The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 18:53, 28 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. Rapti no longer exists, due to reorganisation n 2015. Actually much of the Nepal geo-stub tree needs an overhaul as a result.
Grutness...wha? 04:14, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, as the person who emptied the category in favor of now-current province stub types. Her Pegship (
I'm listening) 18:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Bheri-geo-stub
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 18:53, 28 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. Bheri no longer exists, due to reorganisation n 2015. Actually much of the Nepal geo-stub tree needs an overhaul as a result.
Grutness...wha? 04:14, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, as the person who emptied the category in favor of now-current province stub types. Her Pegship (
I'm listening) 18:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Muay Thai film categories
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:upmerge and rename in the case of the American and Thai categories bibliomaniac15 00:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Per
WP:NARROWCAT. The parent category is sparsely populated. It is unnecessary to break it down even further. With the sole exception of Category:Thai muay Thai films it is difficult to foresee these categories ever having more than a handful of entries.
Betty Logan (
talk) 19:41, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Support alt merge per BrownHairedGirl. In addition I would not mind if the American subcategory would be kept.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 23:17, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Regardless of whether the Thai (and American) subcategories are kept, it should at least be a dual merge, right?
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nationality categories for films are non-diffusing so in theory it shouldn't be necessary.
Betty Logan (
talk) 13:57, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Dual merge to include both Nationality films and Muay Thai films.--12:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Comment Just as a heads up the current consensus (see
Talk:Muay Thai) is that both words should be capitalized; accordingly once the article fixes are complete the well populated cat will be
Category:Thai Muay Thai films; we have held off creating the both words capitalized versions for the other cats listed here pending the conclusion of this discussion.
UnitedStatesian (
talk) 03:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Dual upmerge all but rename those two categories per Marcocapelle and UnitedStatesian. LizRead!Talk! 14:48, 29 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 low-power stations
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 22:30, 28 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: To distinguish from radio stations
Mvcg66b3r (
talk) 17:57, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Support. There aren't many digital low-power radio stations in the US, but this category rename would make it more intelligible for readers particularly given the parent categories. Worth noting this is a subcat of
Category:Television stations in the United States though it contains
CFTV-DT and its scope includes Canada.
Raymie (
t •
c) 06:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Women (Nigeria)
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:uncontested rename. bibliomaniac15 00:33, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Working category for an internal wikiproject. However, projectspace categories are not named in the "Category:Wikipedia:" format -- they just go directly from "Category:" to the actual name of the wikiproject. As witness, all of its siblings within
Category:WikiProject Wiki Loves Women articles are just "Category:Wiki Loves Women [something]", not "Category:Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Women [something]".
Bearcat (
talk) 17:57, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Acts of the National Assembly for Wales 2020
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:WP:SMALLCAT/
WP:NARROWCAT. The category was created by moving two articles from
Category:Acts of the National Assembly for Wales, which is now a parent. But the
National Assembly for Wales (which will become the
Welsh Parliament in just over two weeks time) does not pass very many acts - since 2012 when it was first permitted to make legislation, it has passed just
44 Acts. There have been no more than seven in any one year, and an average of fewer than five per year. There is no indication that the number of Acts passed in 2020 will be any greater than in previous years. There is still less indication that we will make an article for each one of them - of the 44 Acts,
we have articles for just eight. So subdividing by year is premature.
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 15:26, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge back to
Category:Acts of the National Assembly for Wales. Even the 44 Acts (if we had an article for each) would not overpopulate the category. I did not know it was becoming a "parliament", but that will provide a means of closing a category for the past decade.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:00, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Thanks for clarifying. Those are risky assumptions though, it is unlikely that a closer of this discussion would have understood what you had in mind.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 04:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Association football positions
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:57, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions.
GiantSnowman 11:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose on the basis that nominator has failed to take into account the possibility that the article they want to match is incorrect, rather than the categories. Indeed, use of dash is not common in modern parlance, and 'central defenders' is used far more commonly than 'centre back' (and is clearer).
