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 This category has been emptied.
Firefangledfeathers, why do you nominate a category for a deletion discussion if you are just going to empty it out of process? It wastes the time of editors who come here to offer their opinion on what should be done with a category. Please do not do this in the future. LizRead!Talk!01:30, 22 December 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:Commons users who use Canon products
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 - It does not support collaboration to know which users use a particular brand of products, and therefore fails
WP:USERCAT. Category also has an improper naming convention of using "users" instead of "Wikipedians".
VegaDark (
talk)
16:45, 21 December 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:Wikipedian Canadian football players
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.
Category:Wikipedians interested in the military history
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.
Category:Bayesian Wikipedians
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.
Keep as distinct from
Category:Wikipedian statisticians. I didn't make this category but it seems to have been redlinked when I added
User:Scepia/Bayesian to my userpage as a userbox, and then @
Bearcat: made it (who was not notified of this CFD). Bayesians are not the same as
frequentists who comprise the vast majority of statisticians and it would be a mistake to obscure the difference between the two. I feel like this category follows the guidelines at
WP:USERCATYES, "Categories which group users by knowledge or understanding of a topic".
Axem Titanium (
talk)
23:21, 25 December 2022 (UTC)reply
I "created" this only because it was a redlink that had to be cleared off
Special:WantedCategories — but with absolutely no idea what else I was supposed to actually do with it, the only option was to "create" it as an uncategorized category in the hopes that somebody else would be able to figure it out. So my "creation" of the category was not an endorsement of the category, it was merely cleaning clutter off a maintenance tool that has to have clutter cleaned off of it. I would note, however, that firstly the core purpose of user categories is to facilitate collaboration, not just to advertise affiliational trivia — and the issue here is that the redlink suddenly came into existence because Axem Titanium used a deprecated old userbox template that hasn't actually been used on any other userpages in well over a decade. That said, in fact we already have another category, ‹The
templateCategory link is being
considered for merging.›Category:Wikipedians interested in Bayesian methods, to cover off the same area of interest — so really the best solution here is to adjust
User:Scepia/Bayesian (the userbox in question) so that it uses the established category instead of this. Retention as a category redirect won't be necessary if the template is automatically filing pages in the established category instead.
Bearcat (
talk)
07:00, 26 December 2022 (UTC)reply
As do I. The reason I didn't notify Bearcat of any of these discussions (and notified the members of the category instead) was because I knew the context of the creation, and the reason I didn't originally suggest merging is that "This user is a Bayesian", linking to
Bayesian (a redirect to a list) did not give me enough information.
* Pppery *it has begun...18:28, 26 December 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.
Sports events in Mexico
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: One event in each category. And only one month in each year diffused. Merge to MONTH YYYY sports events in North America. –
Aidan721 (
talk)
14:27, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. I have been looking at parts of the events by month tree earlier and it came across as set up way too broadly, with large amounts of very sparsely populated categories and lots of months missing. Start grand and end almost empty is not the best strategy for categorization.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
14:49, 21 December 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.
Category:Major League Soccer most valuable player 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.
Major League Soccer have many types of MVP Awards such as Regular Season MVP award, MLS Cup MVP award, MLS All-Star Game MVP award. And there is a sub category -
category:Major League Soccer MVPs about Regular Season MVP award winners
Readers will never reach this category page because there is not even a single article linking to it. Categorization is not about having "good classification function" but about easily finding related articles. Categorization is not a purpose in itself, it is a tool to navigate between related articles.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
15:15, 21 December 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:Major League Soccer MVPs
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.
Only deletion of MLS MVP award winners category. This is unfair. I think that MLS MVP award winners are notable. So this category can become exception.
Mass nominations almost never work because there is always the chance of one or two exceptions. In this case, someone may argue that one of these awards does have the same status as the Nobel prize. But of course if you wish to start a fresh discussion about all these categories simultaneously, you can do so.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
12:03, 23 December 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:Nigerian disability table tennis players
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.
Merge to the category discussed above. This is a redundant category layer with only one subcategory and other countries do not have this type of category either.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:46, 13 December 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:11th-century historians from the Fatimid Caliphate
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.
Category:Al-Andalus exiles
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, the category is based on a modern concept that does not do justice to the reality of the time. Many medieval Muslim scholars travelled through different Muslim "countries" and/or settled in a different "country" than they grew up in. (Country in quotation marks because it were merely areas that happened to be ruled by certain dynasties. Some of these countries did not even have a name, only the dynasty had a name. Moreover Al-Andalus wasn't a country in the modern sense.) They stayed within the Muslim world though. A true exile would have been if they would settle in the Christian world but that is not the case here.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
21:44, 5 December 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:Motion capture 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.
