The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Per
WP:SMALLCAT. All categories have under 5 articles.
User:Namiba 21:30, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge for Now These currently break up the actual article and hinder navigation but no objection to recreating any if they exceed expectations and ever get up to 5+ articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 13:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Support Not enough content to warrant a city level category. State level is working fine.
SFB 01:17, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Burghers by occupation
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Delete per nom. Sri Lankan categories seem to have been indiscriminately spread in ethnic-occupational intersections regardless of the conditions set at
WP:OCEGRS.
Place Clichy (
talk) 16:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 one day
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Delete There are plenty of films where the events take place within a short timespan, but I doubt this is defining to their narratives.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:52, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Formerly wanted fugitives
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Not a good idea to base a category on a temporary state of affairs. Quite a lot of the people in the other subcategories of fugitives are no longer wanted.
Rathfelder (
talk) 19:08, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep/merge Both categories are needed, so we know who is no longer wanted by the law, or merge if we must since we don't want this category to go to waste.
Davidgoodheart (
talk) 20:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge/delete per nom, and besides Wikipedia is not a police database.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Note that I added "/delete" because the top
Category:Formerly wanted fugitives should plainly be deleted, the articles are already in one or two other subcategories of the proposed merge target.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 11:08, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge I'm not sure if I'm sold on having "wanted" categories, but we definitely should not categorize by something people are not. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge with very few exceptions we do not seperate former and current in categories.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge being "wanted" shouldn't be divided into a temporary category.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 23:11, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Physician-politicians
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Non-notable intersections. Many of these were previously deleted following a
2009 discussion.
User:Namiba 16:29, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Speedy Delete Per
WP:G4. We already discussed this and came to a consensus. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 13:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete, I hadn't realized there was already a consensus when I created the American, Chilean, and Italian categories - that's my bad. I had assumed since there is a
Physicians in the United States Congress article, a category would have been worth making as well. I'm ok with deleting it.
Kyjama (
talk) 19:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete while the seperate identities are both defining, this intersection of the two is not defining, such politicians are in no way a group, and at some times and places this has been a fairly high overlap. I would also point out that in the Pakistani case the category as written is an extremely narrow one, and in the highly unlikely case we keep it we should change it to
Category:Pakistani Medical doctor-politicians.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete no inherently notable intersections.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 23:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete No indication that this is a notable topic on its own.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:54, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Murdered religious leaders
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Trivial intersection. No notable
WP:DEFINING link between the occupation and the manner of death. Not expected as a professional qualification. There may have been many years between the occupation and the death, making the link even weaker.
... who were killed for reasons other than religious motivation. Others listed under "Assassinated" and "Martyrs".
Note: Sources about the death of a person will often discuss both their occupation and their cause of death. This doesn't make this intersection any more notable than a combination with other aspects often discussed in such notices, such as their number of children.
See also: related rationale about suicides by occupation:
Delete, per nom. These are trivial intersections with the exception of martyrs which are not part of the nomination.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:08, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. There is significant overlap between these categories and their corresponding "martyrs" categories. I presume that those here not included in the martyrs ones were mere coincidence and not notably related.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 23:17, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose Their religious activities could well be the cause of the murders.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:55, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
That cannot possibly be true, as this section of the category tree is reserved to other than religious motivation, as already noted in the nomination. Please read more carefully. Removing this will assist editors who don't read the category tree, and add them blindly. William Allen Simpson (
talk) 09:30, 8 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Murdered scientists
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Trivial intersection. No notable
WP:DEFINING link between the occupation and the manner of death. Not expected as a professional qualification. There may have been many years between the occupation and the death, making the link even weaker.
Note: Sources about the death of a person will often discuss both their occupation and their cause of death. This doesn't make this intersection any more notable than a combination with other aspects often discussed in such notices, such as their number of children.
See also: related rationale about suicides by occupation:
Oppose Their scientific activities or their advocacy for scientific causes could well be the reason of the murders.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
That applies to only very few articles in this category. Please read them through.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 14:46, 8 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Black British sportspeople
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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:delete, violation of
WP:BLPCAT: the case for each content category must be made clear by the article text and its reliable sources. In fact almost none of the articles in this category makes this clear.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 10:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Suppport I would add that this is true for most ethnicity categories. While it is often defining, I would be in favor of blowing it up and starting over.--
User:Namiba 16:36, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep - per cfd
2020_March_2#Black_British_people (a resounding keep). This issue is in the UK news every day, regarding nearly every occupation.
