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.
Nominator's rationale: Has only entry and its a redirect. LSU–Alexandria Generals baseball doesn't even have an article.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 23:40, 8 November 2018 (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:Ontario communities with large francophone populations
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category with arbitrary and poorly defined inclusion criteria. While there is a
List of francophone communities in Ontario, which basically lists every community in the province whose francophone population exceeds the provincial average of 4.1 per cent, that list does not correspond to what's been selected for inclusion here -- this category does have partial overlap with the list, but randomly excludes some places that appear in the list and randomly includes some places that don't: there are things here that are census divisions rather than communities, there are unincorporated communities for which there's no demographic data in existence for us to properly
verify whether the size of its francophone community is "large" or not, and the two major cities in the category, Ottawa and Sudbury, each double-dip by also applying the category to Orleans and Rayside-Balfour, sub-municipal neighbourhoods within each city. So the inclusion criteria are random and arbitrary to begin with, before you take into account that it's also mixing in things whose inclusion is impossible to properly verify and/or which don't belong in a category for "communities" at all -- all of which is a recipe for "this shouldn't exist in this form".
Bearcat (
talk) 23:20, 8 November 2018 (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:Ancient Christianity
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.
Comment Diocletian's reforms are the ones used as the start of
late antiquity in sources. I was not suggesting using his reign to define the Christian categories.
Dimadick (
talk) 15:22, 12 November 2018 (UTC)reply
(as nominator) I'm perfectly fine with replacing "era" by "period", as suggested.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 11:56, 2 December 2018 (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.
Hindu calendars
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.
Timrollpickering 17:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:merge per
WP:OVERLAPCAT, these calendars are exclusively tied to the Hindu religion (split by country/region), categorizing the articles by Hindu festival and by calendar is mere duplication.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 22:06, 8 November 2018 (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.
Religious calendars
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.
Timrollpickering 17:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:merge per
WP:OVERLAPCAT, these calendars are exclusively tied to a religion, categorizing the articles by religious festival and by calendar is mere duplication.
Support though would prefer a standard of "festivals".
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 15:07, 10 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Currently we have observances, festivals, holy days and holidays. Perhaps we can align all of that some day.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 15:58, 11 November 2018 (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:City Councilmen of Nauvoo, Illinois
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category incorrectly named according to our
naming conventions for city councillor categories (see parent category
Category:Illinois city council members, where the two sibling subcategories for Chicago and Peoria are both named in the target format.) As for the "aldermen" category, Nauvoo seems to be a bit of an edge case — unlike most cities, where "alderman" and "councillor" mean the same thing and the gender-neutral term replaced the gendered one when women started getting elected to city councils on a regular basis, Nauvoo seems to be a place that simultaneously used both terms for different people on the same city council even in the 1840s. (The article on its city council doesn't specify what the distinction between the two terms might be, however; it just says that some of the members were aldermen and others were councillors, the end.) But Nauvoo is not actually a place where serving on city council would pass
WP:NPOL in its own right, but rather everybody in both categories combined either (a) has another notability claim for other reasons, mainly prominence in the Mormon Church hierarchy, rather than being "notable" as city councillors per se, or (b) isn't really notable at all and should be deleted. So the fact that Nauvoo divvied its city council up under two different titles isn't really a strong reason why the two titles would need two separate categories — they should just be merged into one category at a general term that covers both titles, and fortunately the standard naming convention for city council member categories accomplishes exactly that.
Bearcat (
talk) 20:54, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Merge both per nom -- This is a place with 1100 odd inhabitants today, its council having been a shortlived affair in the 1840s. Do we really need three categories for this, including mayor? The people concerned were notable in connection with the LDS church, not for their political role at Nauvoo.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 12:12, 9 November 2018 (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.
LGBT political advocacy groups in New England
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:procedural close as the category pages were not tagged to give anyone notice of the discussion. In any case there was no support from the regular CFD participants who happened to see it. –
FayenaticLondon 13:40, 22 November 2018 (UTC)reply
I am in need of assistance for the what the proper formatting for this proposed merger. I have less experience with categories. ―Matthew J. Long-Talk-☖ 14:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I am of two minds as to whether
Category:LGBT political advocacy groups in the United States really needs to be subdivided by state at all — the vast majority of its subcategories are one, two or three item
WP:SMALLCATs, and the category as a whole is not large enough to require geographic subdivision at all — but as it stands, the criterion of division is by individual state, not by broad multistate region. As long as we're doing it that way, there's no valid reason for Maine and Massachusetts to be handled differently than any of the other 33 states-plus-DC that have their own state-specific categories. For another thing, both of these are also subcategories of "LGBT in [State]" parent categories, which would mean every item in a merged category would be half wrong in its categorization genealogy. If somebody wanted to put forward a batch proposal to get all of the subcategories upmerged to the appropriate parents, I'd probably support that — but this, as constituted here, I can't support under the circumstances as they stand today.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:16, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose, agree with both minds of Bearcat.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 17:52, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
We dont have clear multistate region system for the USA. Almost every category where divided by geography is divided by state.
Rathfelder (
talk) 21:24, 9 November 2018 (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:Saint Barthélemy supercentenarians
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, empty category--
Ymblanter (
talk) 15:44, 15 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Empty category with no potential members that have an article. There was only one person who fit the category description,
Eugénie Blanchard, and she is now only memorialized by a redirect to
List of French supercentenarians. —
JFGtalk 10:30, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete This category is both non-existent and therefore fails any notability guideline as well.
Newshunter12 (
talk) 04:40, 10 November 2018 (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:Space: Above and Beyond
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category for a TV series with only the show itself as a member. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:19, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete; no merging is needed. –
FayenaticLondon 10:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete per nominator.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 14:02, 8 November 2018 (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.