GiantSnowman 11:47, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Per Google, "central defender" yields over 1 million results, while "centre back" almost 10 million. Also, all prominent CBs are listed as "centre-back" (with dash) in their infobox (see
Sergio Ramos,
Giorgio Chiellini,
Virgil van Dijk, and
Matthijs de Ligt, to name a few).
Nehme1499 (
talk) 22:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
I note there is also a discrepancy with he use of spaces and dashes.
NFT as an example uses 'centre back', space and no dash.
GiantSnowman 11:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose all. "Central defenders" is clearer term. Use of dash is not common.
94.179.168.56 (
talk) 13:13, 29 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Asian Indoor Games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. –
FayenaticLondon 10:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment - this is a little confusing. We have separate articles for
Asian Indoor Games,
Asian Martial Arts Games and
Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games (I suspect a merge/delete of the first is in order). Is this a suitable move though? The Asian Indoor Games, and the Asian Martial Arts were seperate competitions, and now merged. Perhaps it would be better as a container category. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(
talk •
contribs) 14:26, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Yes this is the same competition, I think that "Asian Indoor Games" article should be merged into
Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games because this is mostly the successor of this one, and not that lone Asian Martial Arts Games competition.
Mohsen1248 (
talk) 16:53, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is the wrong way to go about this. Effectively we're having a category rename/merge/deletion discussion when we should be having an article merge discussion. In my opinion the Asian Indoor Games, Asian Martial Arts Games and Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games are separate competitions with separate histories. The
Olympic Council of Asia certainly seems to treat them that way too. @
Mohsen1248: I'm going to revert the undiscussed merge of the categories until we've had a discussion about whether to merge the articles.
SFB 16:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Mohsen1248:} That article was not merged - it was moved without discussion by a
known sock-puppeteer. What we need to do first is start a merge discussion to merge
Asian Indoor Games and
Asian Martial Arts Games into
Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games and engage interested parties and the relevant WikiProjects to assess what's best as a group. If there is consensus to merge the articles on these games into one article, then I would have no opposition to what you are proposing here – tellingly, the action would not merit a discussion and could be completed by speedy request if we sort out the articles first.
SFB 17:02, 23 April 2020 (UTC)reply
So you really think we need a separate article for Indoor athletes at the Asian Indoor Games and Indoor athletics at the Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games, I'm very surprised, I wonder if anybody else thinks the same. I am for merging them all but still merging the main event page is a different story than merging sports page. for example nobody had any problem when someone moved the Futsal page to
Futsal at the Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games. and btw OCA considers old records from 2009 AIG for Swimming and Athletics competition for this new AIMAG event, another reason why we don't need two pages (and two set of categories) for these events.
Mohsen1248 (
talk) 17:13, 23 April 2020 (UTC)reply
They are exactly the same competition, AIG just renamed to AIMAG, Asian Martial Games was held just once, no need to have a separate category.
Mohsen1248 (
talk) 17:04, 29 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merging articles is another matter, it's about categories, the parent AIMAG category is very small per
WP:NARROWCAT cats should be merged. as I said AMG was held just once, we usually don't have categories with just one page in it.
