three "Hieronymus Praetorius scholars" in human history. Aza24 (talk) 19:25, 2 July 2024 (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:Tracker musicians

[edit]
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 to Category:Chiptune and tracker musicians. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Tracker software is commonly used to create chiptunes, such that there is a very significant overlap between the two categories. Given the mostly overlapping and duplicative nature of the categories, a merge seems warranted. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:13, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:44, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:15, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also tagging Chiptune musicians.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 19:03, 2 July 2024 (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:WikiProject assessment categories needing attention

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:WikiProject assessment categories needing attention

Category:MEPs from Italy 2024–2029

[edit]
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: speedy delete. CSD G7 Liz Read! Talk! 18:09, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Created by self in error. PatGallacher (talk) 17:04, 2 July 2024 (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:2024 in professional wrestling in Massachusetts

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:05, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 article. The sole article is already in Category:2024 in Boston so no further merging is needed. User:Namiba 16:36, 2 July 2024 (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:Patrons of Romantic artists

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining category. People are patrons of whatever era of artists they happen to be alive during Mason (talk) 12:20, 2 July 2024 (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:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's employers and patrons

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename the cat to make what's happening a tad clearer. We tend to avoid possessives Mason (talk) 12:17, 2 July 2024 (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:Destroyed Hindu temples

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom Mason (talk) 12:18, 2 July 2024 (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:Military history of Australia during the Korean War

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer, the parent category of each is nearly empty. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:42, 2 July 2024 (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:National military histories by war

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:National military histories by war

Category:Beauty pageant controversies

[edit]
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: purge biographies with no consensus on whether this category should continue to exist. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Most of the contents of this category are people, not events. Describing people as "controversies" simply because they've attracted some sort of negative media attention during their career - or, in some cases, for no evident reason at all - seems inappropriate and potentially a BLP concern. Omphalographer (talk) 04:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on purging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:41, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well I favour purging, but 4 items is barely viable for a category, although there is no absolute minimum. NLeeuw (talk) 04:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am going to relist a further time, but my current thoughts on consensus is that everyone in this discussion agrees that BLPs should not be in the category – the real debate is whether those four pages should be in the category. That is a long way of saying: if there is no further participation in a week, I would personally close this as purge with not consensus on whether the category should exist or not..
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:44, 2 July 2024 (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:Timelines of video games

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:57, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category has become redundant. Judging by the titles of articles, none of them are "Timelines", except for a single article that is "Timeline of arcade video games", so if we categorized stuff correctly, we would get a category with only one article. It also overlaps almost entirely with the other category "Video game lists by genre".

The Persian and Malay versions of this category only have subcats btw, which isn't a good thing. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 00:11, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per QuantumFoam66. Of the articles they removed, Timeline of arcade video game history is the only one that is a timeline, and List of games using procedural generation is in Category:Video game lists by technology or feature. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:24, 3 July 2024 (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.


July 1

[edit]

Battles in Spain 3

[edit]
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 to Category:Military history of Spain by autonomous community. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 9#Battles in Spain 1 and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 10#Battles in Spain 2. NLeeuw (talk) 18:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:54, 1 July 2024 (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:Tourism in Murree

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: One entry Hasbers (talk) 15:29, 1 July 2024 (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:Public universities in Punjab, Pakistan

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I think this is a duplicate category. Hasbers (talk) 15:26, 1 July 2024 (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:Regional prejudice

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 1-article recently created category. Category:Prejudice and discrimination not organized this way. Gjs238 (talk) 11:46, 1 July 2024 (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:Sports venues by former country

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We don't categorize other buildings and structures by former country, even if they no longer existed when that country was dissolved. No merger is likely necessary, as all contents are likely in present-day countries. Two of the Serbia and Montenegro categories were deleted at Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_June_7#Category:Football_venues_in_Serbia_and_Montenegro. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:34, 1 July 2024 (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:DVD interactive technology

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 9#Category:DVD interactive technology


June 30

[edit]

Category:20th-century Indigenous Mexican painters

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duel upmerge for now. This is an isolated category without a real need to diffuse by century Mason (talk) 23:44, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The first merge target contains only 5 articles total. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:43, 1 July 2024 (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:High-technology

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: High-tech is a hard thing to define precisely, so the inclusion criteria for this category are vague and subjective. For instance, the category contains Science and technology in Israel but not Science and technology in Country XYZ. I don't think we need Category:High-technology as a subcat of Category:Science and technology as this would just isolate a handful of pages in a subcategory without providing a meaningful help to readers. Pichpich (talk) 22:35, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Possible tendentious pro-Israel bias on behalf of creator, such as in this category, at recent edits to High tech, and in Talk:Gaza_Strip_famine#Requested_move_24_June_2024. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:41, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, apologies for the misunderstanding. You have my consent to delete. O.maximov (talk) 11:05, 2 July 2024 (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:Religious parodies and satires

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "satires" is not a proper form of the word satire. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 21:51, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Satires is a valid plural, but no other category title uses this word. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:43, 1 July 2024 (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:Sam Smith (singer)

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:TOPICCAT - originally nominated at /Speedy for WP:C2D but it doesn't meet that criterion to the letter. --Ferien (talk) 21:14, 30 June 2024 (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:Registrars of the Order of the Garter

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 9#Category:Registrars of the Order of the Garter

Category:Defy TV affiliates

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Speedy rename: Rebrand 7/1; article already exists Mvcg66b3r (talk) 17:21, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per primary-sourced statements in articles Defy TV and Ion Plus. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:46, 1 July 2024 (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:Madison Square Garden

[edit]
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: purge. I think everyone thus far would agree with Filbirigit's list. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE which explicitly mentions this category as an example of one which should be avoided "Likewise, avoid categorizing events by their hosting locations. Many notable locations (e.g. Madison Square Garden) have hosted so many sports events and conventions over time that categories listing all such events would not be readable." User:Namiba 14:17, 30 June 2024 (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:Puerto Rican people of African descent

[edit]
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. The article will be removed from the Yoruba category for lack of sourcing. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:39, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge; Only one article. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:36, 30 June 2024 (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:Members of the Fourth Aliyah

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 17#Category:Members of the Fourth Aliyah

Category:Buildings damaged by the 2023 Al Haouz earthquake

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: None of these buildings were outright destroyed by the earthquake. See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_August_20#Category:Buildings_and_structures_damaged_by_earthquakes. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:03, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:39, 30 June 2024 (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:Populated places disestablished in New Brunswick in 2023

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 9#Category:Populated places disestablished in New Brunswick in 2023


June 29

[edit]
[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with sister categories like Category:British historian stubs; also with others in Category:European museum stubs. All use nationality, not the name of the state. PearlyGigs (talk) 20:34, 29 June 2024 (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:United Kingdom museum stubs

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with sister categories like Category:British historian stubs; also with others in Category:European museum stubs. All use nationality, not the name of the state. PearlyGigs (talk) 20:33, 29 June 2024 (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:18th century in Mozambique

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 7#Category:18th century in Mozambique

Category:President of the Tanzania Episcopal Conference

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:39, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Badly named categories for the presidency of organizations. If kept, "president" would need to be pluralized to "presidents" in the case of the Tanzania Episcopal Conference and changed to chairmen (not "man") in the case of the Association of Member Episcopal Conferences in Eastern Africa, whose article ascribes its leaders (including the one person filed here) with chairmancy rather than presidency -- but every organization that exists does not automatically get one of these as a matter of course the moment one or two former leaders of it happen to have Wikipedia articles, so it's not clear that either of these categories are needed. Bearcat (talk) 18:19, 29 June 2024 (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:Acid Jazz singles

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:39, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename for clarity. This was created to hold singles released on a record label named Acid Jazz Records, but since acid jazz is also the name of a genre of music it's liable to be misunderstood if not named with the utmost clarity. Bearcat (talk) 18:06, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I support the renaming. It makes good sense.
Karl Twist (talk) 06:37, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom Gjs238 (talk) 22:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the renaming to Category:Acid Jazz Records singles.
Karl Twist (talk) 06:40, 6 July 2024 (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:Sophie, Duchess of Edinburgh

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:40, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category for a person, without the spinoff content needed to justify an eponymous category. Other than the eponym herself, the only other thing filed here is her husband -- but he's a member of the royal family by birth and she's only a member of the royal family by marriage, so he has an eponymous category because there's a lot of other stuff to file in it besides just their BLPs. And her status derives from being married to him rather than vice versa, so in the sense that's relevant to an encyclopedia he's much more of a defining characteristic of her article than she is of his — he's the reason she has an article at all, while his mother, not Sophie, is the reason he has one.
So this would be fine if there were at least four or five other things to file here besides just Edward and Sophie, but she doesn't automatically get one of these just because he has one, if their BLPs are the only things in it. Bearcat (talk) 17:56, 29 June 2024 (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:Hebrew Bible themes in art

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Johnbod pointed out (in this recent CFD and this one) that the topics painted in these cases are subjects, and the use of the word themes should be restricted to abstract topics such as love, death or war. The target for the Paintings category follows Category:Paintings based on the Bible, etc. – Fayenatic London 15:01, 29 June 2024 (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:Paintings illustrating the Song of Songs

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Following others within Category:Paintings based on literature. – Fayenatic London 15:05, 29 June 2024 (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:Vassal rulers of the Umayyad Caliphate

[edit]
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: keep. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 11:37, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 2 P. WP:ARBITRARYCAT. Just delete. Whether someone was a "vassal" or not can be quite arbitrary, and neither of the parent cats really applies: these princes of Armenia were not "people from the Umayyad Caliphate" or part of its government. At most, they were part of its foreign relations. As the catdesc indicates, these were not 'caliphal-appointed governors', and therefore not part of the internal governance. NLeeuw (talk) 15:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Vassal rulers are easily distinguished by the fact that they bore princely rather than gubernatorial titles and were usually hereditary and at least somewhat autonomous. They are also clearly designated as such by modern scholarship. Armenia was very much part of the Umayyad Caliphate, just as much as the Khanate of Khiva was of the Russian Empire or the various Indian princes were of the British Raj. Constantine ✍ 16:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, princes aren't necessarily vassals and it is not very clear from these articles that the subjects were in fact vassals. The articles are already in appropriate Armenian and monarchs categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:50, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Precisely, princes are not necessarily vassals; which means that they need to be distinguished when they are not, in fact, sovereign rulers, but rule at the mercy of an imperial power. Constantine ✍ 16:29, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Queen of Hearts talk 04:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Cplakidas: rule of the Umayyad Caliphate in Armenia was not firmly established in this period and Ashot II Bagratuni is mostly notable for fighting against the Umayyad Caliphate. I really don't think you can call them vassals. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree that having Ashot II in the category is probably not correct. But 'firm rule' is not a prerequisite of vassalage, indeed it is precisely because states can't or don't want to bother to establish firm rule that they establish vassal relationships (if we don't focus only on the European feudal vassal-liege relationship). The title of prince of princes could only be claimed by the backing of an imperial power, whether Byzantium or the Umayyads, from whose hands these Armenian rulers received their title, by definition becoming vassals of the imperial power. Some Armenian princes were able to exercise more or less autonomy, or shift from one patron to the other, exploiting temporary changes in the balance of power. That does not change the fact that they had a subordinate political relationship to an empire. Indeed this is no different to the exactly identical relationship they had with the Abbasid Caliphate, only that by that time Arab suzerainty was far more solidified than under the Umayyads. Constantine ✍ 12:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:12, 29 June 2024 (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:Whitewashing in film

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. Populated by tangentially related films and not articles from the main topic. Gotitbro (talk) 06:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: as I am not sure what you mean by “tangential” as all of the categorised films has an element of whitewashing that is discussed in Whitewashing in film article or mentioned in the film page itself using reliable sources. Take the film Khartoum (film), with blackface white actors which is discussed in the “Reception” section. It does not get more direct than that.
FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:26, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps should have worded that nomination better. What I meant was with categories such as these, the expectation is that there will be articles dedicated to the topic not articles mostly about films which only contain an element of the said cat.
I am coming at this from a recent discussion about a similar topic: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country. Gotitbro (talk) 15:28, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
but that is not the policy you have cited and the example you have cited is irrelevant as I said, these instances of whitewashing are discussed using reliable sources.
This is more like your personal preference and expectations which is not supported by policies. A Cat need to be a characteristic of the subject as described in reliable sources see WP:CATDEF. FuzzyMagma (talk) 14:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Marcocapelle, are you suggesting a category that would include only documentaries on the topic of whitewashing? Dimadick (talk) 14:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:21, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:08, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Australian newspaper proprietors

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category. Mason (talk) 01:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Three functions: Owner, publisher and editor. Often separated, for instance politicians may be newspaper owners but not publisher or editor. Influence without responsibility. Pastoralists may inherit a loss-making paper and subsidise its continued operation. Doug butler (talk) 01:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are no other categories in this tree that make that distinction. Further, I'm pretty sure that there's a cfd that closed on similar newpaper owners, if I'm recalling. Mason (talk) 02:43, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Queen of Hearts talk 05:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:06, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:41, 30 June 2024 (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:12th-century Almohad caliphs

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 7#Category:12th-century Almohad caliphs

Category:Fox Sports 1 people

[edit]
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: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 05:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These personalities are known for appearing on Fox Sports properties more generally, not necessarily Fox Sports 1. Let'srun (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 07:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't know about others but I only tried to include people who appear on FS1 shows in the category. Expanding this to include all Fox Sports people is fine but you'd need to go through all the Fox Sports content that isn't on FS1 (such as NFL on Fox, WWE SmackDown, Soccer on Fox Sports, etc.) Soulbust (talk) 05:53, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I said that to say that maybe both categories can exist? As Fox Sports has quite a lot of properties, and the FS1 list wouldn't be small either if it only included individuals who are FS1 personnel - for example Nick Wright or Colin Cowherd. It appears Erin Andrews is in the FS1 category currently, though she would be in the Fox Sports category only, along with anyone else from NFL on Fox (and of course Fox Sports' other shows). Meanwhile, someone like Joel Klatt could fit in both. Soulbust (talk) 05:03, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:26, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:02, 29 June 2024 (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:Symplectic topology