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.
Nominator's rationale: Has only entry and its a redirect. LSU–Alexandria Generals baseball doesn't even have an article.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 23:40, 8 November 2018 (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:Ontario communities with large francophone populations
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category with arbitrary and poorly defined inclusion criteria. While there is a
List of francophone communities in Ontario, which basically lists every community in the province whose francophone population exceeds the provincial average of 4.1 per cent, that list does not correspond to what's been selected for inclusion here -- this category does have partial overlap with the list, but randomly excludes some places that appear in the list and randomly includes some places that don't: there are things here that are census divisions rather than communities, there are unincorporated communities for which there's no demographic data in existence for us to properly
verify whether the size of its francophone community is "large" or not, and the two major cities in the category, Ottawa and Sudbury, each double-dip by also applying the category to Orleans and Rayside-Balfour, sub-municipal neighbourhoods within each city. So the inclusion criteria are random and arbitrary to begin with, before you take into account that it's also mixing in things whose inclusion is impossible to properly verify and/or which don't belong in a category for "communities" at all -- all of which is a recipe for "this shouldn't exist in this form".
Bearcat (
talk) 23:20, 8 November 2018 (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:Ancient Christianity
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.
Comment Diocletian's reforms are the ones used as the start of
late antiquity in sources. I was not suggesting using his reign to define the Christian categories.
Dimadick (
talk) 15:22, 12 November 2018 (UTC)reply
(as nominator) I'm perfectly fine with replacing "era" by "period", as suggested.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 11:56, 2 December 2018 (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.
Hindu calendars
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.
Timrollpickering 17:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:merge per
WP:OVERLAPCAT, these calendars are exclusively tied to the Hindu religion (split by country/region), categorizing the articles by Hindu festival and by calendar is mere duplication.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 22:06, 8 November 2018 (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.
Religious calendars
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.
Timrollpickering 17:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:merge per
WP:OVERLAPCAT, these calendars are exclusively tied to a religion, categorizing the articles by religious festival and by calendar is mere duplication.
Support though would prefer a standard of "festivals".
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 15:07, 10 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Currently we have observances, festivals, holy days and holidays. Perhaps we can align all of that some day.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 15:58, 11 November 2018 (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:City Councilmen of Nauvoo, Illinois
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category incorrectly named according to our
naming conventions for city councillor categories (see parent category
Category:Illinois city council members, where the two sibling subcategories for Chicago and Peoria are both named in the target format.) As for the "aldermen" category, Nauvoo seems to be a bit of an edge case — unlike most cities, where "alderman" and "councillor" mean the same thing and the gender-neutral term replaced the gendered one when women started getting elected to city councils on a regular basis, Nauvoo seems to be a place that simultaneously used both terms for different people on the same city council even in the 1840s. (The article on its city council doesn't specify what the distinction between the two terms might be, however; it just says that some of the members were aldermen and others were councillors, the end.) But Nauvoo is not actually a place where serving on city council would pass
WP:NPOL in its own right, but rather everybody in both categories combined either (a) has another notability claim for other reasons, mainly prominence in the Mormon Church hierarchy, rather than being "notable" as city councillors per se, or (b) isn't really notable at all and should be deleted. So the fact that Nauvoo divvied its city council up under two different titles isn't really a strong reason why the two titles would need two separate categories — they should just be merged into one category at a general term that covers both titles, and fortunately the standard naming convention for city council member categories accomplishes exactly that.
Bearcat (
talk) 20:54, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Merge both per nom -- This is a place with 1100 odd inhabitants today, its council having been a shortlived affair in the 1840s. Do we really need three categories for this, including mayor? The people concerned were notable in connection with the LDS church, not for their political role at Nauvoo.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 12:12, 9 November 2018 (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.
LGBT political advocacy groups in New England
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:procedural close as the category pages were not tagged to give anyone notice of the discussion. In any case there was no support from the regular CFD participants who happened to see it. –
FayenaticLondon 13:40, 22 November 2018 (UTC)reply
I am in need of assistance for the what the proper formatting for this proposed merger. I have less experience with categories. ―Matthew J. Long-Talk-☖ 14:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I am of two minds as to whether
Category:LGBT political advocacy groups in the United States really needs to be subdivided by state at all — the vast majority of its subcategories are one, two or three item
WP:SMALLCATs, and the category as a whole is not large enough to require geographic subdivision at all — but as it stands, the criterion of division is by individual state, not by broad multistate region. As long as we're doing it that way, there's no valid reason for Maine and Massachusetts to be handled differently than any of the other 33 states-plus-DC that have their own state-specific categories. For another thing, both of these are also subcategories of "LGBT in [State]" parent categories, which would mean every item in a merged category would be half wrong in its categorization genealogy. If somebody wanted to put forward a batch proposal to get all of the subcategories upmerged to the appropriate parents, I'd probably support that — but this, as constituted here, I can't support under the circumstances as they stand today.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:16, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose, agree with both minds of Bearcat.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 17:52, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
We dont have clear multistate region system for the USA. Almost every category where divided by geography is divided by state.
Rathfelder (
talk) 21:24, 9 November 2018 (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:Saint Barthélemy supercentenarians
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, empty category--
Ymblanter (
talk) 15:44, 15 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Empty category with no potential members that have an article. There was only one person who fit the category description,
Eugénie Blanchard, and she is now only memorialized by a redirect to
List of French supercentenarians. —
JFGtalk 10:30, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete This category is both non-existent and therefore fails any notability guideline as well.
Newshunter12 (
talk) 04:40, 10 November 2018 (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:Space: Above and Beyond
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category for a TV series with only the show itself as a member. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:19, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete; no merging is needed. –
FayenaticLondon 10:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete per nominator.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 14:02, 8 November 2018 (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.