Mohsen1248 (
talk) 17:23, 29 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Procedural Oppose/Wrong Venue This is an issue with the main articles. The proper route is to fix them through nominations in the article space and then do
WP:C2D to fix the cats after that.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 01:02, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:American academics of Filipino descent
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete yet another "descent" category running afoul of
WP:OCEGRS. Do people serious think American academics of Asian, Filipino, or any other descent do academics differently? If so, do you have reliable sources to back up such theories?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:39, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, Strong oppose merge as nom to the Asian parent because continent-level descent categories should be container categories per
this and
this discussion, otherwise Asian would be used as a proxy for race. Ineligible intersection per
WP:OCEGRS but
Place Clichy (
talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:American academics of Vietnamese descent
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete yet another "descent" category running afoul of
WP:OCEGRS. Do people serious think American academics of Asian, Vietnamese, or any other descent do academics differently? If so, do you have reliable sources to back up such theories?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, Strong oppose merge as nom to the Asian parent because continent-level descent categories should be container categories per
this and
this discussion, otherwise Asian would be used as a proxy for race. Ineligible intersection per
WP:OCEGRS but
Place Clichy (
talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:American academics of Mongolian descent
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete yet another "descent" category running afoul of
WP:OCEGRS. Do people serious think American academics of Asian, Mongolian, or any other descent do academics differently? If so, do you have reliable sources to back up such theories?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, Strong oppose merge as nom to the Asian parent because continent-level descent categories should be container categories per
this and
this discussion, otherwise Asian would be used as a proxy for race. Ineligible intersection per
WP:OCEGRS but
Place Clichy (
talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:American academics of Indonesian descent
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete yet another "descent" category running afoul of
WP:OCEGRS. Do people serious think American academics of Asian, Indonesian, or any other descent do academics differently? If so, do you have reliable sources to back up such theories?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, Strong oppose merge as nom to the Asian parent because continent-level descent categories should be container categories per
this and
this discussion, otherwise Asian would be used as a proxy for race. Ineligible intersection per
WP:OCEGRS but
Place Clichy (
talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:American academics of Hong Kong descent
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete yet another "descent" category running afoul of
WP:OCEGRS. Do people serious think American academics of Asian, Hong Kong, or any other descent do academics differently? If so, do you have reliable sources to back up such theories?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, Strong oppose merge as nom to the Asian parent because continent-level descent categories should be container categories per
this and
this discussion, otherwise Asian would be used as a proxy for race. Ineligible intersection per
WP:OCEGRS but
Place Clichy (
talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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.
The result of the discussion was:upmerge and delete. bibliomaniac15 18:41, 28 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Per
WP:SMALLCAT. The majority of entries are redirects to an article that is also in the category. Of the few that remain, it seems that most will end up being redirected or deleted. No need for an independent category for this classification. ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 04:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
To be clear, I am suggesting the redirects all be removed. Only things that are articles should be merged.ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 06:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
On that basis I agree with the merger.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:08, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Upmerge and delete per nom. Current categorization of redirects is excessive. (not
watching, please {{ping}}) czar 03:25, 25 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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.
The result of the discussion was:delete. bibliomaniac15 18:53, 28 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. Rapti no longer exists, due to reorganisation n 2015. Actually much of the Nepal geo-stub tree needs an overhaul as a result.
Grutness...wha? 04:14, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, as the person who emptied the category in favor of now-current province stub types. Her Pegship (
I'm listening) 18:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Bheri-geo-stub
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 18:53, 28 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. Bheri no longer exists, due to reorganisation n 2015. Actually much of the Nepal geo-stub tree needs an overhaul as a result.
Grutness...wha? 04:14, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, as the person who emptied the category in favor of now-current province stub types. Her Pegship (
I'm listening) 18:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Muay Thai film categories
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:upmerge and rename in the case of the American and Thai categories bibliomaniac15 00:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Per
WP:NARROWCAT. The parent category is sparsely populated. It is unnecessary to break it down even further. With the sole exception of Category:Thai muay Thai films it is difficult to foresee these categories ever having more than a handful of entries.
Betty Logan (
talk) 19:41, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Support alt merge per BrownHairedGirl. In addition I would not mind if the American subcategory would be kept.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 23:17, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Regardless of whether the Thai (and American) subcategories are kept, it should at least be a dual merge, right?
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nationality categories for films are non-diffusing so in theory it shouldn't be necessary.
Betty Logan (
talk) 13:57, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Dual merge to include both Nationality films and Muay Thai films.--12:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Comment Just as a heads up the current consensus (see
Talk:Muay Thai) is that both words should be capitalized; accordingly once the article fixes are complete the well populated cat will be
Category:Thai Muay Thai films; we have held off creating the both words capitalized versions for the other cats listed here pending the conclusion of this discussion.
UnitedStatesian (
talk) 03:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Dual upmerge all but rename those two categories per Marcocapelle and UnitedStatesian. LizRead!Talk! 14:48, 29 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 low-power stations
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 22:30, 28 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: To distinguish from radio stations
Mvcg66b3r (
talk) 17:57, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Support. There aren't many digital low-power radio stations in the US, but this category rename would make it more intelligible for readers particularly given the parent categories. Worth noting this is a subcat of
Category:Television stations in the United States though it contains
CFTV-DT and its scope includes Canada.