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 15#Category:Symplectic topology

Category:Australian flour millers and merchants

[edit]
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: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge. There's no parent category, and for the most part merchants aren't defined by whether they sold flour or not. Mason (talk) 03:14, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In Australia millers commonly purchase the grain, mill it, and sell the flour, adding value. So they're millers by trade, not merchants. Doug butler (talk) 03:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:43, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:58, 29 June 2024 (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:Australian commercial artists

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining type of artist. Notably there is not a parent category of commercial artists as far as I can find. Mason (talk) 02:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Commercial artists create their art for mass duplication: advertising, souvenirs etc. Not like portraitists etc. Doug butler (talk) 03:54, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, it is almost impossible to differentiate notable artists by "commercial" as so many made a living out of it. If not merged, better rename it to something related to the kind of art. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:58, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:58, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge most - a very mixed bunch here, in most cases they began their career as a "commercial artist", before becoming notable in another type of art. This is common (Andy Warhol for example, & he has no similar category), & probably not defining. Example: " Hilda Wiseman (1894–1982) was a notable New Zealand bookplate designer, artist and calligrapher.....Wiseman began her artistic career as a commercial artist at the Chandler and Company advertising firm....." Some should be merged to eg Oz photographers, cartoonists etc. Johnbod (talk) 16:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge: useless differentiation. Isn't the aim for most artists to be commercially successful? TarnishedPathtalk 10:40, 4 July 2024 (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:Crime action films

[edit]
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: no consensus. If there was a "no consensus" result, this would be it. I don't read the post-final-relist discussion as rebutting Bearcat's argument in full: his point was that merge targets should be carefully addressed, which is not really addressed by saying we should merge things without specifics. Now, of course, you don't always need to respond to all editors' points to reach consensus, but in a very roughly evenly split discussion, it helps. Adding that there is clear disagreement over whether this is WP:OR, it would be supervoting to pick one side over the other. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Hybrid genre term that is not in common usage (unlike lets say, action comedy or even action thriller). Searching for it on google, gives one imdb list, then several lists for one genre or the other. Per the action film article, "Action films often interface with other genres. Yvonne Tasker wrote that films are often labelled action thrillers, action-fantasy and action-adventure films with different nuances." Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:48, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I'd include the sub-categories within this general category again, but I suppose that is implied in this process. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also nominating the following:

Does this do the job @Marcocapelle:? Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:40, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment It is often the case that film genres are crossed over as catgeories that are not actually reflective of legitimate and verifiable sub-genres (such as "romantic comedy" or "horror comedy", for example). So is that the case here? I randomly plucked out some of the films in the category and the genre of "crime action" doesn't appear defining for any of them. The genre for Heat (1995 film) is sourced to Rotten Tomatoes which lists the genre as "crime, drama". The "crime action" genre for The Batman (film) is not supported by sources, and whilst Allmovie lists several genres (include crime and action) it does not list the sub-genre of "crime action", unlike Pretty Woman which lists Romance, Comedy and the combination "Romantic Comedy". The genre for The Girl in the Spider's Web (film) is also sourced to Allmovie (inaccurately I might add), and whilst it does not list "crime action" it does list "crime thriller". In these cases the presence of the article in the category appears to be the product of editorial synthesis, unsupported by sources i.e. it may be possible to source "action" or "crime" but "crime action" or "action crime" is not in itself sourced. Are any supporters of the category able to provide reliable source evidence for the films in this category belonging a sub-genre of "crime-action"? It may be possible to locate sources that substantiate the existence of the genre, but membership of a category also needs to satisfy WP:CATDEF too.
Betty Logan (talk) 01:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep. Existing genre that deserves a category. I completely disagree with the idea that crime films should always include action! Just because a film contains a murder does not make it an action film (nor a crime action film, for that matter). See:
https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780199587261.001.0001/acref-9780199587261-e-0165#:~:text=An%20extremely%20wide%2Dranging%20group,central%20element%20of%20their%20plots.
As for films defined as CA or C-A films, at random:
https://www.michigandaily.com/arts/film/the-roundup-a-womanless-riskless-ruthless-rush/
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/art/2024/06/398_356945.html
https://oxfordre.com/criminology/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264079-e-195 (mentioning Rush Hour as a c-a franchise), for example. A GB search shows various results for crime/action, which sometimes indicate it's a new genre: The hybrid nature – and commercial success – of the Bourne films is characteristic of a new style of crime film, the crime/action[1] but plenty with either "crime action films"(or film/movie) or "crime-action films". A note defining the genre as an hybrid could be added on the category page. (Have a look at the category in other languages).-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The term is without a doubt used in common place, but there is no solid definition for it, as the case for most hybrid genres. Why bother separating them? What does it add? Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:16, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, I can google the term and find people using it, but reading the actual article on action films it states very clearly that these types of terms are used with different values and meaning. There is no solid definition of these hybrid genres. Your Sarah Casey sources only emphasizes that yes, hybrid genres exist, but reading the wiki article, most films past the 90s are hybrids and there is no common meaning with this. As there are none, it fails WP:CATDEF. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Benyahia, Sarah Casey (2012-02-27). Crime. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-136-58182-3.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:43, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notifying WP:ORN for feedback...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete poor rationale provided by keep votes and poor definition of category.
Allan Nonymous (talk) 20:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There is no particular pressing need to separate this subgenre, as opposed to simply putting pages in both the "crime" and "action" film categories. It is rather common for crime to happen in action films, simply as a matter of course, making the definition of this subgenre vague at best. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural oppose as nomination has not adequately accounted for potential issues arising from mass deletion. I looked at Category:Canadian crime action films, the obvious intersection between this batch and my own personal area of expertise, and randomly spotchecked the film Buying Time — but it's in no other "Country genre films" categories at all, which means simply deleting said category without upmerging its contents somewhere would yank that film completely out of the Category:Canadian films by genre tree altogether. And again, that's just the very first film I spotchecked, which means that there are guaranteed to be dozens of other films that will be stranded right out of necessary category trees if these categories are simply deleted without careful surgical replacement and/or transplantation.
    I'm not at all wedded to the need for "crime action" as a genre-intersection category specifically, but just mass-deleting the whole tree at once is a recipe for a total stinkin' trainwreck — so getting rid of it would have to be done as mergers, not as simple deletions, to ensure that films aren't being pulled out of necessary parent trees in the process. Bearcat (talk) 12:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I wouldn't usually relist 3 times, but Bearcat's comment deserves some consideration.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:43, 29 June 2024 (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:Sandžak

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Sandžak


Category:Jewish Canadian philanthropists

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duel upmerge. This is a non-defining intersection between nationality, ethnicity/religion, and occupation. Mason (talk) 07:45, 29 June 2024 (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:Pioneers of Israel

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 7#Category:Pioneers of Israel

Category:Major League Baseball Triple Crown winners

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete per WP:OCAWARD. Its not an award that can be won, its an achievement which is earned. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:42, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To respond to each of your points:
  • For the three players you identified, the fact that they won a triple crown is noted in the lead of all of their articles. It's also mentioned in the New York Times obituaries for Mickey Mantle and Ted Williams. (Sandy Koufax, obviously, does not yet have an obituary.) I think those are pretty good signs that it's a WP:DEFINING characteristic.
  • Categories and lists are not in conflict with one another, and it's great to have both.
  • I agree that this isn't an award, which makes WP:OCAWARD irrelevant to this discussion. I don't know why you mentioned it in the first place.
Hope that clears things up. - Eureka Lott 22:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would still say its not their defining characteristic. As for the list, I think its better only because of the recent inclusion of NgL statistics. I am aware of the "Categories and list are not in conflict rule" but, in this case, the circumstances have changed slightly.
Either way, thank you for giving your reasons. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep: this is one of the most notable achievements that any player can achieve, which is why it's one of the first things that will be mentioned in the summary of any triple crown winner's career. Most sources that list notable baseball records or achievements will have one or more lists of triple crown winners. I cannot think of a single logical reason for deleting these categories. P Aculeius (talk) 12:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:57, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@P Aculeius; a) its not something you can win and b) the recent change to the statistics makes this no longer accurate. Its WP:OCAWARD and also WP:NARROWCAT.
Also adding @Muboshgu, @Yankees10, and @Wehwalt, from WP:Baseball for their opinion. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:03, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You certainly can "win" it, in the sense that most of its "winners" are so described in baseball literature. It's not an award, but that doesn't mean you can't win it, any more than you can't win a game, or a race, or a battle... Your reliance on accuracy is misplaced because A) nobody has been officially "unseated" as a winner by the inclusion of more players, so nobody in the category is there erroneously; B) the addition of record from the Negro Leagues simply means that more players can be added to the category. That is not grounds for deletion. Neither of the policies you have cited applies here; this is a frivolous nomination. P Aculeius (talk) 13:40, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And now they have been added to the category, so it is now accurate. P Aculeius (talk) 14:07, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for not being "won", I'll refer you to Total Baseball, 2nd Edition, pp. 486–491, explicitly calling the players "winners" of the triple crown; Neft & Cohen, The Sports Encyclopedia: Baseball, 1992 edition, p. 649, "Triple Crown Winners"; The Sporting News Official Major League Fact Book, 1999 Edition, p. 475: "Triple Crown Winners"; 20th Century Baseball Chronicle (1992), p. 110: "Rogers Hornsby, who batted .403 and won a second Triple Crown", p. 152: "Philadelphia's Jimmie Foxx won the Triple Crown"; p. 158: "Philadelphia's Chuck Klein won the Triple Crown"; p. 164: "Lou Gehrig carried most of the weight, winning the Triple Crown", etc., and that's just what I had at hand to refer to. P Aculeius (talk) 14:44, 29 June 2024 (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:National Roads in South Africa

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: In South Africa, a National Road is a road that is the responsibility of SANRAL while a National Route is a road that has the letter N in its designation, as stated in the National routes (South Africa) article. Looking at what the main article for the category is, I propose a change (simply change Roads to routes). GeographicAccountant (talk) 19:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:52, 29 June 2024 (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.


June 28

[edit]

X by region in France

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1#X by Y in Z. Thedarkknightli (talk) 23:53, 28 June 2024 (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:Whirly-Girls

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Whirly-Girls

Category:Fictional illeists

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Fictional illeists

Category:FC Nizhny Novgorod seasons

[edit]
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 to Category:FC Pari Nizhny Novgorod seasons. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To comply with the club name change EpicAdventurer (talk) 19:40, 28 June 2024 (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:Television series by Fox Television Animation

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Television series by Fox Television Animation

Category:Conscientious objector Medal of Honor recipients

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Conscientious objector Medal of Honor recipients


Category:Former high schools in Tokyo

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge. No need to diffuse highschools within a specific populated place and status (Defunct vs current; note that one of the targets is currently being speedy renamed from Category:Former high schools in Japan) Mason (talk) 14:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Tokyo is equivalent to a prefecture, not a city, in a manner like a U.S. state. I'm not sure if this would make the category more viable, or if there should still be a split? WhisperToMe (talk) 23:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:51, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:40, 28 June 2024 (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:Autistic LGBT people