Oculi (
talk) 18:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep -- This is a well understood ethnic descriptor. I do not think misattributing ethnicity is likely to lead to a libel suit, the reason for the BLP policy.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 19:44, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Whatever the reason for BLP policy, it is what we have to adhere to.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep per all the above and remove articles that don't mention the subject's ethnicity, per
WP:CATVER. LugnutsFire Walk with Me 08:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete when in practice categories are applied regularly in the face of no text indicating they apply and no article indication that the intersection is actually defining, the categories should be deleted.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep Per Oculi's rationale.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete because these categories have been indiscriminately spread to too many articles that do not meet the criteria set in the
WP:EGRS guideline. In fact, their mere existence (unfortunately) serves as invitation to even good-faith contributors to plaster them on too many articles based on a mere face test, rather than reliable sources and Wikipedia guidelines. Ethnicity is a topic worth a great ammount of nuance, which are much better treated in article body with all possible commentary and references, rather than a mere category inclusion that does not allow any nuance or mention of sources. The tool is broken and hard to fix, therefore the best way forward is probably to be very conservative in creating such categories, and deleting trivial intersections between ethnicity and occupation which do not meet
WP:OCEGRS conditions.
Place Clichy (
talk) 16:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Mayors in the Netherlands
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: merge per
WP:SMALLCAT, just one or two articles in each of these categories and they are not part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:55, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge for Now While these places would have had more than five mayors, most would be non-notable. No objection to recreating any if they exceed expectations and get up to 5+ articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 10:01, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
It is very unusual to create category redirects to parent categories. Category redirects are mainly used in case of synonym.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 19:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Sanskrit scholars by nationality
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: merge per
WP:SMALLCAT, only one, two or three articles in every of these categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge All I'm open to making exceptions to
WP:SMALLCAT if it leaves a few small categories to complete a set, but this whole tree is anemic. It is also does not seem to be the approach of other languages under
Category:Linguists by language of study. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 10:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure viewing Sanskrit scholars primarily as a subcat of linguists is the right approach. IMO it seems more comparable to
Category:Classical scholars or its subcat
Category:Latinists, which appears to have an established by-nationality subcategorisation scheme. --
Paul_012 (
talk) 15:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Paul 012: This nomination isn't opposing doing away with this nationality tree altogether since the well populated Indian, British, American and French subcategories are not nominated. The question here is really should we be creating nationality subcats in every instance. Usually we use the
WP:SMALLCAT exception when the tree is generally well populated with just a few runts. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 13:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
KeepCategory:Thai Sanskrit scholars. Plenty potential for expansion, as there are many notable people who are still red links, so WP:SMALLCAT doesn't quite apply. --
Paul_012 (
talk) 15:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
No objection to recreating the Thai category later if it ever gets up to 5+ articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Suggest merging all European scholars into one category. The Sri Lankans are likely to be Tamil and Hindu, so that they are different — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Peterkingiron (
talk •
contribs)
Upmerge these are all below the normal size threshold. Also because these scholars will often study and publish on issues besides just sanskrit, the more broad parent categories plus the specific sanskrit scholars category tend to be a reasonable arrangement of the articles.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:57, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Genies in video 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.
Support Though the main article is called
Jinn, not genie.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:59, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Regents by regency in Indonesia
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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:upmerge, unnecessary intermediate category level "by" something because the parent category is (nearly) empty.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:26, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge Both per nom as the layer does not aid navigation. (I had to read through the articles for a bit since I was unaware of this definition of "regency".) -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 14:01, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Shopping courts
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Not clear what makes any of these "shopping courts". Shopping court is currently prodded for lack of sourcing, and the concept seems no different than "outdoor mall". Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 04:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete, not a defining characteristic.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete. FWIW these "courts" sound identical to what are known as shopping plazas in other parts of the world.
Grutness...wha? 02:17, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Even with the main article having been recently improved, I don't see that categorization here is defining or objective.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 13:50, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Not defining.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 16:25, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Comment, the current contents are now listed in the article. –
FayenaticLondon 22:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete not sure the difference between a shopping court and a
strip mall. (btw, someone could nominate
Category:Strip malls as well (with its eponymous article and one redirect).
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 23:25, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete I think a shopping court has more outside walking space, and less quick access to the parking, than the average strip mall, but I am unconvinced that people use either term in ways that limit them to such specific distringuishing.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 17:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:HR 7722
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: The system is not very notable.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Kepler-1229b (
talk •
contribs) 00:30, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Support in principle per
WP:SMALLCAT but I suspect the category should be merged to one or more of its parent categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 03:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete: there isn't really a suitable category to merge these articles.
Praemonitus (
talk) 17:18, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Meridiano de Oro Awards
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The
Meridiano de Oro is a Venezuelan award given by the
Dearmas Block that recognizes "excellence of professionals in the World of Spectacle" and the only article in this category,
Daniela Alvarado, doesn't even mention the award. Doesn't get much clearer than that. I don't know if I can say the category is "listified" since there is only 1 article but it is now linked
here in the main article. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 00:02, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Stoner/stonette of the year awards
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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: Per
WP:SMALLCAT. All categories have under 5 articles.