Raymie (
t •
c) 06:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Women (Nigeria)
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:uncontested rename. bibliomaniac15 00:33, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Working category for an internal wikiproject. However, projectspace categories are not named in the "Category:Wikipedia:" format -- they just go directly from "Category:" to the actual name of the wikiproject. As witness, all of its siblings within
Category:WikiProject Wiki Loves Women articles are just "Category:Wiki Loves Women [something]", not "Category:Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Women [something]".
Bearcat (
talk) 17:57, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Acts of the National Assembly for Wales 2020
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:WP:SMALLCAT/
WP:NARROWCAT. The category was created by moving two articles from
Category:Acts of the National Assembly for Wales, which is now a parent. But the
National Assembly for Wales (which will become the
Welsh Parliament in just over two weeks time) does not pass very many acts - since 2012 when it was first permitted to make legislation, it has passed just
44 Acts. There have been no more than seven in any one year, and an average of fewer than five per year. There is no indication that the number of Acts passed in 2020 will be any greater than in previous years. There is still less indication that we will make an article for each one of them - of the 44 Acts,
we have articles for just eight. So subdividing by year is premature.
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 15:26, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge back to
Category:Acts of the National Assembly for Wales. Even the 44 Acts (if we had an article for each) would not overpopulate the category. I did not know it was becoming a "parliament", but that will provide a means of closing a category for the past decade.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:00, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Thanks for clarifying. Those are risky assumptions though, it is unlikely that a closer of this discussion would have understood what you had in mind.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 04:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Association football positions
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:57, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions.
GiantSnowman 11:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose on the basis that nominator has failed to take into account the possibility that the article they want to match is incorrect, rather than the categories. Indeed, use of dash is not common in modern parlance, and 'central defenders' is used far more commonly than 'centre back' (and is clearer).
GiantSnowman 11:47, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Per Google, "central defender" yields over 1 million results, while "centre back" almost 10 million. Also, all prominent CBs are listed as "centre-back" (with dash) in their infobox (see
Sergio Ramos,
Giorgio Chiellini,
Virgil van Dijk, and
Matthijs de Ligt, to name a few).
Nehme1499 (
talk) 22:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
I note there is also a discrepancy with he use of spaces and dashes.
NFT as an example uses 'centre back', space and no dash.
GiantSnowman 11:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose all. "Central defenders" is clearer term. Use of dash is not common.
94.179.168.56 (
talk) 13:13, 29 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Asian Indoor Games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. –
FayenaticLondon 10:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment - this is a little confusing. We have separate articles for
Asian Indoor Games,
Asian Martial Arts Games and
Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games (I suspect a merge/delete of the first is in order). Is this a suitable move though? The Asian Indoor Games, and the Asian Martial Arts were seperate competitions, and now merged. Perhaps it would be better as a container category. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(
talk •
contribs) 14:26, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Yes this is the same competition, I think that "Asian Indoor Games" article should be merged into
Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games because this is mostly the successor of this one, and not that lone Asian Martial Arts Games competition.
Mohsen1248 (
talk) 16:53, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is the wrong way to go about this. Effectively we're having a category rename/merge/deletion discussion when we should be having an article merge discussion. In my opinion the Asian Indoor Games, Asian Martial Arts Games and Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games are separate competitions with separate histories. The
Olympic Council of Asia certainly seems to treat them that way too. @
Mohsen1248: I'm going to revert the undiscussed merge of the categories until we've had a discussion about whether to merge the articles.
SFB 16:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Mohsen1248:} That article was not merged - it was moved without discussion by a
known sock-puppeteer. What we need to do first is start a merge discussion to merge
Asian Indoor Games and
Asian Martial Arts Games into
Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games and engage interested parties and the relevant WikiProjects to assess what's best as a group. If there is consensus to merge the articles on these games into one article, then I would have no opposition to what you are proposing here – tellingly, the action would not merit a discussion and could be completed by speedy request if we sort out the articles first.