Nominator's rationale: An overly broad category. Nearly all big-budget video games since the 2010s used motion capture. No longer a defining characteristic.
OceanHok (
talk)
11:38, 5 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep Before I created this category, the parent category was overloaded with video games. I also strongly reject the premise that nearly all modern video games use motion capture. Nintendo, one of the largest video game developers, rarely uses motion capture. There are tons of big budget games that either don't have human characters or go for a stylistic animation that don't use motion capture. I won't be opposed to moving this to performance capture though and narrow the scope to only when facial expressions are recorded for performance capture. JDDJS (
talk to me •
see what I've done)16:01, 5 December 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.
Category:National LGBTQ Wall of Honor
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: Seems to be a non-defining honor. (Note: per Wikipedia rules, to have a separate category, it must be
defining for the majority of recipients, meaning it is a central aspect according to reliable sources that would be worthy of mention in the lead of the article). I checked five recipients at random:
Gilbert Baker (artist),
Leslie Feinberg,
Christopher Lee (activist),
Marsha P. Johnson, and
Virginia Uribe. The award was mentioned in the article, with boilerplate text that seemed to have been copied and pasted, but did not seem to be prominently covered in reliable sources or the lead of the article sufficient to consider it defining for any of them. The category is already listified at
National LGBTQ Wall of Honor; it should be deleted as non-defining. (
t ·
c) buidhe06:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
£97<¥£ like your issue is with the quality of the articles, in which case AFD the articles you think have the types of issues you mention or perhaps even with the choices the
Stonewall National Monument voters made. But this category is no different than one for baseball members who were inducted into Cooperstown or musicians into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Our place, in this case, is to verify that the organization is legit and the people who are added to the category are honorees. So, if your issue is with the quality of the articles there, it is not the organization’s fault or the category’s. Ask for better sources if you are not satisfied. In fact, look for sources yourself so you know they meet your standards. But again, that is an issue with the article. Not the category. The honoree has been verified. That is all that matters.
BostonMensa (
talk)
07:13, 21 December 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:Saskatchewan United Party
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:Eponymous category for a political party without the volume of spinoff content needed to justify one. This is a new minor party that was registered just three weeks ago, so the only articles to file here at this time are the eponym and the party's leader -- this would be fine if there was other stuff to file here, like several other MLAs and leadership conventions, but is not necessary for just two articles.
Bearcat (
talk)
05:32, 21 December 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:East Timor–Kosovo relations
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:Eponymous category solely for the eponym, with no other potential contents readily locatable. As always for X-Y relations categories, this would be fine if there were several articles to file here, but is not needed for just one article.
Bearcat (
talk)
05:18, 21 December 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:Isle of Man women Twenty20 International cricketers
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:Eponymous category for a list. This would be fine if the list actually contained any blue links that could actually be filed here to populate the category, but it doesn't -- it's an entirely unlinked list and a spotcheck of random names within it failed to turn up anybody who has an article that got overlooked. Obviously no prejudice against recreation if and when five or six of the people actually have articles, but it aids navigation not a whit to have a category just to hold the list alone.
Bearcat (
talk)
05:06, 21 December 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:Vehicles used by the United States Government
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.
Category:Episodes of Star Trek in which the ship is taken over
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.
Category:Founded by La Saints Union
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.
Category:Ohio Brass Company employees
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.
I created the cat, thinking it would be useful, but don't have any strong feelings either way. If the folks who specialize in cats feel it's not useful, I'm fine with that. --
RoySmith(talk)14:42, 21 December 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:Events in 2023
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. Existing cat tree is sensible, and this outlier is not needed. If we want to park all the "YYYY events by month" in "YYYY events" supercategories, we should do so consistently. I would oppose such a move, which would add branches to the tree for no benefit.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs)
04:43, 21 December 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:Kishore Kumar Mohanty family
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:WP:SMALLCAT for a member of an Indian state legislature (not an officer of the legislature, either, but just a regular legislator of no particularly exalted status) and his wife. Something like this would be fine if there were five or six or ten articles to file together, but it's not needed for just two people.
Bearcat (
talk)
04:23, 21 December 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:Institutions run by Mata Amritanandamayi Math
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:Overcategorization on the basis of inclusion in an outside organization's proprietary (and copyrighted) ranking list, which is not a
defining characteristic. For added bonus, this is an annual list, within which some people may drop off the list entirely and other new people may be added to it each year, meaning it's a fluctuating characteristic -- and our article about the list only deigns to document the top 10 (not the entire Top 100) for just five years in a previous decade, meaning that inclusion in the list isn't even properly verified in the first place.