[edit]
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: No consensus The dispute is whether this intersection is sufficiently defining, and people have made arguments on both sides in similar numbers. The 2016 consensus being overturned was weak, based just on two thinly-argued comments in a messy discussion, so is not binding here. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:07, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is a the recreation of Category:LGBT people on the autism spectrum, which was deleted per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_January_31#Category:People_on_the_autism_spectrum as a non-defining intersection. The overall topic is notable, but individuals as the intersection of a specific disability and sexual orientation/identity doesn't really meet the higher bar of WP:egrs. I encourage the category creator to see if the category was previously created before they make more intersections with LGBT and disability. See for a similar ongoing argument for Lesbians with disabilities Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_26#Category:Lesbians_with_disabilities Mason (talk) 02:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, but disperse in the tree of Category:People on the autism spectrum in the first place. I am not sure about the proposed merge target because I do not know if autism is generally considered to be a disability. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose/Keep I disagree that only identity+action are more defining than identity+identity, in fact I find autistic LGBT to be more defining than LGBT muderers (which one thing has nothing to do with each other, but since they are religioculturally/traditionally seen as sinful, then we have these guidelines). And as EGRS notes, When making a new category, be sure there is substantial existing research on that category of people specific to the occupation in relation to their sexual orientation. while making it unclear about identity+identity instead of occupation. And as you linked, the topic justifies it as notable. Actually, I find autistic LGBT to be more defining than LGBT with disability. --MikutoH talk! 23:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    also, isn't it the nominator responsible for searching old deletions to support their arguments? Because I found no previous deletions and decided to create, in my perception for the first time, the category. If I saw that it was deleted before, I would rethink it before creating it. but since that's not the case, I don't understand why you mentioned this fact. or do you mean that previous deletions justify recreation? --MikutoH talk! 00:38, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh you're right, I accidentally ignored the link. --MikutoH talk! 00:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That discussion had small quorum with two voting, IP nominated multiple categories in the same bascket. --MikutoH talk! 23:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Repilies/Questions: What do you @MikutoH mean by identity+action versus identity+identity? Because the requirement for intersections is the same per WP:EGRS. The bar is set high to avoid tokenization and stereotypes. Most of the categories that meet the threshold for egrs is indentity+occupation. It's a much higher bar to cover three way intersections: being LGBT, being disabled, and the specific kind of disability. It isn't about what you find to be defining. It's what scholarly sources say is defining. We are also running afoul of final rung. Mason (talk) 23:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I was talkibg about this sentence: a person's actions are more important than, for example, their race or sexual orientation.. And Wikipedia:Consensus can change. --MikutoH talk! 01:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And you ignored the studies in the article you linked. --MikutoH talk! 01:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok thanks for clearing that up. I don't disagree with you. I think that the intersection of two identities can be defining, but it does require a heavier bar. And, I just don't think that there's enough literature to support the intersection right now. What I've seen in the literature is descriptive that people are more likely to have both identities than by chance alone. But there are a lot of descriptions like that, such as men who's name start with L are more likely to be lawyers. (Ok not that extreme, but it takes more than just the fact the intersection exists). Mason (talk) 00:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject LGBT studies, WikiProject Disability, and WikiProject Autism have been notified of this discussion. --MikutoH talk! 23:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose - I think this intersection does qualify as defining for the purposes of EGRSD (in part because it is a notable intersection that I think several reliable sources discuss the incidence of and connection between in-depth), though my opposition is weak purely because I'm concerned maybe there's some nuance of the guideline I'm not understanding here. - Purplewowies (talk) 01:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've actually been thinking about this a little... what in EGRSD implies a higher bar than the intersection being notable/encyclopedic? Is there someone who could explain that higher bar in a way that makes it clear where the guideline does not? In particular, I don't see anything that suggests a higher bar, and the section's prose even ends with "At all times, the bottom line remains can a valid, encyclopedic main article be written for this grouping?" (Which. It can. The nom says as much.) I'm considering changing my !vote to a non-weak oppose, but I wanted to see if anyone can make me see something in EGRSD that I'm not picking up on. Thanks. - Purplewowies (talk) 16:43, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Here's the quote from egrs, with two underlines.@Purplewowies
      >Do not create categories that intersect a particular topic (such as occupation, place of residence, or other such characteristics) with an ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or disability, unless that combination is itself recognized as a defining topic that has already been established (in reliable sources showing substantial existing research specific to the topic), as academically or culturally significant in its own right. The mere fact that such people happen to exist is not a valid criterion for determining the legitimacy of a category.
      It effectively says that the intersection needs to be defining as a topic, as opposed to some categories that are just used to diffuse a larger category, like 1901 events etc or people from Georgia. The fact that such people exist isn't enough, which is effectively the argument I'm making. The literature says that these people exist and do at higher rates, which could and does support a page existing, but it doesn't mean that there's a body of academic literature that the intersection of two identities is defining above and beyond that two identities by themselves. Mason (talk) 21:28, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 16:07, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom but, @Marcocapelle, @Smasongarrison, I would say it should be manually merged with Category:LGBT people and Category:People on the autism spectrum. I don't think autism is a disability per se. I can be considered as such in severe cases but not everyone would agree that it is in all cases. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:26, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. I tend to take a broader definition of disability to explicitly include autism and other (equally lovely) flavors of neurodivergence, but you're right that not a universal opinion (It probably stems from my default of wanting more folks on my team 🤣).
@Omnis Scientia Would you be willing to do the manual merge to determine which folks should be added to the intersection (lgbt+disability)? I think it would be helpful to have someone who has a less universalist approach make the decisions. I'm happy to help with the rest. Mason (talk) 23:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison, I understand that perfectly! Its a good thing to be inclusive. And sure, I would be willing to manually merge. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:01, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Much appreciated as alwaysMason (talk) 20:35, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:30, 28 June 2024 (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:Converts from atheism or agnosticism

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 7#Category:Converts from atheism or agnosticism

Category:Central Greece

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 22#Category:Central Greece

Category:Body horror video games

[edit]
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: keep. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Seems to be entirely original research, not a thing whatsoever in video games, or in horror video games. User has been warned repeated for adding, and now creating, incorrect categories. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and cleanup It apparently is a thing in video games, there are plenty of sources that describe games as body horror, such as this one and this one. Body horror also has its own parent article. I'm not really aware of what bad categories this user made, but either way, even a stopped clock is right twice a day and that alone isn't a reason to delete a viable category. Any games that sources don't describe as body horror should be removed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree to keeping/cleanup AHI-3000 (talk) 19:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep and purge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 15:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:22, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and cleanup It's definitely a valid horror subgenre, but could use some cleanup, particularly for the franchise categories lumped in.
ThanatosApprentice (talk) 23:57, 3 July 2024 (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.

Involving countries

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Involving countries

Category:Youth activists

[edit]
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: Reverse merge * Pppery * it has begun... 01:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I think we should just merge these two categories, they're both extremely similar with the defining feature being that the activist is notable for being young. Mason (talk) 20:26, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Child activists.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:27, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse merge, which should also come with renaming all subcategories from "child" to "youth". QuietHere (talk | contributions) 08:51, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Reverse merge would conflict though with all of the Fooian children categories. Mason (talk) 23:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose merging, in either direction - I've slightly reworded for greater clarity the head note for Category:Child activists to read as follows: "This category is for individuals who were notable as activists during childhood, i.e. before the age of 15." Whereas the head note for Category:Youth activists refers to the age range of 15 to 24 years, which conforms with the definition of "youth" that was adopted by the United Nations. Anomalous+0 (talk) 08:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:48, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nederlandse Leeuw and Smasongarrison: Marcocapelle already replied to Anomalous+0's comment above; do you have thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:15, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just don't think that the distinction between youth and child is important for categories at these intersections. I'm more on board with reverse merge and removing children as a parent. Mason (talk) 23:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm I think the objection has some merit, though I don't feel strongly about it. NLeeuw (talk) 15:15, 8 July 2024 (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:User Fanoflionking

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:14, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:UCFD/I#Personal userspace categories. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:40, 28 June 2024 (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:Rulers of Chiang Mai

[edit]
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: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per article Kingdom of Chiang Mai. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I'll need to think this over, but right now I'm leaning toward oppose as there's no consensus in history-writing on the English-language term used to refer to such rulers, though rulers is commonly used. On a related note, I notice you've attempted a reorganization to match the category's scope with that of the Kingdom of Chiang Mai article, which I'm not sure was optimal. As raised at Talk:Lan Na, there was not a separate "Kingdom of Chiang Mai", rather the article just covers the a period in Lan Na's history when it was under suzerainty of Bangkok, so it's probably the articles that need to be re-structured. But the categories can be updated again when and if that does happen. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 04:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:35, 28 June 2024 (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:Films with scents

[edit]
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT. Removed three entries where this was non-defining, leaving just the two films and the general topic (which isn't itself a film so maybe shouldn't be in here as an entry; perhaps {{catseealso}} would've made more sense). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 08:34, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 16:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge? Delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:34, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not opposed to deletion. Erik makes a fine point about the association being loose. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 17:57, 28 June 2024 (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:Wikipedians with Asperger syndrome

[edit]
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 to Category:Autistic Wikipedians. There is a lot going on here, but given a clear majority of participants (four, one of which is "mild"; compared to two in opposition, one of which is described as "lean") feel that the categories should be merged, it would be supervoting to close this as anything but merge absent strong arguments in opposition. The non-merger of the mainspace articles was brought up, but that did not sway the opinions of others. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:26, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge with parent category. Asperger's syndrome is no longer an official diagnosis so there shouldn't be a category suggesting it is either. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:35, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the categories should be merged. Jarble (talk) 14:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I find it mildly licentious (maybe?) to request a merge of this Category, when the two main articles that are the subject matter of this proposal, namely Asperger syndrome and Autism, are currently being Considered for Merger with no unanimous clear consensus reached against the adoption of said merge proposal.
However, if I am wrong (entirely possible) and this proposal is not precipitate in view of the on-going discussion mentioned further above, then I Oppose, since not all countries have adopted ICD-11, and it continues to be an official diagnosis in some jurisdictions. There is also the possibility that some people might, for whatever personal reasons, identify more with the Asperger’s label than they do with Autism. We should not be taking away a notably significant and not-yet-historic diagnosis because of ICD-11. -Konanen (talk) 22:49, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Konanen, I didn't know about the merger and I would be against it myself since the scope of articles and categories are very different. Categories have a more stricter rules. From everything on the matter, Asperger's is no longer an official diagnosis. I wouldn't have taken the step if I wasn't sure. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Omnis Scientia: Can you (or anyone else) please share what the rules on categories are? I have no idea where to find them, and I really enjoy not spewing nonsense, which I cannot do if I do not know the rules. Thank you in advance! –Konanen (talk) 23:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Konanen, hey there. You can read the rules at WP:CFD. Being completely honest, its fair complicated and I don't fully understand it myself. Still figuring it out. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will drop a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Autism.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 16:19, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:33, 28 June 2024 (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:Syndromes with autism

[edit]
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 to Category:Syndromic autism with no consensus on whether the category should continue to exist or not. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:28, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Syndromic autism" is much more commonly used than "Syndromes with autism". For example, on Google Scholar, "Syndromes with autism" OR "Syndrome with autism" yields about 516 results gives about 3,470 resultsSyndromic autism article. Digressivo (talk) 05:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion? (I am not seeing opposition to the rename if this category continues to exist, so if there are no further comments I would expect this to be closed as rename with no consensus on whether the category should exist.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 16:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer deletion given that what Marco has written. Mason (talk) 02:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion. Autism is not just a slightly higher prevalence; it is a significant and clinically relevant feature of these syndromes, affecting more than a third or even more than half of the patients in some cases. Digressivo (talk) 01:49, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:01, 28 June 2024 (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:Old roads in Morocco

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:33, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, poorly populated category and other countries don't have this sort of category either. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:55, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Marcocapelle. My thought when creating this category was to populate it with articles about road systems in Morocco at various historical periods. Even if other geographical areas or countries don't have such a category, that's not a sufficient ground, in my opinion, to merge it or delete it. Perhaps we should consider creating more such categories for other countries or regions, if they can be populated with available topics. In fact, I think topics related to history of traffic and roads still need a lot of coverage. Ideophagous (talk) 16:54, 28 June 2024 (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:Secularism in the Arab world

[edit]
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: No consensus * Pppery * it has begun... 01:10, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I know that technically these are different regions, but... these categories overlap so healvy I think we should merge them. Mason (talk) 22:11, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom, but purge the Moroccan and Tunisian subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: If Moroccan and Tunisian sub-categories are to be purged due to this merger, then I would oppose it, because the perceived and projected cultural ties among the Arab world are notable enough to warrant grouping all of these topics into that category.---Konanen (talk) 10:46, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nothing in the Moroccan and Tunisian subcategories hints at being part of a movement in the Arab world. The content is very specifically related to these two countries only. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Marcocapelle, I do not understand your point:
      1) Point of clarification: do subcategories and pages within the Secularism category have to reference specific concerted movements, or is any topic related to Secularism within the named geographic region (whichever that may be) sufficient to merit inclusion into the category?
      2) Morocco and Tunisia are, by definition, part of the Arab world. Any movements existing in these countries are therefore logically movements within the Arab world, so unless I have lost all of my abilities to read and understand, I do not think your comment makes sense.
      Clarification would be appreciated! –Konanen (talk) 12:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: I appreciate the categories may have heavy overlap, but I do not see why the Arab World, as a geographical and political area/unit, should be of lesser importance than, say, Category:Secularism in England while nobody suggests merging it into Category:Secularism in the United Kingdom, or merging that one into Category:Secularism in Europe.
    @Marcocapelle suggests that, if the merger goes through, Moroccan and Tunisian subcategories should be purged. That would be a disservice to the bigger picture, since all countries of the Arab world have significant influence over each other’s political movements, see for example the lead at Arab Spring. Marcocapelle’s requirement to make a case that "secularism in the Arab world" is an encyclopedic topic seems to me to be iniquitous, as well. But never let it be said that I would not try to source proof of definingness of the subject matter [5][6][7][8].
    However, if a merger is considered absolutely necessary, then I suggest renaming Category:Secularism in the Middle East to Category:Secularism in the Middle East and North Africa, modelled after Democracy in the Middle East and North Africa. Thank you. –Konanen (talk) 09:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Question/Comment: Asking for evidence to support something being defining is not "iniquitous", that's a reasonable bar. But what I'm struggling with is why we need both Secularism in the Middle East and Secularism in the Arab world. Are they distinct enough to warrant two categories? I think that merging in reverse would also be fine. Mason (talk) 19:50, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mason: Yes, because the Arab World is a reasonably well-defined geocultural area, while the Middle East, which is a more loosely-defined geopolitical region, comprises—per the WP article—five non-Arab World countries, and moreover lacks 6 to 9 (depending on the count) countries considered as belonging to the Arab World. In other words, there are roughly 18 countries making up the Middle East, 13 of which are part of the Arab World, while the minimum count of the latter comprises 19 countries (maximum: 22 countries).
    It may be useful for some users to limit their browsing of the topic to only Arabic-speaking countries, as their political developments are usually heavily influenced by one another, and correlations within them would be of greater interest, which is not the case for non-Arab World Middle Eastern countries, which has a contested/varying definition. –Konanen (talk) 22:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not asking if Arab world and the middle east are distinct. I'm asking if the intersection with secularism for each is distinct. Mason (talk) 00:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:10, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. @Konanen, I would say the term "Arab world" is the more loosely defined region of the two. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:36, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, @Smasongarrison, I think we can create a Category:Secularism in North Africa to represent the second half MENA countries and add any related article there. Just a thought. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would be a good solution Mason (talk) 00:01, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh this already exists, Morocco just wasn't in there yet. I have added it now. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: The Arab world is not more loosely defined. It's the member states of the Arab League. Charles Essie (talk) 14:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:54, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the Arab League is just that: a league. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:24, 29 June 2024 (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:Australian police chiefs

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Inline with article names. GMH Melbourne (talk) 14:27, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:06, 28 June 2024 (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:Video games featuring Bugs Bunny

[edit]
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 to Category:Bugs Bunny video games and purge. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:10, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This has been discussed before with the film categories, "featuring" is not a defining characteristic, a lot of the articles in this category should not be categorized this way. ★Trekker (talk) 15:06, 28 June 2024 (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:Video games featuring Daffy Duck

[edit]
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 to Category:Daffy Duck video games and purge. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:11, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This has been discussed before with the film categories, "featuring" is not a defining characteristic, a lot of the articles in this category should not be categorized this way. ★Trekker (talk) 15:06, 28 June 2024 (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:Fan translation of video games

