The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 Unneeded - arbitrary - bad English --
Alexf(talk) 23:28, 2 October 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.
Footballers by city in Israel
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 all containing fewer than five articles, rename the rest to "footballers" (with some support and no opposition here, and could be done speedily anyway under
WP:C2C), and splitting
Category:Footballers from Jaffa from
Category:Footballers from Tel Aviv. For the record, in order to leave backlinks to the discussion, the renames are as follows.
Nominator's rationale: A series of
WP:SMALLCAT of footballers. Footballer categories should really only be split from large Sportspeople by city categories, which in and of themselves should be split from large people by city categories
Librarian from Liberia (
talk) 20:42, 26 August 2021 (UTC)reply
I've lost patience with the copy and paste now but you get the picture. Consider any subcategory within
Category:Footballers by city or town in Israel to be nominated if it contains under 10 articles. Rationale as outlined above. Creator doesn't seem to mind categories being deleted, and one gets the impression from the note at the top that it happens quite a lot to her.
[1]Librarian from Liberia (
talk) 20:55, 26 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Support merging any with fewer than five articles, which is the usual cutoff point in such discussions. They should be doubly upmerged to the proposed categories and
Category:Footballers in Israel. Keep the rest.
Grutness...wha? 07:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC)reply
A double upmerge is not needed, the articles are already in players per club categories in Israel.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions.
GiantSnowman 08:25, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Support merging any with fewer than five articles, as long as they are tagged, obviously, and keep but rename the rest to
Category:Footballers from CITY as is standard naming convention.
GiantSnowman 08:27, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Support merge except For any categories with 6 or more entries. I agree with Grutness above.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 11:49, 4 September 2021 (UTC)reply
These have only just been tagged, omitting 4 which have 6+ members. Let's leave this another week. –
FayenaticLondon 12:31, 25 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: The entire category tree with 81 subcategories has only been tagged in its entirety just now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 20:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Thank you for adding the remainder of the tree. Anything said before applies to the whole tree, obviously.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)reply
I have updated the numbers in a few cases where it makes a difference. –
FayenaticLondon 20:55, 3 November 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.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Either rename or delete. Why have a category about what they did not do? Very strange. If retained, the name needs to reflect the weird scope.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 11:58, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep and convert, as far as possible, into a holding category for its many subcats. Taking a few of the 21 articles as examples, the likes of
Anne of Austria, Queen of Poland,
Anna of Austria, Queen of Spain and others are members of
Category:Austrian princesses, a subcat of
Category:Austrian royalty and should be removed from this on the basis of parent/child conflict.
Mayerling incident doesn't belong in this category – it is well-categorised elsewhere as a scandal and a historical event. Haven't looked closely at all the articles but most, if not all, can surely be (or already are) adequately recategorised.
No Great Shaker (
talk) 13:23, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
But surely the name as it stands is almost entirely misleading.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 13:32, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
In relation to its sub-categories, I don't think it is. I agree it isn't right for the current set of articles it holds, which is why I think the articles should if possible be recategorised, leaving only the subcats in this.
No Great Shaker (
talk) 13:51, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep - it is the category inclusion text which should be removed. This was a bizarre addition after the cfd
2007 May 22#Category:Non-ruling Austrian royalty: the text from the merged category has no bearing on the target category.
Oculi (
talk) 13:55, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep per Oculi. The headnote needs to be removed, as it is not helpful. It has rulers of Austria as a subcat, which means that the rulers ARE in.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 21:02, 3 October 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:Historians of Rockaway, Queens
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Amended nomination from delete to upmerge, per Oculi.
No Great Shaker (
talk) 13:54, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Upmerge per SMALL CAT.
Vincent F. Seyfried is well-categorised. The other is up for AFD, but if kept could be given additional categories.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 21:06, 3 October 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.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 Unneeded - arbitrary - bad English --
Alexf(talk) 23:28, 2 October 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.
Footballers by city in Israel
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 all containing fewer than five articles, rename the rest to "footballers" (with some support and no opposition here, and could be done speedily anyway under
WP:C2C), and splitting
Category:Footballers from Jaffa from
Category:Footballers from Tel Aviv. For the record, in order to leave backlinks to the discussion, the renames are as follows.
Nominator's rationale: A series of
WP:SMALLCAT of footballers. Footballer categories should really only be split from large Sportspeople by city categories, which in and of themselves should be split from large people by city categories
Librarian from Liberia (
talk) 20:42, 26 August 2021 (UTC)reply
I've lost patience with the copy and paste now but you get the picture. Consider any subcategory within
Category:Footballers by city or town in Israel to be nominated if it contains under 10 articles. Rationale as outlined above. Creator doesn't seem to mind categories being deleted, and one gets the impression from the note at the top that it happens quite a lot to her.
[1]Librarian from Liberia (
talk) 20:55, 26 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Support merging any with fewer than five articles, which is the usual cutoff point in such discussions. They should be doubly upmerged to the proposed categories and
Category:Footballers in Israel. Keep the rest.
Grutness...wha? 07:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC)reply
A double upmerge is not needed, the articles are already in players per club categories in Israel.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions.
GiantSnowman 08:25, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Support merging any with fewer than five articles, as long as they are tagged, obviously, and keep but rename the rest to
Category:Footballers from CITY as is standard naming convention.
GiantSnowman 08:27, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Support merge except For any categories with 6 or more entries. I agree with Grutness above.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 11:49, 4 September 2021 (UTC)reply
These have only just been tagged, omitting 4 which have 6+ members. Let's leave this another week. –
FayenaticLondon 12:31, 25 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: The entire category tree with 81 subcategories has only been tagged in its entirety just now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 20:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Thank you for adding the remainder of the tree. Anything said before applies to the whole tree, obviously.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)reply
I have updated the numbers in a few cases where it makes a difference. –
FayenaticLondon 20:55, 3 November 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.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Either rename or delete. Why have a category about what they did not do? Very strange. If retained, the name needs to reflect the weird scope.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 11:58, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep and convert, as far as possible, into a holding category for its many subcats. Taking a few of the 21 articles as examples, the likes of
Anne of Austria, Queen of Poland,
Anna of Austria, Queen of Spain and others are members of
Category:Austrian princesses, a subcat of
Category:Austrian royalty and should be removed from this on the basis of parent/child conflict.
Mayerling incident doesn't belong in this category – it is well-categorised elsewhere as a scandal and a historical event. Haven't looked closely at all the articles but most, if not all, can surely be (or already are) adequately recategorised.
No Great Shaker (
talk) 13:23, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
But surely the name as it stands is almost entirely misleading.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 13:32, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
In relation to its sub-categories, I don't think it is. I agree it isn't right for the current set of articles it holds, which is why I think the articles should if possible be recategorised, leaving only the subcats in this.
No Great Shaker (
talk) 13:51, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep - it is the category inclusion text which should be removed. This was a bizarre addition after the cfd
2007 May 22#Category:Non-ruling Austrian royalty: the text from the merged category has no bearing on the target category.
Oculi (
talk) 13:55, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep per Oculi. The headnote needs to be removed, as it is not helpful. It has rulers of Austria as a subcat, which means that the rulers ARE in.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 21:02, 3 October 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:Historians of Rockaway, Queens
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Amended nomination from delete to upmerge, per Oculi.
No Great Shaker (
talk) 13:54, 1 October 2021 (UTC)reply
Upmerge per SMALL CAT.
Vincent F. Seyfried is well-categorised. The other is up for AFD, but if kept could be given additional categories.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 21:06, 3 October 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.