Bearcat (
talk)
03:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep - I am the category creator. I do not agree to this rationale, as any past recipient can be in this category. I have already added a few people. So past recipient do not need to drop off. It does not have any "YEAR" associated with it. I cannot speak to the copyright issue, but I do not think we are violating any copyright issues here. If that was the case, there are hundreds of other categories in violation that use company copyrighted names. You may want to check that dozens of award categories exist already without any copyright issues. Examples:
Lists which rank people in numerical order are not the same thing, and do not work the same way, as awards. An award isn't copyrighted; a listicle is.
Bearcat (
talk)
04:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:OCAWARD, with very few exceptions (e.g. Nobel Prize winners is an exception) we routinely delete award winners categories. This is not an award we should make an exception for.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
03:53, 21 December 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:GreenPAC Endorsed Candidate
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.
Keep - I created this category and am for keeping it (no surprise). GreenPac is an organization that vets candidates on the environment. It is non-partisan and works with all political parties. It is like winning an award, to be nominated by GreenPac. For voters who care about the environment, it is a seal of approval. Although, not a
Nobel or an
Emmy, it is as valid for citizens of Canada who care about a sustainable future.
mgifford (
talk)21 December 2022
It defines nobody in no "category", because endorsements from outside groups are things done to the candidates rather than by the candidates.
Bearcat (
talk)
03:59, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep - Often elections in multi-party elections are close. If GreenPAC is critical in helping a candidate win a campaign, then I would say it was relevant to that persons identity. Being an endorsed candidate has shown up on lawn sites for politicians such as successful politicians such as
Catherine McKenna.
This is something that has been an important issue in Canadian elections. Finding canadidates across the platform who have been vetted by a group of experts for having concerns about the environment is important.
GreenPac is an non-partisan organization that works with all political parties in Canada to support green.
GreenPac may well be more relevant in the public debate but the question here is what defines each individual person and that is a different question. The fact that GreenPac is generally relevant is reflected in it having its own article.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
16:56, 21 December 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.
Comment This category has been emptied.
Firefangledfeathers, why do you nominate a category for a deletion discussion if you are just going to empty it out of process? It wastes the time of editors who come here to offer their opinion on what should be done with a category. Please do not do this in the future. LizRead!Talk!01:30, 22 December 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:Commons users who use Canon products
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 - It does not support collaboration to know which users use a particular brand of products, and therefore fails
WP:USERCAT. Category also has an improper naming convention of using "users" instead of "Wikipedians".
VegaDark (
talk)
16:45, 21 December 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:Wikipedian Canadian football players
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.
Category:Wikipedians interested in the military history
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.
Category:Bayesian Wikipedians
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.
Keep as distinct from
Category:Wikipedian statisticians. I didn't make this category but it seems to have been redlinked when I added
User:Scepia/Bayesian to my userpage as a userbox, and then @
Bearcat: made it (who was not notified of this CFD). Bayesians are not the same as
frequentists who comprise the vast majority of statisticians and it would be a mistake to obscure the difference between the two. I feel like this category follows the guidelines at
WP:USERCATYES, "Categories which group users by knowledge or understanding of a topic".
Axem Titanium (
talk)
23:21, 25 December 2022 (UTC)reply
I "created" this only because it was a redlink that had to be cleared off
Special:WantedCategories — but with absolutely no idea what else I was supposed to actually do with it, the only option was to "create" it as an uncategorized category in the hopes that somebody else would be able to figure it out. So my "creation" of the category was not an endorsement of the category, it was merely cleaning clutter off a maintenance tool that has to have clutter cleaned off of it. I would note, however, that firstly the core purpose of user categories is to facilitate collaboration, not just to advertise affiliational trivia — and the issue here is that the redlink suddenly came into existence because Axem Titanium used a deprecated old userbox template that hasn't actually been used on any other userpages in well over a decade. That said, in fact we already have another category, ‹The
templateCategory link is being
considered for merging.›Category:Wikipedians interested in Bayesian methods, to cover off the same area of interest — so really the best solution here is to adjust
User:Scepia/Bayesian (the userbox in question) so that it uses the established category instead of this. Retention as a category redirect won't be necessary if the template is automatically filing pages in the established category instead.