SFB 17:02, 23 April 2020 (UTC)reply
So you really think we need a separate article for Indoor athletes at the Asian Indoor Games and Indoor athletics at the Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games, I'm very surprised, I wonder if anybody else thinks the same. I am for merging them all but still merging the main event page is a different story than merging sports page. for example nobody had any problem when someone moved the Futsal page to
Futsal at the Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games. and btw OCA considers old records from 2009 AIG for Swimming and Athletics competition for this new AIMAG event, another reason why we don't need two pages (and two set of categories) for these events.
Mohsen1248 (
talk) 17:13, 23 April 2020 (UTC)reply
They are exactly the same competition, AIG just renamed to AIMAG, Asian Martial Games was held just once, no need to have a separate category.
Mohsen1248 (
talk) 17:04, 29 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merging articles is another matter, it's about categories, the parent AIMAG category is very small per
WP:NARROWCAT cats should be merged. as I said AMG was held just once, we usually don't have categories with just one page in it.
Mohsen1248 (
talk) 17:23, 29 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Procedural Oppose/Wrong Venue This is an issue with the main articles. The proper route is to fix them through nominations in the article space and then do
WP:C2D to fix the cats after that.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 01:02, 30 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:American academics of Filipino descent
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete yet another "descent" category running afoul of
WP:OCEGRS. Do people serious think American academics of Asian, Filipino, or any other descent do academics differently? If so, do you have reliable sources to back up such theories?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:39, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, Strong oppose merge as nom to the Asian parent because continent-level descent categories should be container categories per
this and
this discussion, otherwise Asian would be used as a proxy for race. Ineligible intersection per
WP:OCEGRS but
Place Clichy (
talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:American academics of Vietnamese descent
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete yet another "descent" category running afoul of
WP:OCEGRS. Do people serious think American academics of Asian, Vietnamese, or any other descent do academics differently? If so, do you have reliable sources to back up such theories?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, Strong oppose merge as nom to the Asian parent because continent-level descent categories should be container categories per
this and
this discussion, otherwise Asian would be used as a proxy for race. Ineligible intersection per
WP:OCEGRS but
Place Clichy (
talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:American academics of Mongolian descent
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete yet another "descent" category running afoul of
WP:OCEGRS. Do people serious think American academics of Asian, Mongolian, or any other descent do academics differently? If so, do you have reliable sources to back up such theories?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, Strong oppose merge as nom to the Asian parent because continent-level descent categories should be container categories per
this and
this discussion, otherwise Asian would be used as a proxy for race. Ineligible intersection per
WP:OCEGRS but
Place Clichy (
talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:American academics of Indonesian descent
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete yet another "descent" category running afoul of
WP:OCEGRS. Do people serious think American academics of Asian, Indonesian, or any other descent do academics differently? If so, do you have reliable sources to back up such theories?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, Strong oppose merge as nom to the Asian parent because continent-level descent categories should be container categories per
this and
this discussion, otherwise Asian would be used as a proxy for race. Ineligible intersection per
WP:OCEGRS but
Place Clichy (
talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:American academics of Hong Kong descent
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. bibliomaniac15 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete yet another "descent" category running afoul of
WP:OCEGRS. Do people serious think American academics of Asian, Hong Kong, or any other descent do academics differently? If so, do you have reliable sources to back up such theories?
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, Strong oppose merge as nom to the Asian parent because continent-level descent categories should be container categories per
this and
this discussion, otherwise Asian would be used as a proxy for race. Ineligible intersection per
WP:OCEGRS but
Place Clichy (
talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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.
The result of the discussion was:upmerge and delete. bibliomaniac15 18:41, 28 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Per
WP:SMALLCAT. The majority of entries are redirects to an article that is also in the category. Of the few that remain, it seems that most will end up being redirected or deleted. No need for an independent category for this classification. ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 04:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC)reply
To be clear, I am suggesting the redirects all be removed. Only things that are articles should be merged.ZXCVBNM (
TALK) 06:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
On that basis I agree with the merger.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:08, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Upmerge and delete per nom. Current categorization of redirects is excessive. (not
watching, please {{ping}}) czar 03:25, 25 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.