[edit]
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Although this category's name was copied from the article Fan trasnlation of video games, this category lists individual games that were fan-translated. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 19:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Existence of an unofficial version is a trivial characteristic. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 12:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:06, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per LaundryPizza03. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:04, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename The existence of a fan translation is not a trivial characteristic. Mother 3 is a game notorious for still not having an official translation, so much so that Mother 3 fan translation has its own article. I can't see how that's not WP:DEFINING. It's literally in the title. Nickps (talk) 13:02, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now per LaundryPizza03. I say for now because something like Mother 3 fan translation certainly belongs in this category, but one member is not sufficient to support a category. If and when it is recreated, it should host articles about fan translations, not video games which happen to have fan translations. But mere existence of fan translations for a game is not defining for that game itself – it is only defining for the translations themselves. If this is kept (and that is a big "if"; I firmly believe that this category should be deleted in its current state), I would agree that the proposed rename makes more sense than the current name. But I still strongly believe that this should be deleted. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:09, 6 July 2024 (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:Video games featuring Sylvester the Cat

[edit]
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 to Category:Video games based on Looney Tunes. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT. Only three games here are actually defined by Sylvester. ★Trekker (talk) 15:05, 28 June 2024 (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:Video games featuring the Tasmanian Devil (Looney Tunes)

[edit]
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 to Category:Tasmanian Devil (Looney Tunes) video games and purge. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This has been discussed before with the film categories, "featuring" is not a defining characteristic, a lot of the articles in this category should not be categorized this way. ★Trekker (talk) 15:02, 28 June 2024 (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:Buddhist monks from the Western Regions

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Buddhist monks from the Western Regions

Category:Intersex plurisexual people

[edit]
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: keep. ✗plicit 14:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These categories are too small, merging would make them bigger together. --MikutoH talk! 23:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:50, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Marco. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:45, 28 June 2024 (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:Films directed by Wayne Kramer (filmmaker)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Films directed by Wayne Kramer (filmmaker)

Category:Dean bass guitars

[edit]
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 to Category:Electric bass guitars by manufacturer. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:01, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 1-article category. Merge to Category:Electric bass guitars by manufacturer Gjs238 (talk) 12:16, 28 June 2024 (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:Centuries in Podgorica

[edit]
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 to Category:History of Podgorica. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:00, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer, it is the only subcategory of its parent. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:09, 28 June 2024 (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:Redcar and Cleveland geography stubs

[edit]
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 to Category:North Yorkshire geography stubs. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:26, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains 27 stubs, below the usual threshold of 60. – Fayenatic London 08:28, 28 June 2024 (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:Permadeath games

[edit]
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 both HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:02, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: For consistency with similar category names in "Video games by gameplay element". Also because I recently created a separate category for permadeath role-playing games. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 15:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename Insufficiently disambiguated from Category:Permadeath role-playing games. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:14, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete? (I don't see any opposition to the rename, if the category is to be kept.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:15, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as non-defining. I have added the new parent created by QuantumFoam66 into the nomination. – Fayenatic London 08:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete fails Wp:CATDEF, it's not defining. Permadeath role-playing games isn't a thing as all tabletop roleplaying games are permadeath if that's how the table plays it. There is no such thing as a rule that applies to a all instances of a particular role-playing game and that kind of would go against the purpose and meaning of them. All role-playing games are permadeath, or not permadeath, depending on the desires of the people playing the game. It's a pointless category that means nothing and is not supported by any references or industry discussion. By trying to create it and add it to articles I believe the editor may not understand what a role-playing game is. Canterbury Tail talk 00:40, 6 July 2024 (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.


June 27

[edit]

Category:Circassia

[edit]
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: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This newly created uncategorized category seems redundant with Category:Circassians. Gjs238 (talk) 15:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on renaming?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:45, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:04, 27 June 2024 (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:Battles involving ancient peoples

[edit]
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. There is no consensus to merge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, no clear distinction versus its parent category. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:46, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:02, 27 June 2024 (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:Galician films

[edit]
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: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Appears to be redundant? Gjs238 (talk) 15:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Irish films" is not the same as "Irish (or Gaelic) language films" and that's why there are several different categories (Category:Irish films by language). For the same reason, "Galician films" (or "Galician animated films") are not the same as "Galician language films". Gasparoff (talk) 08:51, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:58, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:01, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment I do not have an opinion on whether we should have categories for films by autonomous community of Spain, but assuming we will keep them, it is desirable that we make these catnames less ambiguous. The comparison with Catalan and Catalan-language films also shows this.
We could develop a new convention like Films in Fooian (see the recent Songs in Fooian precedents) versus Films from Fooland (see the recent People from Fooland precedents), but such a decision would have broad implications for our current category structures. Nevertheless, given how often ambiguous adjectives like "Galician" lead to confusion, and recent precedents have developed solutions to avoid such confusion, this seems the best way forward. NLeeuw (talk) 10:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:00, 27 June 2024 (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:Princes(ses) by country

[edit]
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: consensus against renaming. Further tweaks to the category structure are beyond the scope of this nomination, and any interested editor is welcome to pursue those tweaks WP:BOLDly and/or via a fresh CFD discussion, as applicable. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 14:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Cfd discussion
Nominator's rationale: So we have two options here: Option A: "Fooian princes(ses)"; or Option B: "Princes(ses) of Foo". Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Marcocapelle from the speedy Cfd discussion. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:29, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SFBB, you can choose the options here. Then the rest of the categories in Category:Princes by country and Category:Princesses by country can be speedied. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:52, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly prefer B for accuracy. When you read "Montenegrin princesses" literally then the category could also contain someone born in Montenegro, not as a princess, who marries a Spanish prince. But the intention of the category (inasfar as it concerns marriages) is people from anywhere in the world who marry a Montenegrin prince. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:46, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This a hard one. First, both categorizations are not equivalent. German princess is not the same a princess in Germany. E.g. Marie Antoinette was the princess consort of France, but she was not French but German (as any other subject of the HRE; Austrian was not considered a nationality back then). The previous example shows how difficult is to work with nationalities, especially as our understanding of nationalities has changed over time. On the other side, the categorization based on current countries is also problematic. What do we do princesses of Prussia? (no longer in Germany) or princesses of Bohemia? (Czechia? Germany? Austria?). I think this is quite close to WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN. I think that the healthiest categorization would be Prince of Entity e.g. Prince of Bohemia, Princess of the Two Sicilies, Prince of Spain, etc. (even if the entity does no longer exist). Every other option just sounds very problematic to me and poised to miscategorization.SFBB (talk) 20:21, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @SFBB, I agree. This one is a bit difficult given how many such places there in Europe alone. @Marcocapelle, any thoughts on SFBB's suggestion? Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:54, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prefer option B. Princes(ses) of Foo simply makes the most sense and is the most appropriate categorization scheme from my point of view. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:17, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My point is that Option B right now (as the categories currently are) is organized as Princes of (current country) or Princesses in (current country). This is wrong as in many case it's not possible to construct a parallel between a current country and the historical entity, the people belonged to. For instance, Mozart was a subject of the Prince-Archbishopric of Salzburg, which was part of the HRE (and not of the Duchy of Austria or anything related to Austria). Subjects of the HRE were considered (and considered themselves) as Germans and never as Austrians (well...except of the subject of Austria proper). The only reason for Mozart beign considered an Austrian is that later (after Mozart's death), Salzburg was annexed by Austria. However, we usually find Mozart to be categorized as Austrian (just check the article), whereas the only historically valid categorizations would be Salburg/Salzburgian and HRE/German.
While I indeed prefer something like Option B, it should be something like Princes of (historical entity) or Princesses in (historical entity) (and by historical entity I also include current countries, e.g. UK, Denmark or Liechtenstein, but it also allows things like Bohemia - instead of Czechia -, Hanover - instead of Germany -, Aragon (as a parallel to Castile, instead of Spain), or the Brazilian Empire (instead of Brazil). Otherwise, we're making the exact same mistake that is described in WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN.SFBB (talk) 11:51, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:49, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Option B for all currently existing and/of well-defined monarchies (e.g. Denmark, Sweden, Liechtenstein, Montenegro, etc) .
  • Delete all ill-defined cases: Germany (move whatever possible to German Empire), Italy (move whatever possible to Kingdom of Italy), the Netherlands (move whatever possible to Kingdom of the Netherlands), and Greece (move whatever possible to Kingdom of Greece)
  • Difficult cases (e.g. Poland, probably including the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Kingdom of Poland, and Congress Poland) would require special attention.
  • In general: completely revise all these categories (not only the ones listed here). SFBB (talk) 22:34, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ps: I just checked and the Greek case seems to be properly defined based on the Kingdom of Greece (I was afraid, I would also contain all kingdoms of Ancient Greece). SFBB (talk) 22:43, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • By and large we still agree. I don't think we really need to rename to Princes of the Kingdom of, but we should definitely purge articles (e.g. William of Orange) and recategorize. For the latter, there should be a follow-up split proposal especially for Germany and Italy. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:58, 29 June 2024 (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:Allegiant Stadium

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:05, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE, "avoid categorizing events by their hosting locations". User:Namiba 16:27, 27 June 2024 (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:Hector Guimard

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:05, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All related articles are contained in a "works by" category so there is no need for an eponymous parent category as well. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 05:27, 27 June 2024 (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:Gospel record labels in Nigeria

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created 1-article category. Category:Gospel music record labels not subcategorized by country. Gjs238 (talk) 01:50, 27 June 2024 (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.

36 to 42 days old

[edit]

June 26

[edit]

Category:American expatriate baseball players in Canada

[edit]
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: Keep * Pppery * it has begun... 01:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: What constitutes an expatriate? Is it someone who moves to another country, or works there? If the latter, how long and/or often do they need to work there? Is his permanent residence relevant? An American who plays for a Canadian team plays at most half his team's games in Canada, with the rest in the United States. As for a Canadian on a Canadian team, he will similarly play half his team's games in Canada, but now he plays the other half in the United States - does that make him an expatriate Canadian in the United States while he is a member of a Canadian team? And does this player's permanent residence matter?

Further:
- is this status permanent, or does it end when the player stops playing for the related team?
- when does this status take effect? does an American on an American team who plays say six games on the road in Toronto in a season qualify?
- this category title just says "...players in Canada". Should it specify players who live in Canada, or who play/work in Canada, etc?

There are endless similar categories in multiple sports featuring multiple countries that could be affected, but let's start here. Is this even a defining characteristic? Baseball players can be defined by their hometowns, their position(s) played, the team(s) for which they played, etc, but does this expat category even serve a meaningful purpose? There are ~2400 players in this category, including people like Butch Alberts, who played his entire six game career for the Blue Jays (3 in Canada, 3 on the road in the United States, for what it's worth) in 1978. Should he qualify for this category and why? Echoedmyron (talk) 22:16, 26 June 2024 (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:Music pedagogues by instrument

[edit]
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These categories are the only in the Category:Music educators tree which don't use "educators". The terms "music pedagogue" and "music pedagogy" both redirect to music education, the main topic for this category, and that article uses "pedagogy" just 17 times ("pedagogue" gets zero) while "education" appears 220 times and "educator" 31. Unsurprising, as "pedagogy" is a less common academic term, at least in my experience. All reasons for which I think it would make more sense to make this change. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 21:51, 26 June 2024 (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:United Kingdom history book stubs

[edit]
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 to Category:British history book stubs. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with Category:German history book stubs and also with its own sisters Category:British battle stubs and Category:British election stubs‎. Using UK as the nationality is incorrect. PearlyGigs (talk) 21:10, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Fadesga (talk) 21:12, 26 June 2024 (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:Phobias

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 9#Category:Phobias

Category:1st-century bishops of Carthage

[edit]
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 HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article in the category which is not helpful for navigation between articles. Besides it is not certain whether the subject of the only article was a bishop of Carthage or Cartagena. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:06, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per rationale. OhHaiMark (talk) 15:56, 2 July 2024 (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:Battles during Roman Civil wars

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category:Battles, Category:Civil wars and Category:Roman civil wars not subcategorized this way. Gjs238 (talk) 16:50, 26 June 2024 (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.

Northern and Southern dynasties Buddhist monks

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, narrow intersection between very short-living dynasties (typically a few decades) and religion and occupation. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:51, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:31, 26 June 2024 (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:Prague-West geography stubs

[edit]
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 to Category:Central Bohemian Region geography stubs. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge with template into parent Category:Central Bohemian Region geography stubs. This and the nomination above fail to reach a reasonable number of stubs (around 60 is the usual cut-off). Not understubbed as far as I can tell. Note: if kept, it should be renamed to Category:Prague-West District geography stubs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs).Grutness...wha? 06:57, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FromCzech: pinging. Grutness...wha? 06:59, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:30, 26 June 2024 (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:Mělník geography stubs

[edit]
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 to Category:Central Bohemian Region geography stubs. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge with template into parent Category:Central Bohemian Region geography stubs. This and the nomination below fail to reach a reasonable number of stubs (around 60 is the usual cut-off). Not understubbed as far as I can tell. Note: if kept, it should be renamed to Category:Mělník District geography stubs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Grutness...wha? 06:57, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FromCzech: pinging. Grutness...wha? 06:59, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:30, 26 June 2024 (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:British co-ed groups

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 3#Category:British co-ed groups

Category:Checkmat

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:58, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category:Brazilian jiu-jitsu training facilities not subcategorized by individual jiu-jitsu academies. Gjs238 (talk) 16:05, 26 June 2024 (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:Dream Art

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:58, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category:Brazilian jiu-jitsu training facilities not subcategorized by individual jiu-jitsu academies. Gjs238 (talk) 16:03, 26 June 2024 (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:3rd century in Africa (Roman province)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 3#Category:3rd century in Africa (Roman province)

Category:Articles unintentionally citing retracted publications

[edit]
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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:26, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Follow-up from Previous Cfd. However, all these templates are linked, so keeping the convention constant will be ideal. For context, {{retracted}} is added by bots and humans, so we should not be assuming that a retraction is used unintentially just because it is tagged. Moving the "default" categories to the neutral names, and moving the "checked"/"intentional" to subcategories seems like a better way to do this. Mdann52 (talk) 06:09, 26 June 2024 (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:School fire disasters

[edit]
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: manual merge to Category:School fires. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Superfluous/unclear distinction between these two categories; a fire is, by definition, a disaster ForsythiaJo (talk) 02:36, 26 June 2024 (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:Related to Ulterior Motives

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We don't create categories for "related" topics Skyshiftertalk 00:25, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete i don’t care anymore just delete it Kierandude (talk) 17:03, 28 June 2024 (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:Old style serif typefaces

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 9#Category:Old style serif typefaces

Category:Women conservationists

[edit]
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 to Category:Conservationists. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:54, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A non-notable intersection of gender and occupation. User:Namiba 14:22, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sort the rules out Wikipedia's policy on this is far from clear. Category deletion should be based on a clearly agreed set of rules and until then such categories should be left alone. Why is a "Female United States senators" category OK when "women conservationists" is not. I can assure you that to become a conservationist in PNG is for a women in PNG a considerable achievement and far from "non-notable". Roundtheworld (talk) 20:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on merging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 16:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:22, 26 June 2024 (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.