Bearcat (
talk)
07:00, 26 December 2022 (UTC)reply
As do I. The reason I didn't notify Bearcat of any of these discussions (and notified the members of the category instead) was because I knew the context of the creation, and the reason I didn't originally suggest merging is that "This user is a Bayesian", linking to
Bayesian (a redirect to a list) did not give me enough information.
* Pppery *it has begun...18:28, 26 December 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.
Sports events in Mexico
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: One event in each category. And only one month in each year diffused. Merge to MONTH YYYY sports events in North America. –
Aidan721 (
talk)
14:27, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. I have been looking at parts of the events by month tree earlier and it came across as set up way too broadly, with large amounts of very sparsely populated categories and lots of months missing. Start grand and end almost empty is not the best strategy for categorization.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
14:49, 21 December 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.
Category:Major League Soccer most valuable player 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.
Major League Soccer have many types of MVP Awards such as Regular Season MVP award, MLS Cup MVP award, MLS All-Star Game MVP award. And there is a sub category -
category:Major League Soccer MVPs about Regular Season MVP award winners
Readers will never reach this category page because there is not even a single article linking to it. Categorization is not about having "good classification function" but about easily finding related articles. Categorization is not a purpose in itself, it is a tool to navigate between related articles.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
15:15, 21 December 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:Major League Soccer MVPs
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.
Only deletion of MLS MVP award winners category. This is unfair. I think that MLS MVP award winners are notable. So this category can become exception.
Mass nominations almost never work because there is always the chance of one or two exceptions. In this case, someone may argue that one of these awards does have the same status as the Nobel prize. But of course if you wish to start a fresh discussion about all these categories simultaneously, you can do so.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
12:03, 23 December 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:Nigerian disability table tennis players
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.
Merge to the category discussed above. This is a redundant category layer with only one subcategory and other countries do not have this type of category either.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:46, 13 December 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:11th-century historians from the Fatimid Caliphate
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.
Category:Al-Andalus exiles
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, the category is based on a modern concept that does not do justice to the reality of the time. Many medieval Muslim scholars travelled through different Muslim "countries" and/or settled in a different "country" than they grew up in. (Country in quotation marks because it were merely areas that happened to be ruled by certain dynasties. Some of these countries did not even have a name, only the dynasty had a name. Moreover Al-Andalus wasn't a country in the modern sense.) They stayed within the Muslim world though. A true exile would have been if they would settle in the Christian world but that is not the case here.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
21:44, 5 December 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:Motion capture 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.
Nominator's rationale: An overly broad category. Nearly all big-budget video games since the 2010s used motion capture. No longer a defining characteristic.
OceanHok (
talk)
11:38, 5 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep Before I created this category, the parent category was overloaded with video games. I also strongly reject the premise that nearly all modern video games use motion capture. Nintendo, one of the largest video game developers, rarely uses motion capture. There are tons of big budget games that either don't have human characters or go for a stylistic animation that don't use motion capture. I won't be opposed to moving this to performance capture though and narrow the scope to only when facial expressions are recorded for performance capture. JDDJS (
talk to me •
see what I've done)16:01, 5 December 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.
Category:National LGBTQ Wall of Honor
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: Seems to be a non-defining honor. (Note: per Wikipedia rules, to have a separate category, it must be
defining for the majority of recipients, meaning it is a central aspect according to reliable sources that would be worthy of mention in the lead of the article). I checked five recipients at random:
Gilbert Baker (artist),
Leslie Feinberg,
Christopher Lee (activist),
Marsha P. Johnson, and
Virginia Uribe. The award was mentioned in the article, with boilerplate text that seemed to have been copied and pasted, but did not seem to be prominently covered in reliable sources or the lead of the article sufficient to consider it defining for any of them. The category is already listified at
National LGBTQ Wall of Honor; it should be deleted as non-defining. (
t ·
c) buidhe06:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
£97<¥£ like your issue is with the quality of the articles, in which case AFD the articles you think have the types of issues you mention or perhaps even with the choices the
Stonewall National Monument voters made. But this category is no different than one for baseball members who were inducted into Cooperstown or musicians into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Our place, in this case, is to verify that the organization is legit and the people who are added to the category are honorees. So, if your issue is with the quality of the articles there, it is not the organization’s fault or the category’s. Ask for better sources if you are not satisfied. In fact, look for sources yourself so you know they meet your standards. But again, that is an issue with the article. Not the category. The honoree has been verified. That is all that matters.