User:Namiba 21:30, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge for Now These currently break up the actual article and hinder navigation but no objection to recreating any if they exceed expectations and ever get up to 5+ articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 13:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Support Not enough content to warrant a city level category. State level is working fine.
SFB 01:17, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Burghers by occupation
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Delete per nom. Sri Lankan categories seem to have been indiscriminately spread in ethnic-occupational intersections regardless of the conditions set at
WP:OCEGRS.
Place Clichy (
talk) 16:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 one day
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Delete There are plenty of films where the events take place within a short timespan, but I doubt this is defining to their narratives.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:52, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Formerly wanted fugitives
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Not a good idea to base a category on a temporary state of affairs. Quite a lot of the people in the other subcategories of fugitives are no longer wanted.
Rathfelder (
talk) 19:08, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep/merge Both categories are needed, so we know who is no longer wanted by the law, or merge if we must since we don't want this category to go to waste.
Davidgoodheart (
talk) 20:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge/delete per nom, and besides Wikipedia is not a police database.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Note that I added "/delete" because the top
Category:Formerly wanted fugitives should plainly be deleted, the articles are already in one or two other subcategories of the proposed merge target.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 11:08, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge I'm not sure if I'm sold on having "wanted" categories, but we definitely should not categorize by something people are not. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge with very few exceptions we do not seperate former and current in categories.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge being "wanted" shouldn't be divided into a temporary category.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 23:11, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Physician-politicians
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Non-notable intersections. Many of these were previously deleted following a
2009 discussion.
User:Namiba 16:29, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Speedy Delete Per
WP:G4. We already discussed this and came to a consensus. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 13:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete, I hadn't realized there was already a consensus when I created the American, Chilean, and Italian categories - that's my bad. I had assumed since there is a
Physicians in the United States Congress article, a category would have been worth making as well. I'm ok with deleting it.
Kyjama (
talk) 19:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete while the seperate identities are both defining, this intersection of the two is not defining, such politicians are in no way a group, and at some times and places this has been a fairly high overlap. I would also point out that in the Pakistani case the category as written is an extremely narrow one, and in the highly unlikely case we keep it we should change it to
Category:Pakistani Medical doctor-politicians.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete no inherently notable intersections.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 23:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete No indication that this is a notable topic on its own.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:54, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Murdered religious leaders
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Trivial intersection. No notable
WP:DEFINING link between the occupation and the manner of death. Not expected as a professional qualification. There may have been many years between the occupation and the death, making the link even weaker.
... who were killed for reasons other than religious motivation. Others listed under "Assassinated" and "Martyrs".
Note: Sources about the death of a person will often discuss both their occupation and their cause of death. This doesn't make this intersection any more notable than a combination with other aspects often discussed in such notices, such as their number of children.
See also: related rationale about suicides by occupation:
Delete, per nom. These are trivial intersections with the exception of martyrs which are not part of the nomination.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:08, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. There is significant overlap between these categories and their corresponding "martyrs" categories. I presume that those here not included in the martyrs ones were mere coincidence and not notably related.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 23:17, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose Their religious activities could well be the cause of the murders.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:55, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
That cannot possibly be true, as this section of the category tree is reserved to other than religious motivation, as already noted in the nomination. Please read more carefully. Removing this will assist editors who don't read the category tree, and add them blindly. William Allen Simpson (
talk) 09:30, 8 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Murdered scientists
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Trivial intersection. No notable
WP:DEFINING link between the occupation and the manner of death. Not expected as a professional qualification. There may have been many years between the occupation and the death, making the link even weaker.
Note: Sources about the death of a person will often discuss both their occupation and their cause of death. This doesn't make this intersection any more notable than a combination with other aspects often discussed in such notices, such as their number of children.
See also: related rationale about suicides by occupation:
Oppose Their scientific activities or their advocacy for scientific causes could well be the reason of the murders.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
That applies to only very few articles in this category. Please read them through.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 14:46, 8 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Black British sportspeople
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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:delete, violation of
WP:BLPCAT: the case for each content category must be made clear by the article text and its reliable sources. In fact almost none of the articles in this category makes this clear.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 10:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Suppport I would add that this is true for most ethnicity categories. While it is often defining, I would be in favor of blowing it up and starting over.--
User:Namiba 16:36, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep - per cfd
2020_March_2#Black_British_people (a resounding keep). This issue is in the UK news every day, regarding nearly every occupation.