June 25

[edit]

Category:Bright green environmentalism

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is fundamentally subjective and vaguely-defined. It gives me the impression of promoting a particular obscure philosophy. I'm pretty familiar with environmentalism as a movement and I've never heard of "bright green environmentalism" except through this category. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 23:04, 25 June 2024 (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:Gilgit-Baltistan stubs

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 4#Category:Gilgit-Baltistan stubs

Category:Galician animated films

[edit]
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: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: In accordance with Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_June_3#Category:Galician_films. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Irish films" are not the same as "Irish (or Gaelic) language films" and that's why there are two different categories (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Irish_animated_films). For the same reason, "Galician films" (or "Galician animated films") are not the same as "Galician language films". Gasparoff (talk) 08:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:55, 25 June 2024 (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:Athletes by location in Greece

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 5#Category:Athletes by location in Greece

Category:Bergey's volume 1

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Apparently the contents of the category are bacterial taxa discussed in volume 1 of Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. This is not a defining characteristic of the subject of the articles in the category Plantdrew (talk) 19:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 19:42, 25 June 2024 (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:Football teams in Africa

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Doesn't follow the pattern in the category tree of Category:Association football teams (all articles previously categorized here were association football teams, not other football). And no other categories by continent in this category tree. P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:38, 25 June 2024 (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:National football teams in Africa

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete as redundant to Category:African national association football teams (yes, not exactly the same, but all articles previously categorized here were association football teams). P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:33, 25 June 2024 (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:Argentine commanders in the Falklands War

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 3#Category:Argentine commanders in the Falklands War

Category:Horror cinema

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of Category:Horror films. Created by a user that a week later was blocked. Gonnym (talk) 17:48, 25 June 2024 (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:Numismatic history of Ecuador

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All have the same single article, Macuquina. All categories and the article were created by the same user that a week later was blocked. Merge to a single target (possibly Category:Numismatics). Gonnym (talk) 17:45, 25 June 2024 (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:Blind cricket administration

[edit]
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 to Category:Blind cricket governing bodies. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content, it is a set category only containing governing bodies. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:31, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:00, 26 June 2024 (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:Cities in Sevastopol

[edit]
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: move Inkerman to Category:Cities in Crimea and Kacha, Sevastopol to Category:Cities in Crimea and Category:Geography of Sevastopol; delete all four nominated categories. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:42, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge/delete, only one category/article in each. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:21, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should the two populated places be in Category:Administrative divisions of Sevastopol? I wasn't fully sure. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:26, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: updated target categories per Marco's suggestion below. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:08, 25 June 2024 (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:Irish provincial cricket unions

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, the parent category is otherwise almost empty. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:54, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:00, 26 June 2024 (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:Lebanese Protestant hymnwriters

[edit]
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 to Category:Lebanese songwriters. Discussion of the categorization of Wadia Sabra can take place at Talk:Wadia Sabra. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 3x upmerge. Narrow category that's only got one person in it Mason (talk) 03:00, 25 June 2024 (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:New Zealand men by occupation and century

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in here, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason (talk) 02:02, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:24, 25 June 2024 (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:Male wartime nurses

[edit]
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 to Category:Male nurses. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:17, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This category has only one page in it, who is already in a more specific Wartime nurses category Mason (talk) 01:57, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:01, 26 June 2024 (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.


June 24

[edit]

Category:Cabinets of Canadian provinces and territories navigational boxes

[edit]
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 as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All of these categories are navbox categories, and should be named accordingly. RedBlueGreen93 20:35, 24 June 2024 (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:John Marshall Law School (Chicago) faculty

[edit]
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 to Category:University of Illinois Chicago School of Law faculty. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The school was renamed and the corresponding alumni category was moved to Category:University of Illinois Chicago School of Law alumni. This should follow suit. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2024 (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:Fictional children by occupation

[edit]
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 to Category:Fictional children. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Nominating this again, this time for merge. Right now it is a WP:NARROWCAT with only two subcategories. It might need to be dual merged, but either way it is clearly unnecessary with so few subcategories ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, didn't we go through this same thing before? And there were more categories in here before. AHI-3000 (talk) 18:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need to be rude and hostile, and most of the subcategories were removed for being blatantly incorrect so it's a different situation than last time. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge The old nomination was Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_December_18#Category:Fictional_children_by_occupation. And now there are four subcategories. The only contents at the time of this nomination were Category:Fictional child prostitutes and Category:Fictional child soldiers; the other two, I thought we agreed to remove (alogn with two others) at the end of the last CfD. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they were re-added post nomination, but consensus agreed they did not belong in this category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:22, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AHI-3000, please stop edit warring on this matter. Do not repeatedly add members to the category that were purged as a result of the CfD discussion. — Qwerfjkltalk 17:23, 24 June 2024 (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:Kenyon Owls

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Kenyon College changed its fight name from Lords and Ladies to Owls in 2022. See here and here. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:11, 24 June 2024 (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:Mansas of Mali

[edit]
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 to Category:Mansas of the Mali Empire. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename as more accurate, this is not about the modern republic of Mali. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:15, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. The modern country of Mali gained independence in 1960. Alternatively Category:Mansas, as the title Mansa is used only for the Mali Empire. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Alt rename or as per nom?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:07, 24 June 2024 (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.

Template:CartoonNetwork-stub

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:35, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Template no longer needed. After the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 1#Category:Cartoon Network stubs resulted in its dedicated category being deleted as underpopulated, the uses of this template were purged for whether they needed to be filed directly in Category:Animation stubs or not, and it turned out that every article with this on it either didn't belong in that category at all or was simply redundant to the page already being in the Category:Animated television series stubs subcategory, meaning it's now been completely stripped from articlespace and is now in use only on a single ten-year-old user sandbox page that's still completely unreferenced for the purposes of becoming salvageable as an article.
Essentially, without a dedicated category this is just redundant to other templates, because any possible use of it would now just result in duplicate categorization of the page in both Category:Animation stubs and one of its subcategories at the same time. Bearcat (talk) 13:21, 24 June 2024 (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:Former Premier League clubs

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 10#Category:Former Premier League clubs

Category:12th-century Arab historians

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 10#Category:12th-century Arab historians

Category:National military histories by war

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 2#Category:National military histories by war

Category:Northwest Community College Conference football standings templates

[edit]
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 to Category:Northwest Athletic Association of Community Colleges football standings templates. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:39, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The Northwest Athletic Conference sponsored football through the 1989 season when the league was known as the "Northwest Athletic Association of Community Colleges". Jweiss11 (talk) 03:46, 24 June 2024 (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:Defunct off-price department stores of the United States

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining category Mason (talk) 13:30, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:01, 24 June 2024 (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:History of Great Britain

[edit]
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Option A: remove header and a remove a number of parent categories. Option B: nominate subcategories for merger. In any case, the current content of the category is completely out of sync with how the category creator(s) intended. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, please clarify the issue with this particular category. I don't really follow. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just Delete & re-home articles as necessary. The period of the Kingdom of Great Britain - from 1707 to 1800, is not really used by historians or the public. If kept it should be more clearly named to avoid confusion with the (main) geographical meaning of Great Britain, which has clearly been taken by some adders as the intended meaning. In fact such a category might make more sense, at the top of trees with UK, English, Scottish & Welsh sub-cats. Johnbod (talk) 01:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:51, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:47, 24 June 2024 (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:Beauty pageant controversies

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 2#Category:Beauty pageant controversies


June 23

[edit]

Category:Jewish American jazz composers

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. Non-defining intersection between genre, instrument, and ethnicity per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 22:18, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:45, 23 June 2024 (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:Suicides by year

[edit]
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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 21:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge. Suicide is a way of dying. Since there is a Category:Suicide methods and Category:Deaths by year, I would argue we don't need a category for a specific way of dying by year. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t understand your rationale re: our having a cat for suicide methods and a cat for deaths by year. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 20:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Basically that its WP:OVERCAT. If a person dies by suicide, they should be categorized in the year they died and the way they died and there is no need for a seperate "by year" category for a specific way of dying. I've only nominated a decade for now to see how this Cfd goes. Then, if it goes through, I will nominate the rest. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:55, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, @LaundryPizza03, @Smasongarrison, pinging for your view on this Cfd. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:59, 24 June 2024 (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:S.L. Benfica (table tennis)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 7#Category:S.L. Benfica (table tennis)

Battles in Spain 3

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 1#Battles in Spain 3

Category:WikiProject Fossorials

[edit]
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. Liz Read! Talk! 01:33, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Project was deleted at MfD. Delete all sub-categories as well. Gonnym (talk) 17:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have tagged the subcategories. Delete all per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:00, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all The subcategories are now listed. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:59, 23 June 2024 (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:Candidates for speedy deletion as having been created by blocked or banned users

[edit]
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: withdrawn. – Fayenatic London 21:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Based on the outcome of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Enforcing ECR for article creators WP:CSD#G5 is no longer restricted to pages created by blocked or banned users but now also applies to pages created in violation of general sanctions (regardless of any attribute of the editor, to the faith in which they created the page, or even if they knew such sanctions existed, an action I continue to think is harmful to the project but alas the consensus was not with me) and so the category name needs to be updated and this unwieldy new title is the shortest one I can craft that is accurate. Splitting the category would be sensible but also contrary to the RfC outcome which explicitly rejected creating a new criterion, so I'm not proposing that. Speedy deletion categories are usually populated by templates, but as there are multiple of them and the templates do not need to be renamed I guess CfD is the appropriate venue, but feel free to move to this to TfD if I'm wrong on that. I'm not sure if I need to individually notify editors who participated in the RFC, but I will leave a message on the RFC talk page. Thryduulf (talk) 17:15, 23 June 2024 (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:Crater Lake

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Ambiguity problem. This category is for one specific lake-slash-national-park in the United States whose name is Crater Lake, but I just had to clean it up for the misfiling of several generic crater lakes in Uganda. As always, the mere presence of a usage note on the category itself is not necessarily sufficient to control the problem, as people frequently file things in categories that sound right and then walk away without checking the category to see if they're doing it wrong -- so the category itself should be named as precisely as possible to quash any ambiguity. Bearcat (talk) 16:30, 23 June 2024 (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:Films set in Velankanni

[edit]
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 to Category:Films set in Tamil Nadu. – Fayenatic London 21:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Films set in [Place]" category for a small town, without enough films filed in it to need a dedicated category. As always, every town that exists does not automatically get one of these the moment a couple of films have been set there -- it would be fine if there were five or ten films to file here, but if there are less than five then the state level is sufficient. Bearcat (talk) 16:19, 23 June 2024 (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:Albert Henry Krehbiel

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category for a person, without the volume of spinoff content needed to justify an eponymous category. Other than the eponymous biography itself, the only other things filed here are an alternate version of his name that elides the middle "Henry", and the title of a book about him, both of which are just redirects to the eponymous biography rather than separate articles.
I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody can actually find evidence that there are enough other related articles that could be filed here, but we do not need a category just to hold three different ways of getting to the same place. Bearcat (talk) 16:15, 23 June 2024 (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:Television series about microbes

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "[Form of media] about X" category with only one thing in it and little prospect of expansion since microbes are not a common subject of television series — and the television series here was a cartoon, so its being "about" microbes falls short of being a defining characteristic. As always, we do not automatically need an "about" category for every single possible thing that one television series has been "about" -- this would need to be common enough of a subject for television series to have at least five entries in it before it was justifiable. Bearcat (talk) 16:09, 23 June 2024 (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:Luarsab Sharashidze

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category for a person, with no content in it besides the eponym himself. I'm not knowledgeable enough about the subject to know whether there are other things that could be filed here to populate it, so I'm not prepared to just speedy-delete it as a categorization error myself without discussion and am willing to withdraw this if enough other content can be found, but people do not automatically get categories at their own names just to hold their own main biographies. Bearcat (talk) 15:59, 23 June 2024 (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:Digital-only stations on the AM band

[edit]
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 to Category:Digital-only radio stations. – Fayenatic London 22:02, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia does not categorize radio stations for the matter of whether they're on the AM or FM bands, so we don't need to intersect digital-only status with a criterion that we don't otherwise categorize for. Bearcat (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2024 (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:Fictional chimney sweepers

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 4#Category:Fictional chimney sweepers

Category:Former Philippine Basketball League teams

[edit]
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. ✗plicit 00:44, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The Philippine Basketball League is defunct for several years now, so all of its teams are now its former teams. Upmerge to Category:Philippine Basketball League teams. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:07, 1 July 2024 (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:Fictional female entertainers

[edit]
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 to Category:Fictional females by occupation. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:16, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT, possibly some subcategories will merit a dual merge to Category:Fictional entertainers. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:20, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:16, 23 June 2024 (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:Tracker musicians

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 2#Category:Tracker musicians

Category:Rock, Rock, Rock!

