The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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.
Comment If the point is to be more broad, then a subcategory should be created explicitly for military personnel. American black history during WWII wasn't limited to military service. -
Indy beetle (
talk) 08:35, 3 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose This category would exclude Rosie the Riveter. African-American contributions to the war effort include people who were not in the military, be they builder of the weapons and other things needed, USO performers, non-military nurses who helped treat the wounded, people working on the Manhattan Project, some of The female mathematicians, or "computers" at the predecessor of NASA, and the list goes on.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:43, 4 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose, due to consistency with other African American war categorises and since the category also contains non-people, such as several units like
92nd Infantry Division (United States).--
Mvqr (
talk) 10:58, 7 April 2022 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:African Americans in World War I
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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.
Daughters and sons of monarchs
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 generally but a Japanese imperial daughter has recently ceased to be royal through marriage to a commoner; and
Category:Princes is slightly ambiguous as the ruler of Monaco is a Prince: possibly keep in that case.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 15:08, 3 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose since prince and princess are not exactly synonymous with being the children of a monarch. For instance,
Princess Beatrice and
Princess Eugenie are not the daughters of a monarch, but rather the granddaughters of one.
Векочел (
talk) 22:59, 5 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Not exactly synonymous is correct, they are close enough that a distinction is not helpful at all. They are all royalty, women, and not the spouse of a monarch.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 03:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)reply
OpposeCategory:Daughters of monarchs as above and because the daughters of Roman monarchs are not described as princesses (if anything it was wives). Although "close enough" may well be a reason for leaving things alone I don't think it justifies a change in categorisation towards being less descriptive.
Princess covers all sorts of shapes and sizes of folk. I haven't looked at the other nominations because there is far too much unnecessary churn in categorisations to take time over.
Thincat (
talk) 09:39, 10 April 2022 (UTC)reply
(as nom) Ok I notice there are some valid objections against merging the top categories right now, so I will strike these. The objections do not apply to the above country subcategories though because, e.g., the United Kingdom is a monarchy with princes and princesses to begin with.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 17:02, 14 April 2022 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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.
Support per nom. This is the quintessential reason about why it's the best idea to go through
WP:WPSS/P before creating stub cats.
Curbon7 (
talk) 20:22, 2 April 2022 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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.
Comment If the point is to be more broad, then a subcategory should be created explicitly for military personnel. American black history during WWII wasn't limited to military service. -
Indy beetle (
talk) 08:35, 3 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose This category would exclude Rosie the Riveter. African-American contributions to the war effort include people who were not in the military, be they builder of the weapons and other things needed, USO performers, non-military nurses who helped treat the wounded, people working on the Manhattan Project, some of The female mathematicians, or "computers" at the predecessor of NASA, and the list goes on.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:43, 4 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose, due to consistency with other African American war categorises and since the category also contains non-people, such as several units like
92nd Infantry Division (United States).--
Mvqr (
talk) 10:58, 7 April 2022 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:African Americans in World War I
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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.
Daughters and sons of monarchs
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 generally but a Japanese imperial daughter has recently ceased to be royal through marriage to a commoner; and
Category:Princes is slightly ambiguous as the ruler of Monaco is a Prince: possibly keep in that case.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 15:08, 3 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose since prince and princess are not exactly synonymous with being the children of a monarch. For instance,
Princess Beatrice and
Princess Eugenie are not the daughters of a monarch, but rather the granddaughters of one.
Векочел (
talk) 22:59, 5 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Not exactly synonymous is correct, they are close enough that a distinction is not helpful at all. They are all royalty, women, and not the spouse of a monarch.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 03:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)reply
OpposeCategory:Daughters of monarchs as above and because the daughters of Roman monarchs are not described as princesses (if anything it was wives). Although "close enough" may well be a reason for leaving things alone I don't think it justifies a change in categorisation towards being less descriptive.
Princess covers all sorts of shapes and sizes of folk. I haven't looked at the other nominations because there is far too much unnecessary churn in categorisations to take time over.
Thincat (
talk) 09:39, 10 April 2022 (UTC)reply
(as nom) Ok I notice there are some valid objections against merging the top categories right now, so I will strike these. The objections do not apply to the above country subcategories though because, e.g., the United Kingdom is a monarchy with princes and princesses to begin with.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 17:02, 14 April 2022 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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.
Support per nom. This is the quintessential reason about why it's the best idea to go through
WP:WPSS/P before creating stub cats.
Curbon7 (
talk) 20:22, 2 April 2022 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.