BostonMensa (
talk)
07:13, 21 December 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:Saskatchewan United Party
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:Eponymous category for a political party without the volume of spinoff content needed to justify one. This is a new minor party that was registered just three weeks ago, so the only articles to file here at this time are the eponym and the party's leader -- this would be fine if there was other stuff to file here, like several other MLAs and leadership conventions, but is not necessary for just two articles.
Bearcat (
talk)
05:32, 21 December 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:East Timor–Kosovo relations
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:Eponymous category solely for the eponym, with no other potential contents readily locatable. As always for X-Y relations categories, this would be fine if there were several articles to file here, but is not needed for just one article.
Bearcat (
talk)
05:18, 21 December 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:Isle of Man women Twenty20 International cricketers
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:Eponymous category for a list. This would be fine if the list actually contained any blue links that could actually be filed here to populate the category, but it doesn't -- it's an entirely unlinked list and a spotcheck of random names within it failed to turn up anybody who has an article that got overlooked. Obviously no prejudice against recreation if and when five or six of the people actually have articles, but it aids navigation not a whit to have a category just to hold the list alone.
Bearcat (
talk)
05:06, 21 December 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:Vehicles used by the United States Government
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.
Category:Episodes of Star Trek in which the ship is taken over
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.
Category:Founded by La Saints Union
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.
Category:Ohio Brass Company employees
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.
I created the cat, thinking it would be useful, but don't have any strong feelings either way. If the folks who specialize in cats feel it's not useful, I'm fine with that. --
RoySmith(talk)14:42, 21 December 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:Events in 2023
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. Existing cat tree is sensible, and this outlier is not needed. If we want to park all the "YYYY events by month" in "YYYY events" supercategories, we should do so consistently. I would oppose such a move, which would add branches to the tree for no benefit.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs)
04:43, 21 December 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:Kishore Kumar Mohanty family
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:WP:SMALLCAT for a member of an Indian state legislature (not an officer of the legislature, either, but just a regular legislator of no particularly exalted status) and his wife. Something like this would be fine if there were five or six or ten articles to file together, but it's not needed for just two people.
Bearcat (
talk)
04:23, 21 December 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:Institutions run by Mata Amritanandamayi Math
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:Overcategorization on the basis of inclusion in an outside organization's proprietary (and copyrighted) ranking list, which is not a
defining characteristic. For added bonus, this is an annual list, within which some people may drop off the list entirely and other new people may be added to it each year, meaning it's a fluctuating characteristic -- and our article about the list only deigns to document the top 10 (not the entire Top 100) for just five years in a previous decade, meaning that inclusion in the list isn't even properly verified in the first place.
Bearcat (
talk)
03:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep - I am the category creator. I do not agree to this rationale, as any past recipient can be in this category. I have already added a few people. So past recipient do not need to drop off. It does not have any "YEAR" associated with it. I cannot speak to the copyright issue, but I do not think we are violating any copyright issues here. If that was the case, there are hundreds of other categories in violation that use company copyrighted names. You may want to check that dozens of award categories exist already without any copyright issues. Examples:
Lists which rank people in numerical order are not the same thing, and do not work the same way, as awards. An award isn't copyrighted; a listicle is.
Bearcat (
talk)
04:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:OCAWARD, with very few exceptions (e.g. Nobel Prize winners is an exception) we routinely delete award winners categories. This is not an award we should make an exception for.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
03:53, 21 December 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:GreenPAC Endorsed Candidate
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.
Keep - I created this category and am for keeping it (no surprise). GreenPac is an organization that vets candidates on the environment. It is non-partisan and works with all political parties. It is like winning an award, to be nominated by GreenPac. For voters who care about the environment, it is a seal of approval. Although, not a
Nobel or an
Emmy, it is as valid for citizens of Canada who care about a sustainable future.
mgifford (
talk)21 December 2022
It defines nobody in no "category", because endorsements from outside groups are things done to the candidates rather than by the candidates.
Bearcat (
talk)
03:59, 21 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep - Often elections in multi-party elections are close. If GreenPAC is critical in helping a candidate win a campaign, then I would say it was relevant to that persons identity. Being an endorsed candidate has shown up on lawn sites for politicians such as successful politicians such as
Catherine McKenna.
This is something that has been an important issue in Canadian elections. Finding canadidates across the platform who have been vetted by a group of experts for having concerns about the environment is important.
GreenPac is an non-partisan organization that works with all political parties in Canada to support green.
GreenPac may well be more relevant in the public debate but the question here is what defines each individual person and that is a different question. The fact that GreenPac is generally relevant is reflected in it having its own article.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
16:56, 21 December 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.