[edit]
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: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 21:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not a lot of opportunity for growth here. The two songs articles can be merged to Category:Songs written for films. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 21:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure.
I would suggest to take out “I’m Not a Juvenile Delinquent” and “You Can’t Catch Me,” then just leave that category as it is. However, I guess deletion might be a solution for Wikipedia I guess. So fair enough. Inajd Inajd0101 (talk) 21:58, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On a second thought, I oppose this deletion because WP:SMALLCAT is not approved and these songs were written for the movie. Therefore, leave it as it is. Inajd Inajd0101 (talk) 08:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, keep. Inajd Inajd0101 (talk) 18:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:44, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:15, 23 June 2024 (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:Doki Doki Literature Club! characters

[edit]
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: reverse merge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant to Category:Doki Doki Literature Club! since that category only includes these characters and the game itself. The characters are all still in that category, so there is nothing to merge here. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as creator. Admittedly entirely forgot about the parent category when creating the category, so I agree with the redundancy issue. Though I agree, I still would have appreciated it if we could have finished discussing this before nominating it for deletion. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 14:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I guess I probably should have gone a bit slower. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:28, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine, especially since this category is getting deleted either way. Apologies if I was a bit accusatory by accident there. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 14:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per it being a mistaken creation according to category creator. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 14:22, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Doki Doki Literature Club!.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:49, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • NOTE: If we are going to keep this, I would support keeping both and oppose a merge. I think this category is redundant, but I think it makes sense to have the other category even if this one exists. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:52, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:07, 23 June 2024 (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:British women Marxists

[edit]
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: no consensus. I don't see affirmative consensus to populate, but I also don't see consensus that this should not be populated. However, if a category is to exist, you don't need to get consensus to populate the category with pages that belong in it. Therefore, I see this result as implicitly endorsing the category being populated, and will ping Nederlandse Leeuw in case they wish to do so. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need to diffuse this category by nationality? Frankly, I have my doubts that the intersection of gender and Marxism is defining. Mason (talk) 00:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:04, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sibling cats suggest:
More than enough to populate this category. I might add that a lot of subcategories in this tree do not feature a single woman. Women are underrepresented as part of biographies on British Marxists, and I don't think upmerging this category is going to help address that gender gap at all. NLeeuw (talk) 18:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on populating?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:54, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:06, 23 June 2024 (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:History of Malaya

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 4#Category:History of Malaya

Category:History of Malaysia since Independence

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 9#Category:History of Malaysia since Independence

Category:18th-century Wallachian poets

[edit]
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: no consensus. The nominator and some other participants felt that the categories in question were overly specific; a few others claimed that the centuries were informative for the type of articles the categories contain. There was no agreement on whether the categories contained too few articles to be of navigational utility. Neither the nomination nor the alternative proposal reached a consensus, so at the status quo we stay. (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 3x merge there are at most 6 people in this poet tree, without a real need to diffuse by century. I made a potential merge target category because Category:Wallachian poets didn't exist as a category.Mason (talk) 21:16, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is significantly less of a chore to create small intersectional and valid categories than huge category trees, which can be created at any ulterior time for reuniting the smaller categories and any articles that remain loose. I would rather create "18th-century Wallachian poets" instead of "Wallachian poets" (or rather "Category:Poets from the Principality of Wallachia" -- the two nomenclatures currently compete), if the latter option has me tagging all the articles on Wallachian poets, then sorting them by retagging the same articles with the respective narrower category! It reduces my workload and it is sheer common sense. Note how, in the "military personnel" tree, you had them all fitted nicely for you to just unify the categories; but of course you didn't realize that a lot of articles on Wallachian soldiers from other centuries (say: the 15th) are now not in the category you created, and of course you didn't go searching for such examples to include in the larger category you created (you also didn't realize that the category level you created should now include other trans-chronological articles, such as Category:Spatharii of Wallachia, all of whom were a sort of military personnel). You see: that would be the sort of work required for the part of the category tree that I hadn't bothered created, and the sort of workload you're now externalizing for others. (My contributions focus mainly on content creation, with all the intricate research this requires. I find category creation necessary, but boring -- implying that I should spend my time here on creating potentially immense categories, or hunting down articles to fill out the immense categories that others create, is a bit presumptuous. Just like other requests of that nature, for instance that I should fill out more redlinks to demonstrate to my colleagues here that a category is sufficiently valid -- that "18th-century Wallachian poets" is at least as valid a category as "Aqua members".) Dahn (talk) 02:25, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also: Category:Moldavian and Wallachian poets is rather pointless. I had created Category:Moldavian and Wallachian chroniclers back when we didn't have a category tree for both former countries, and to address the fact that chroniclers, a sort of occupation that is entirely in the past (for a genre that ended in the early 19th-century), had a trans-border shared tradition of history-writing (and a limited number of articles to fit in there). While this shared tradition can also be argued for poets: if we already have poets in the Wallachian category, what is the exact point of creating a category (other than the already existing larger Romanian one) for "Wallachian and Moldavian poets"? Dahn (talk) 02:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I modeled the parent of Category:Moldavian and Wallachian chroniclers, because this is not my area of expertise. I'm fine with an alternative target, and would have much preferred that a parent category existed instead of having to make an educated guess. Mason (talk) 22:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • And I have to say I do not understand the logic whereby we "only" have a category for "foo fooians" if it is demonstrated that there are "enough" (a never-defined "enough") articles to populate it. Sure it would be absurd to have a category for just two articles (though, again, three is apparently enough in other cases). But a category exists not just to neatly group the articles in a shelf; it exists to facilitate navigation, to quickly allow our readers, through this unique instrument offered by our platform, to see all the connections between a set of articles. The evidently absurd example you provide with Category:20th-century Aqua (band) members (I do understand the rhetorical point, but still) shows that you simply do not regard this as an important feature, that you do not conceive of any practical situation in which a reader may need a quick navigational tool for seeing what and how many were the Wallachian poets in the 18th century (including all the utterly mediocre ones that would not be mentioned in a properly developed Literature of Romania), and that you do not see it fit to ask why me as an editor would conceive of a tool to assist such a reader. I find that a bit arresting. Dahn (talk) 02:56, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @DahnPlease just make all the proper parent categories. It's not an unreasonable ask. Mason (talk) 22:07, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it not helpful? Please elaborate on that point. Dahn (talk) 06:34, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
44 subcategories to Category:18th-century poets by nationality, yet just one gets singled out. Interesting. Also note that of those 44, fully 10 have less than 4 articles included. Biruitorul Talk 07:40, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support 6 is not a lot for a category, but although there is no consensus on the mininum amount of items per category at any given time, WP:MFN (the work-in-progress guideline) recommends to merge for now if a category has fewer than 5 items. I don't feel too strongly about the need to merge these categories, but it's fine with me to do so. NLeeuw (talk) 18:07, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge target? (see Marcocapelle's alt proposal)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 10:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as per Marco. — Qwerfjkltalk 19:09, 10 July 2024 (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:Women who experienced pregnancy loss

[edit]
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. Overall I find the delete !votes are more convincing. This is not going to be defining for the majority of articles that it fits, so this content is better suited for a list (if at all). (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 19:14, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete; the idea for this category clearly came from a good faith place but I don't see how helpful it is. Losing a pregnancy is a lot more common than people think, and the further back you go in history the more common it was. Its not a defining characteristic of any of these women even though it was likely a defining moment (or moments) in their lives. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. and agree with the assessment that its creation was in good faith. There might be a handful, like Catherine of Aragon, where you could make a case that it was defining, but it's a stretch. (And if anything henry the 8th's experience with pregnancy loss would probably be more defining...) Mason (talk) 21:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. An earlier discussion closed as no consensus. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:35, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural oppose I do not see any arguments being advanced why the earlier discussion (less than a year ago) should be disregarded, or how all the opposing arguments presented then should be ignored, or why those arguments have somehow been undermined or overturned. If you're just here to redo a discussion without bringing new policy and guideline-based reasons to do so, that is not helpful for the process. NLeeuw (talk) 18:01, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nederlandse Leeuw, I wasn't aware of the previous discussion until Marco added a link to this. But I can give you a more detailed reasoning. You can say this category can also come under WP:TRIVIALCAT since, as painful it is, it is trivial that a famous woman lost a pregnancy. It may even be WP:SUBJECTIVECAT since even an abortion can be considered pregnancy loss to some and not to others and also, to some people, giving birth to a child who died soon after birth can be too.
    Also worth noting that we now know that women aren't the only ones who can get pregnant. Non-binary people can too. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:59, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, let's have a look.
    • What does WP:TRIVIALCAT say? In general, if something could be easily left out of a biography, it is likely that it is a trivial characteristic. I think that depends. I know women to whom a miscarriage was traumatising and life-changing, but I also know women to whom a miscarriage was kind of okay since the pregnancy was unplanned anyway. Furthermore, I know women who consciously opted to abort their pregnancy when the circumstances were not right to complete the pregnancy, and to some of them, it wasn't a big deal, while to others it was (even though they didn't regret it, as it was the best choice in the situation). Nevertheless, pretty much all these women only disclosed their experiences to me in a private setting, with a clear understanding that I should keep it a secret from others; they wish to control which people are allowed to know it, as they consider it a private and sensitive matter, even if in the end it wasn't a big deal to some of them. I think this wish should be respected.
    For our purposes here, I think this would call for a case-by-case assessment of what impact the person in question says in WP:RS that the pregnancy loss has had on their life. We shouldn't be labelling people to whom it wasn't that important, as this could needlessly stigmatise them. Especially in WP:BLPs, as pointed out in the previous discussion, we should be very careful not to categorise such people unless they come forward with their stories and explain it was very important in their lives.
    • I agree with you that the current catdesc is vague about whether it includes intentional abortions. The linked article pregnancy loss suggests it includes both intentional and unintentional cases. If that is the objection, though, the logical solution would be a split of the category rather than a deletion, wouldn't you agree?
    • I agree that non-binary people can get pregnant and experience pregnancy loss as well. If that is the objection, though, the logical solution would be a renaming of the category rather than a deletion, wouldn't you agree?
    NLeeuw (talk) 09:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nederlandse Leeuw, respectfully I wouldn't agree with any split or rename because I also think this category is WP:NONDEF in addition to being trivial and subjective. If its worth adding, the information about pregnancy loss should be added - which is to say written into - to the article of the person. Indeed, in most cases it matters, it is gone into detail. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:35, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok. That seems to suggest you no longer support deletion, does it? NLeeuw (talk) 11:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nederlandse Leeuw, where did I suggest I no longer support deletion? I very much do. I merely stated that if a person has lost a pregnancy and it is important to their lives, that information should be incorportated into their article. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah sorry, then I misunderstood what you said. I guess I can understand that argument. I'll wait to see what others have to say for now. Thanks for your clarifications so far. NLeeuw (talk) 12:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nederlandse Leeuw, no worries! Thanks for hearing me out as well! :) Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, the above, and last time. Simply not defining, plus except for a few high profile women, we usually just don't know about this aspect of lives. To judge by the category as it is, this virtually only seems to happen to European royalty and American actresses. Johnbod (talk) 15:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The current contents might, of course, not be representative of humanity at all. But it is a good question who should and shouldn't be in here, if we are to have this category. NLeeuw (talk) 15:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The question is, and would be, who we have RS information for. That will only be a very small minority of our population of 397,000 women with biographies, reinforcing how non-defining it is. Johnbod (talk) 15:56, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure I follow why a very small number of biographies falling into the category reinforces the argument that it is non-defining? That's true for many non-controversial categories. Chocmilk03 (talk) 04:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Because this is extremely common, and if it was defining we would have far more entries, even given the frequent lack of information. Johnbod (talk) 12:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This isn't an easy question but having read through the extensive earlier discussion, I am persuaded that this category should be kept. It can be a WP:DEFINING event for some people based on reliable sources; if it isn't, then the category shouldn't be applied to the article (also bearing in mind WP:SENSITIVE). It seems to me correctly applied in the cases of (for example) Chrissy Teigen, Kathryn van Beek and Anne Boleyn. Chocmilk03 (talk) 22:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Chocmilk03, WP:DEFINING means characteristics that person is notable for. I think you would agree that, while these women may have lost a pregnancy, they aren't defined by them nor are their lives characterised by losing pregnancies. The only serious exception is royalty for obvious reasons.
    Again, if its defining to their lives in any way, it should be added to the person's article. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Omnis Scientia: In my view, the characteristic of having lost a pregnancy can contribute to notability, and is a defining event for some people. In the same way that we have categories for year of birth, where people attended high school, Category:People with Parkinson's disease, Category:American amputees, Category:People with polydactyly, etc, categories don't have to be the main thing that the person is notable for or the defining aspect of their life in order to be defining and useful for navigational purposes. Chocmilk03 (talk) 21:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Chocmilk03, well you can make that argument but, at the same time, not everything is categorized. Not every medical condition is categorized, not every disability. Its why "People with infertility issues" (or something similar) is not categorized and why I feel this category should not be either. I've given my reasons for why above, not least of which is that losing pregnancy is something very common and, going back further, was a lot more common. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:27, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I would also not go with the old Cfd's arguments. It really turned into a huge row which was not about debating whether the category was WP:OVERCAT or not (I think it is in many ways) but rather about people saying "what about this" and so on. I hope this Cfd will be more on actual policy than the previous one. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also please don't argue WP:OTHERCATSEXIST. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Omnis Scientia: My views are based on my own reading of the policies including WP:CATDEF, WP:TRIVIALCAT, WP:COPDEF etc, not the previous CFD arguments. In my view, this category does meet the criteria of defining for some people (even though it is unlikely to be the sole reason for notability). "A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to in describing the topic"; pregnancy loss meets this criteria for some people.
    I wasn't arguing that "other stuff exists"; those categories were simply examples to illustrate my point, in the same way you've used "People with infertility issues" as an example of why you feel this category should not exist.
    I've read your arguments (and those of others above) and respectfully disagree, hence my vote for 'keep'. I don't seek to persuade you of the correctness of my views, and understand you take a different view. Chocmilk03 (talk) 22:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I find Chocmilk03's arguments somewhat persuasive, but not yet compelling. Let's see what others have to say. NLeeuw (talk) 15:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please see previous discussion, as Marcocapelle linked above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I've read through the arguments in the previous discussion and what else has been written here. Fundamentally, something is defining if it's often (or could reasonably be) mentioned in the lead. For 99% of these pages, its not defining. I still think that the category should be deleted as it isn't defining. For the very few who it could be defining, they can be added to a list. At the very very very least, this category needs to be purged. Mason (talk) 22:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for that clarification. Note to closer: Mason already !voted Support per nom above, so the word deleted in this comment shouldn't be counted. NLeeuw (talk) 13:16, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 10:38, 23 June 2024 (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:Hinglaj Mata