Oculi (
talk) 18:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep -- This is a well understood ethnic descriptor. I do not think misattributing ethnicity is likely to lead to a libel suit, the reason for the BLP policy.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 19:44, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Whatever the reason for BLP policy, it is what we have to adhere to.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep per all the above and remove articles that don't mention the subject's ethnicity, per
WP:CATVER. LugnutsFire Walk with Me 08:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete when in practice categories are applied regularly in the face of no text indicating they apply and no article indication that the intersection is actually defining, the categories should be deleted.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep Per Oculi's rationale.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete because these categories have been indiscriminately spread to too many articles that do not meet the criteria set in the
WP:EGRS guideline. In fact, their mere existence (unfortunately) serves as invitation to even good-faith contributors to plaster them on too many articles based on a mere face test, rather than reliable sources and Wikipedia guidelines. Ethnicity is a topic worth a great ammount of nuance, which are much better treated in article body with all possible commentary and references, rather than a mere category inclusion that does not allow any nuance or mention of sources. The tool is broken and hard to fix, therefore the best way forward is probably to be very conservative in creating such categories, and deleting trivial intersections between ethnicity and occupation which do not meet
WP:OCEGRS conditions.
Place Clichy (
talk) 16:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Mayors in the Netherlands
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: merge per
WP:SMALLCAT, just one or two articles in each of these categories and they are not part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:55, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge for Now While these places would have had more than five mayors, most would be non-notable. No objection to recreating any if they exceed expectations and get up to 5+ articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 10:01, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
It is very unusual to create category redirects to parent categories. Category redirects are mainly used in case of synonym.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 19:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Sanskrit scholars by nationality
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: merge per
WP:SMALLCAT, only one, two or three articles in every of these categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge All I'm open to making exceptions to
WP:SMALLCAT if it leaves a few small categories to complete a set, but this whole tree is anemic. It is also does not seem to be the approach of other languages under
Category:Linguists by language of study. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 10:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure viewing Sanskrit scholars primarily as a subcat of linguists is the right approach. IMO it seems more comparable to
Category:Classical scholars or its subcat
Category:Latinists, which appears to have an established by-nationality subcategorisation scheme. --
Paul_012 (
talk) 15:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Paul 012: This nomination isn't opposing doing away with this nationality tree altogether since the well populated Indian, British, American and French subcategories are not nominated. The question here is really should we be creating nationality subcats in every instance. Usually we use the
WP:SMALLCAT exception when the tree is generally well populated with just a few runts. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 13:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
KeepCategory:Thai Sanskrit scholars. Plenty potential for expansion, as there are many notable people who are still red links, so WP:SMALLCAT doesn't quite apply. --
Paul_012 (
talk) 15:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
No objection to recreating the Thai category later if it ever gets up to 5+ articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Suggest merging all European scholars into one category. The Sri Lankans are likely to be Tamil and Hindu, so that they are different — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Peterkingiron (
talk •
contribs)
Upmerge these are all below the normal size threshold. Also because these scholars will often study and publish on issues besides just sanskrit, the more broad parent categories plus the specific sanskrit scholars category tend to be a reasonable arrangement of the articles.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 16:57, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Genies in video 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.
Support Though the main article is called
Jinn, not genie.
Dimadick (
talk) 16:59, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Regents by regency in Indonesia
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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:upmerge, unnecessary intermediate category level "by" something because the parent category is (nearly) empty.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:26, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Merge Both per nom as the layer does not aid navigation. (I had to read through the articles for a bit since I was unaware of this definition of "regency".) -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 14:01, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Shopping courts
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Not clear what makes any of these "shopping courts". Shopping court is currently prodded for lack of sourcing, and the concept seems no different than "outdoor mall". Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 04:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete, not a defining characteristic.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete. FWIW these "courts" sound identical to what are known as shopping plazas in other parts of the world.
Grutness...wha? 02:17, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Even with the main article having been recently improved, I don't see that categorization here is defining or objective.
RevelationDirect (
talk) 13:50, 2 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Not defining.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 16:25, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Comment, the current contents are now listed in the article. –
FayenaticLondon 22:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete not sure the difference between a shopping court and a
strip mall. (btw, someone could nominate
Category:Strip malls as well (with its eponymous article and one redirect).
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 23:25, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete I think a shopping court has more outside walking space, and less quick access to the parking, than the average strip mall, but I am unconvinced that people use either term in ways that limit them to such specific distringuishing.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 17:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:HR 7722
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: The system is not very notable.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Kepler-1229b (
talk •
contribs) 00:30, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Support in principle per
WP:SMALLCAT but I suspect the category should be merged to one or more of its parent categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 03:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete: there isn't really a suitable category to merge these articles.
Praemonitus (
talk) 17:18, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Meridiano de Oro Awards
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The
Meridiano de Oro is a Venezuelan award given by the
Dearmas Block that recognizes "excellence of professionals in the World of Spectacle" and the only article in this category,
Daniela Alvarado, doesn't even mention the award. Doesn't get much clearer than that. I don't know if I can say the category is "listified" since there is only 1 article but it is now linked
here in the main article. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 00:02, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Stoner/stonette of the year awards
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.