[edit]
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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:19, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, the category only contains a single image. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:56, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge The Hinglaj Mata Temple doesn't have any scope for a topic category. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:33, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Added relevant article pages to the category-the main temple and another a fort. Krayon95 (talk) 06:49, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why is Hinglajgarh related to Hinglaj Mata Temple? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:09, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From the article itself, the fort is either named or developed after a temple of the said goddess. Krayon95 (talk) 19:13, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:19, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 10:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Marcocapelle. Is this an acceptable outcome for you, LaundryPizza03? HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:57, 4 July 2024 (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:Battles of the American Revolutionary War by state

[edit]
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: No consensus to merge en masse without prejudice to a renomination of some of the categorize on size grounds. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:18, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN. Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 6#Category:Battles of the War of 1812 by state. NLeeuw (talk) 19:42, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
do not merge this is simply another step in the path of destroying useful category information at the US state level. US state boundaries are in no way akin to the boundary problems found in some European countries, which was misused used as a precedent by this editor to destroy the state categorization of the Battles of the War of 1812. State boundaries have not generally changed since their formation, unlike the shifting boundaries of European geographic entities. Hmains (talk) 20:02, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would respectfully request that you WP:assume good faith, and base your opposition to the proposal on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, rather than a personal POV of how things supposedly were in the past in North America compared to Europe so that WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN conveniently does not apply to categories you created. I am simply applying our polices and guidelines, confirmed by consensus established in precedents, and I would urge you to do the same. Have a good day. NLeeuw (talk) 22:01, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing about 'the past' involving the boundaries of the federal states of the United States. Unlike Europe of the past, the boundaries of these states are generally the same as when they were created over of last 200+ years. That means a battle that took place in a populated place of state x is still correctly stated as having been a battle in state x. I am not doing things in WP for my own convenience, whatever that may be. I am stating the facts. You have requested deletion of all these categories so I assume that is your intent--this does not involve 'faith' of any kind. Thanks Hmains (talk) 23:07, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and I did not mean to offend in any way if that is what happened. I am just here to edit. Thanks Hmains (talk) 00:07, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, no offence taken. I only took issue with the passage ...which was misused used as a precedent by this editor to destroy the state categorization.... This way of saying things implies that I am deliberately doing something wrong, and that what I am doing is harmful. The first bit is conduct that users should avoid: WP:Assume good faith means that we always assume that fellow editors are trying to do the right thing, even if they make mistakes. (And I do make plenty of mistakes, and I'll happily be corrected if you can point out what I should have done instead). The last bit may be your opinion, but it is rather strongly worded; it's better not to use words such as "destruction" when it comes to reorganising category trees in a way you don't like. Hopefully that clears things up?
My intention is to upmerge rather than outright delete these categories. Even though deletion is the result, the contents of the former categories will be preserved in their parent categories, and the logbooks will note which categories were merged into which. E.g. battles in New York state will still be in Category:Military history of New York (state), where readers and editors alike can still find them. This upmerging is based on WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN, a guideline which has existed since about 2007. If you think there is something wrong with that guideline, you are free to raise the issue at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Military history. Making arguments here at CFD for why this guideline should not apply to the United States, however, is not very helpful.
Besides, practically speaking, the main article List of American Revolutionary War battles already mentions the state in which each battle took place. This is one single page for all you want readers to know about the location of these battles, right? NLeeuw (talk) 10:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom, per guideline. In the nomination the articles are kept at a state level, there is no destroyal taking place. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:21, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    destruction*. Otherwise I agree. ;) NLeeuw (talk) 10:18, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the larger categories and merge the ones with very few members per WP:NARROWCAT and WP:DIFFUSE. Merging the larger categories would make the category tree less useful for readers. The nom may prefer the list to the categories, but lists and categories can coexist without conflict. - Eureka Lott 14:11, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I should explain that I have only noted how many P and C there are in each of them as a secondary argument, but according to WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN (the primary argument), it doesn't matter what size the category is, as all such "battles in X" categories are considered inappropriate. (Even if we were to keep the "large" ones, which categories would you consider "large" and which ones "small"?)
    My remark that the list already mentions the locations anyway is intended to address the concern of Hmains, the creator of these categories, that valuable information or overview might be lost if the proposal receives approval, because the list covers it. Personally, I'm not sure if it is necessary to mention the locations in any list or category, but keeping them in the list while upmering the categories seems an acceptable compromise to me.
    I hope this may help to understand the rationale. NLeeuw (talk) 17:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The problem that WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN attempts to address—issues arising when modern and historical names differ—is largely irrelevant here. The boundaries of South Carolina, for instance, are the same now as they were during this conflict. You're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. - Eureka Lott 14:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Lots of states, provinces and especially territories didn't have their modern boundaries yet. More importantly, WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN doesn't say anywhere that it doesn't apply in some places, but not in others. It's a universal rule, it should be applied everywhere. If someone thinks there should be exceptions to the rule, they're free to start the process of seeking to amend it. But until it is amended, we should apply the guideline as it is, and not engage in special pleading.
    Given the many recent precedents in both the category space and the article space, there is a running consensus to phase out "battles in Fooland" categories and articles. NLeeuw (talk) 17:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:MILMOS is a style manual. Despite your protestations, it doesn't automatically override our categorization guidelines. You're veering into WP:IDONTLIKEIT territory with these assertions. - Eureka Lott 23:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 10:28, 23 June 2024 (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:Substitution tracking templates

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unclear if this is used anymore by any template as it isn't found in an "insource" search. If still used the category description should be updated with where this is used from. Gonnym (talk) 10:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unused, as confirmed by both search and WhatLinksHere. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:06, 1 July 2024 (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:Baseball players from Ames, Iowa

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 4#Category:Baseball players from Ames, Iowa

Category:Proto-Mongols

[edit]
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 to Category:Mongol peoples. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:29, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, the category only contains the eponymous article and a subcategory. That is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:34, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:04, 1 July 2024 (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:Mongol states

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 4#Category:Mongol states

Category:DVD interactive technology

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 1#Category:DVD interactive technology

Category:Historic buildings and structures in the United States

[edit]
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, rename, and merge. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING (WP:SUBJECTIVECAT)
We have plenty of objective categories for historic buildings like Category:National Register of Historic Places, Category:Historic Hotels of America, and Category:Oakland Designated Landmarks. This category is different because, in my subjective opinion, the Citigroup Center is not historic but, in the subjective opinion of another editor, it is. That's really all it takes to add an article to this tree! - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:30, 23 June 2024 (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.

Ambassadors of the Republic of Venice 2

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 11#Category:Ambassadors of the Republic of Venice to the Kingdom of Sardinia. WP:MFN. There are many, many underpopulated (1 to 4 P) ambassador cats like this. Recommend future follow-ups for Category:Ambassadors of Aragon, Category:Ambassadors of North Yemen, Category:Ambassadors of the Duchy of Milan, amongst others. NLeeuw (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2024 (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.


June 22

[edit]

Category:WikiProject assessment categories needing attention

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 2#Category:WikiProject assessment categories needing attention

Category:All WikiProject Color pages

[edit]
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: withdrawn. I realize my mistake now, and am going to edit the category's header to remove a misused template. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:00, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No other WikiProject has a comprehensive list of members. It is also tagged as NA-Class, which does not match the intended purpose. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:50, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This category feeds the user:HotArticlesBot for updating Wikipedia:WikiProject Color/Hot articles. Curran919 (talk) 09:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LaundryPizza03: There are literally hundreds of such categories, including Category: All WikiProject Medicine articles, Category: WikiProject Geology articles, Category: WikiProject Biology articles, Category: WikiProject Agriculture articles, etc. They are created by the WikiProject templates. And NA class is for "A page that does not fit into any other category. Used as a 'catch-all' by all WikiProjects." That seems to be a good place to put something like a tracking category used by software (rather than a category intended for human browsing). Nosferattus (talk) 14:50, 23 June 2024 (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:Television series based on novels

[edit]
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: manual merge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Categories without a clear point of distinction from their parents. In theory, a distinction could be drawn between television series and television films, but the parent category isn't actually doing that: there's no Category:Television films based on novels at all, and instead virtually everything in Category:Television shows based on novels or its "Television shows based on [Country] novels" subcategories is a series (sometimes even with this and one or more of those both sitting alongside each other), so in actual practice this undergrown sapling is just duplicating the parent tree unnecessarily. And even populating it more fully would just entail moving virtually everything out of the parents anyway, so they'd still just be fundamentally redundant to each other.
I'm willing to withdraw this if there's any kind of editorial will to start creating and populating "Television films based on novels" categories to sister this, but as things currently stand this isn't offering a clear differentiation from its parent. Bearcat (talk) 21:36, 22 June 2024 (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:B-Class vital articles in Games

[edit]
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. ✗plicit 13:23, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Categories for vital article classifications that do not exist, and some others of questionable usefulness. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:33, 22 June 2024 (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.

X in the Republic of Artsakh

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 13:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Country no longer exists, so there is no justification to keeping these around. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:57, 22 June 2024 (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:Populated places in the Republic of Artsakh

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:35, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The Republic of Artsakh no longer exists, and all of these are likely in a subcategory of Category:Populated places in Azerbaijan. There is no clear consensus on what happens if a country ceases to exist — the only other times this happened during Wikipedia's existence was the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 2003, and Serbia and Montenegro in 2006. The most recent precedent I could find was Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_December_13#Architecture_in_Serbia_and_Montenegro, but there are older precedents such as Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/User/Archive/February_2007#Category:Wikipedians_in_Serbia_and_Montenegro and Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_June_7#Category:Indoor_arenas_in_Serbia_and_Montenegro which happened shortly after Serbia and Montenegro ceased to exist. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Artsakh is history, and Artsakh content should be in history categories, not geography categories. If we categorize every place on Earth by every former administrative division they were in at one point, there will be no end to that. It's perfectly fine to have articles about the defunct provinces and other subdivisions of Artsakh though. Place Clichy (talk) 19:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Mellk (talk) 09:04, 1 July 2024 (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.

Submerged settlements in X

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 14:18, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Settlement is not standard for categories, and there is no reason to limit the categories to settlements. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:33, 22 June 2024 (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:Settlements demolished to make room for airports

[edit]
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 to Category:Populated places demolished to make room for airports. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 13:57, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category name is not standardized, but because there is no parallel I am not sure if it should exist. Should we have a Category:Populated places forcibly depopulated by eminent domain for the non-ghost towns on the list? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:31, 22 June 2024 (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:Polish social activists of the Prussian partition

[edit]
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 to Category:Activists from the Grand Duchy of Posen. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 19:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category should either be merged or renamed to make it clearer how this is defining. Mason (talk) 01:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:58, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This question is part of a wider issue concerning the categorisation of "Polish people" during the Partition period from 1795 to 1918. Last year I tried to address it, but no consensus emerged: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland/Archive 19#Categorisation of Category:Polish people of the partition period.
In short: we'll need to choose whether we mean "Polish" as an ethnicity (as Marcocapelle suggested), or as a nationality (as Mason is indirectly suggesting, since Category:Polish activists is in the Category:Activists by nationality tree). Ethnicity is always a difficult one to establish and results in lots of sourcing problems, and it means we can't put these people in the Category:Polish people tree (because it is part of the Category:People by nationality tree). So nationality seems the best approach. For our purposes here, the Prussian partition is best understood as the Grand Duchy of Posen, though it is a little more complicated than that (I'll get back to that).
But how do we grant a Polish "nationality" in a time when they did not have a state? My proposal was to recognise certain historic non-sovereign entities as "Polish":
1815:
  Grand Duchy of Posen (Prussian Partition)
  Congress Poland (Russian Partition)
  Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria (Austrian Partition)
  Free City of Kraków (independent until 1846)
Should we categorise all inhabitants of these polities as having "Polish nationality", or not? Currently, only inhabitants of Congress Poland and the preceding Duchy of Warsaw are deliberately categorised as Category:Polish people.
Until we resolve that question, it's probably difficult to do anything with these Polish Partition categories. We do not want to erase Polish history, but it's really challenging to categorise it either. NLeeuw (talk) 07:01, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For the second time, thoughts on the (new) alt rename target Smasongarrison?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:26, 22 June 2024 (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:Jewish Palestine Liberation Organization members

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 19:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete per WP:OCEGRS and possibly WP:NONDEF. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:01, 22 June 2024 (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:Drake & Josh video games

[edit]
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 to Category:Drake & Josh and Category:Nickelodeon video games and Category:Video games set in San Diego and and Category:Video games set in the 2000s. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 13:58, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category only consists of two articles. There were no other Drake and Josh games produced. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:29, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 18:26, 22 June 2024 (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:Roman generals

[edit]
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/rename. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 06:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Uphelpful bundling of Roman people. This category contains Ancient Romans and Byzantine people. Mason (talk) 03:03, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should have. It's not accurate to consider it a separate empire, historical revisionism.★Trekker (talk) 07:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but that's not really responsive to nom. It's not helpful to have a Category:Roman generals by century when there's not even a regular generals by century category.Mason (talk) 23:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 18:08, 22 June 2024 (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:Battles of the War of 1812 in Canada

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN. Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 6#Category:Battles of the War of 1812 by state. See also recent precedents, e.g. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 24#Battles by location in Germany. NLeeuw (talk) 09:28, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:19, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • do not merge There is nothing stated in WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN that requires the deletion of geographic sub-categories within a 'battles of xx war' category. And doing so will harm the reader's navigation to desired articles, forcing them to mentally merge several requests together and open and read multiple articles together to obtain information such as 'what are the battles of the War of 1812 in Canada?' or 'what are the battles of the war of 1812 in Ontario?' WP information consists not only of article content but also the category structure. This is destroying content. Thanks Hmains (talk) 00:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:29, 22 June 2024 (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.

Bengali–Assamese script

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Bengali–Assamese script

Category:Rashidun governors of Ta'if

[edit]
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. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge/delete for now, currently only 1-2 articles in each category, this is not helpful for navigation. No objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:26, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:19, 22 June 2024 (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:Cricket organizations

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Cricket organizations

Category:Jesuit musicians

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Jesuit musicians

Category:Jews and Judaism in Portland, Maine

[edit]
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: manual merge as per Marco. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 07:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge with parent category. The people in this category should be moved to Category:Jews from Maine. That leaves one synagogue and a school. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This plan is not a good one, as both synagogue articles are already in Category:Religious buildings and structures in Portland, Maine.--User:Namiba 15:49, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tagging those who participated in December's discussion User:Smasongarrison, User:Jahaza, User:LaundryPizza03, User:Place Clichy.--User:Namiba 15:49, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That previous discussion was a no consensus. Place Clichy (talk) 18:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why though? The name of the category clearly indicates that it should include individual people (Jews) as well as Jewish institutions. Unless there is a mass rename, that doesn't make sense. Jewish elected officials (for example) are obviously defined by their connection to the city.--User:Namiba 12:53, 26 June 2024 (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:Historical geography

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Historical geography

Category:Cross-platform free software (BSD; Linux; macOS; Windows)

[edit]
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 to parents. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 14:02, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging to all parents:
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining/trivial intersection. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:29, 22 June 2024 (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.


June 21

[edit]

Category:Major League Baseball Triple Crown winners

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:Major League Baseball Triple Crown winners


Category:Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador alumni

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 11:40, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category lacks the requisite sourcing and the main article for the category has been deleted. Allan Nonymous (talk) 20:06, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:55, 29 June 2024 (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:National Roads in South Africa

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:National Roads in South Africa

Category:Crime action films

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:Crime action films

Category:Battles involving the Qarmatians

[edit]
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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 11:48, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These battles concern a specific subgroup of Qarmatians, namely those of the Qarmatian 'republic' of Bahrayn under the al-Jannabi family. This was the main Qarmatian group, but by no means the only one, and at any rate it should be distinguished. Other "Qarmatian" battles, like the Battle of Hama (even though the Qarmatian label is debatable here), are not included. Constantine ✍ 07:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:44, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: (Sorry, wrong CfD)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:16, 21 June 2024 (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:Wesean National Leaders

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 11:44, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This counts as a WP:HOAX. Nothing called "Wesea" actually exists. It is an aspiration for certain separatist political movements. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:51, 21 June 2024 (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:Legendary creatures

[edit]
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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 11:51, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge or reverse merge, largely overlapping categories. I will tag both categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. "Legendary" supposes that there might be some truth to it, but all contents here seem to fall outside of the realm of serious modern biology. NLeeuw (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep At the moment, "Legendary" sits above "Folklore" and "Mythological creatures" - rather a lot of the contents of the first two should probably be moved to the last. As a matter of English meaning, I don't think "Legendary" supposes that there might be some truth to it" is at all true. "legendary" suggests to me a literary source(s) somewhere quite early on, & I think there is a distinction, if a rather vague one. Johnbod (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the moment "legendary" sits above, but the hierarchy could just as well be reversed because there isn't a clear distinction. The fact that the above two editors disagree on what Legendary means illustrates the confusion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    While I'm not necessarily opposed to merging related folklore/legend/mythology categories together, I don't know which goes where. AHI-3000 (talk) 01:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I assume a redirect would be needed after merging.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:02, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect certainly seems helpful, especially if we agree a merger is a good idea, but are in doubt about the best target. One way or the other, readers and editors will thus find their way. NLeeuw (talk) 17:23, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:03, 21 June 2024 (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:Romans from Africa

[edit]
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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 11:54, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, many of these people were not Romans. Aligning this with e.g. Category:Roman-era people by ethnicity. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:14, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Some more explicit support/opposition to various potential names for the categories would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:42, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose the first, lean oppose the second: the Constitutio Antoniniana of AD 212 granted citizenship to all free residents of the Roman empire, and while there were non-free inhabitants (slaves, prisoners), we would probably consider them Romans irrespective of their legal status. So in theory the only non-Romans from that point onward would be travelers passing through—and they probably do not represent a significant proportion of these categories. Even before this, most of the inhabitants of areas under direct Roman governance are people we would consider "Romans" in the broadest sense.
The first proposed category could theoretically include people of any origin living anywhere on the continent of Africa between the eighth century BC and the sixth century AD—possibly later, depending on whether you include the Byzantine Empire under "Roman era". In theory this would include the Carthaginians, Numidians, Egyptians, and various other Phoenician and Greek colonists, as well as native peoples, even before they had contact with, much less governance by Rome. But the clear intent of the category under its current title is to include inhabitants of Roman Africa, not other areas, and this also limits the time period—there was no Roman era in Africa until the latter half of the second century BC, and other areas only gradually came under Roman control (for instance, Numidia, Tripolitania, Egypt). Renaming the category as proposed would dramatically increase the nominal scope in a way that is not intended.
"Roman-era people by province" is not quite as bad, since its geographic scope would be limited to people within the borders of Roman territories, but again it would include relatively few non-Romans, since once a place became a Roman province, its free inhabitants typically became citizens, or in the case of non-free inhabitants who were owned by citizens, or natives under direct Roman governance, we would still typically call them Roman: although there must have been many non-citizens at various early stages, but there will be very few articles about them, and since the category name does not explicitly refer to citizenship, they could still be included under a broad reading of "Romans". The only people who would definitely not be included, again, would be travelers from foreign lands, and there cannot be a significant number of articles about foreign travelers in the Roman Empire—and they would not be "from" the provinces named, so it's not clear they would be included even under the proposed title.
In all, "Roman-era African people" is a really bad choice, as its title gives it a potentially unlimited scope, unconnected with either Romans or Roman territory; "Roman-era people by province" would be misleading, since it implies a broader scope than that which is evidently intended, even though there would hardly be any non-Romans in it (possibly various Huns, Goths, Franks, or Vandals toward the end of the Western Empire, though some of these became nominally Roman). P Aculeius (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2024 (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:Violence in the Palestinian territories

[edit]
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: keep. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:57, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, all four articles in the category are about events after the establishment of the State of Palestine. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom.
NLeeuw (talk) 06:36, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcocapelle, Nederlandse Leeuw, do you stick by your initial merge !vote? — Qwerfjkltalk 11:56, 29 June 2024 (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:Australian commercial artists

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:Australian commercial artists

Category:Australian flour millers and merchants

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:Australian flour millers and merchants

Category:Mayoralties of municipalities in the United States

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:48, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category whose name is a bit confusing and not accurately descriptive of its contents. The contents here are subpages where a political figure (usually a person who went on from the mayoralty to hold much more prominent national offices, and thus has a very, very long biographical article that needed to have stuff chunked out from it for size management) has had a "Mayoralty of [Person]" article created as a spinoff from their base biography -- but that means that the defining characteristic here is "mayoralties of individual people", not "mayoralties of municipalities" (which could be too easily confused with a redundant duplication of Category:Mayors of places in the United States, and thus potentially have stuff misfiled in it by editors who weren't paying attention to the actual contents of the categories.)
So it should likely be renamed to make its intentions clearer. Bearcat (talk) 16:42, 21 June 2024 (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:Symplectic topology

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:Symplectic topology

Category:Organisations based in Northeast India

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:49, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category:Organisations based in India not subcategorized this way. Gjs238 (talk) 14:58, 21 June 2024 (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:Saadi Shirazi

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:49, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. Only the writer and work of theirs in the category. Unhelpful for navigation when there are only two pages like this Mason (talk) 13:38, 21 June 2024 (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:Fox Sports 1 people

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:Fox Sports 1 people


Category:Meitei goddesses

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 12:05, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I haven't listed all of the child categories of this, but the problem is not the parent category. The problem is that the parent category contains a massive 39 largely-overlapping categories for just 24 actual articles. I suggest that every child of this category should be merged back to the parent. PepperBeast (talk) 02:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pepperbeast: I listed them all. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! PepperBeast (talk) 03:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support There is an evident large overlap in the roles of deities in Meitei mythology. For example, Kounu appears in 24 of the 39 categories. Also merge to respective deities by type, such as Category:Abundance goddesses. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hie, Creator of many of the Categories here. To explain why so many categories were created. I actually created all the "in Meitei mythology" to basically UNCLOUT other categories. Apparently ALL the deities of Meitei mythology are Deities of Everything-and-Its-Neighbour and one of the creator of pages put each and every one (or close to it) in dozens of categories for basically almost every god and goddess. I don't know anything about Meitei Mythology, so I can't tell which god really belong in a category or not (apparently basically all goddesses or close to it are Goddess of Abundance, Beauty, Arts, Fertility, Love and lust, Peace, Magic, among other things...) Though some divinities in each Pantheon can have lots of domains (like Apollo in greek mythology, Sucellos in the celt one), and I can't tell which really belong in each category or not. Still, I note that most don't have anything in the description or a reference that would justify many of the various categories listed (I think one of the rational seems to be that if a goddess is beautiful then she's deemed a goddess of Beauty, Fertility as well as Love and lust, any divinity that is not a warrior is automatically pushed into God/Goddess of Peace and basically all divinities are Fortune ones just by existing, unless linked to something unfortunate...) This caused a bit of a strange situation in the various categories, as for exemple if you went to Category:Abundance goddesses to have a look at the goddesses of this domain, half the goddesses (17 out of 34) were the Meitei Goddesses alone, the other half for ALL the other Pantheons in the world put together... Same with the other categories, 20 out of the 44 pages in Category:Beauty goddesses were the Meitei goddesses, 19 out of the 47 pages of Category:Fortune goddesses, etc. Though when so many categories in a pagebelongs to just one other pantheon, usually creating a child page is preferable. --Zeynel (talk) 07:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Category contents were changed without clear explanation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't know if it matters but the categories that were emptied after this CFD discussion was opened are:
Liz Read! Talk! 20:54, 22 June 2024 (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:12th-century Almohad caliphs

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:12th-century Almohad caliphs

Category:Australian newspaper proprietors

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:Australian newspaper proprietors

Auto racing teams

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:49, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended content
Nominator's rationale: Most of these categories were speedily renamed to their current names from the proposed names in May 2023. Discussions at the Formula One WikiProject and the Motorsport WikiProject resolved that these speedy renames should be reversed because, unlike many other sporting teams, auto racing teams may compete all over the world and their national identity is defined by their racing licence and is not necessarily related to the location of their base of operations. Consider the current Formula One World Champions: Red Bull Racing - they are universally recognised as an Austrian team (they use an Austrian racing licence and when they win a race, the Austrian national anthem is played) but their base of operations is in England. The category rename in May 2023 moved the article from the accurate Category:Austrian auto racing teams to the inaccurate Category:Auto racing teams in Austria. DH85868993 (talk) 11:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: because I don't want to close a 44-category CfD as "unopposed".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Queen of Hearts talk 04:56, 21 June 2024 (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:Vassal rulers of the Umayyad Caliphate

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:Vassal rulers of the Umayyad Caliphate

Category:Christian universalists by nationality

[edit]
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: revert reparenting. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 12:09, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per this conversation, "Universalism" is not a denomination. I am bringing this to CfD per Smasongarrison's suggestion to confirm that others agree that this revision by Neddyseagoon is inappropriate and should be undone. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:36, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, my request was to get feedback on whether universalism should be parented by denomination or placed in the main category as a philosophy/theory. I never said that the revision from 2016 was inappropriate, I said that was a stable edit. I don't have a strong opinion, on the parent category, but I did want others to weigh in about how it should be categorized. Mason (talk) 04:42, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if I misrepresented you. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:58, 21 June 2024 (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.

Sixteen Kingdoms Buddhist monks

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:58, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, the Sixteen Kingdoms contains partially parallel and mostly very short-living kingdoms, typically a few decades. No need to categorize Buddhist monks by each of them separately. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:33, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Mason (talk) 13:38, 21 June 2024 (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:Scottish women embroiderers

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:50, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge. This is a non-defining intersection between the type of textile artist and gender. Mason (talk) 03:18, 21 June 2024 (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:Pretenders to the Mexican throne

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:51, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OR WP:NPOV WP:BLP (Maximilian von Götzen-Iturbide states: Götzen does not pursue any claim to the throne...Despite Götzen not actively pursuing any claim himself, social media users claiming to be Mexican monarchists have posted their support of his claim., therefore also WP:NONDEFINING). Follow-up to recent deletion of main article Pretenders to the Mexican throne, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pretenders to the throne of Mexico. See also User:Nederlandse Leeuw/Pretenders#NLeeuw category list.
Some deceased people in this category also appear to be inappropriately labelled pretenders:

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Associated TfD was closed as delete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:22, 21 June 2024 (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:Whitewashing in film

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Category:Whitewashing in film

Category:Defunct Catholic schools in Louisville, Kentucky

[edit]
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 (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:51, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge. There's only one page in here, and no other city (or state) level categories in Defunct Catholic schools in the United States Mason (talk) 01:00, 21 June 2024 (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.

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 20

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Previous_22_to_42_days&oldid=1048280605"