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: For former countries we do not need the separate category for political history.
BlackBony (
talk) 20:28, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Support, everything in these categories is history so there is no point in having two separate categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:17, 1 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. and Marcocapelle. -
Vipz (
talk) 17:34, 10 July 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.
Nominator's rationale: For former countries we do not need the separate category for political history.
BlackBony (
talk) 20:23, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Support, everything in these categories is history so there is no point in having two separate categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:18, 1 July 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:Alpha-lactones
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:no consensus.
✗plicit 13:14, 11 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Since these are spelt "α-Lactone", "β-Lactone" at the start of a sentence, I believe this should also be done here. (Articles such as
alpha-Propiolactone format it like "alpha-Propiolactone".)
1234qwer1234qwer4 10:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose, as this is about capitals at the start of a sentence, the "A" in Alpha should probably suffice.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 00:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename as Α-Lactones, Β-Lactones, Γ-Lactones, Δ-Lactones, Ε-Lactones, using Greek letters, as is done with some of the content. I am not sure there is enough content for Α-Lactones and Β-Lactones to merit separate categories, so that these should perhaps be merged to parents. I would have no objection to using α β γ δ and ε, rather than the capitals.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 19:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)reply
If this is technically possible in Wikipedia (which I do not know) then this sounds like a reasonable solution.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Not in the actual title, but you can modify how it is displayed with {{lowercase title}}. Currently, this will not be respected by the category navigation, however (there might be a task for this somewhere on Phabricator).
1234qwer1234qwer4 14:32, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Then the alternative solution should wait until that is fixed.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 04:40, 9 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:34, 29 June 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.
Fictional locations of Disney
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:keep. There was no consensus on a possible merge, which could be the topic of a new, separate discussion.
(non-admin closure)JBchrchtalk 09:50, 16 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Most of these articles in these categories are either redirects, things that share the name of fictional locations, or locations that originate in non-Disney media.
(Oinkers42) (
talk) 05:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Do not merge, merging would only be useful in case of a SMALLCAT nomination which is not applicable here. Either delete per SHAREDNAME or keep.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:02, 31 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 00:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep Disney has produced a large number of adaptations from novels, plays, etc. It makes sense to group the locations of such adaptations together, as they are settings for films. Though I would agree removing articles which do not actually cover fictional locations.
Dimadick (
talk) 03:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:34, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep This seems well populated and a cohesive grouping as I click through it. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:47, 1 July 2022 (UTC)reply
That is cleaner and I support the rename, if kept. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 01:59, 13 July 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:Sports competitions in Novosibirsk
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, currently only one article in the category. Two more articles might be added but then it is still small.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:33, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge for Now With no objection to recreating if it ever gets up to 5 articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:48, 1 July 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:Medieval Tunisian people
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: That was the country from 1048−1574
Rathfelder (
talk) 13:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Support, to the best of my knowledge
Ifriqiya was a historical region rather than a state, but in any case it is more accurate than Tunisian.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:12, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename Clearly ahistorical. Not opposed to a broader reworking as proposed by Hugo999 but that would involve a larger nomination. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:50, 1 July 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:Aftermath of the Russo-Ukrainian War
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 -- Since the war is ongoing, it is too soon to talk about its aftermath.
WP:CRYSTAL seems relevant.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 19:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Why not just rename them as suggested as above?
Charles Essie (
talk) 21:31, 3 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename The war has had a worldwide impact on supply chains and inflation, but we have not yet seen its aftermath.
Dimadick (
talk) 02:34, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge to parent categories, "impact" is not a clearly separate characteristic. The articles are simply about the war. (Or if they are not, like
2022 Peruvian protests, they should be purged.)
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:29, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge to parent cats until war is over. If there is not a consensus for that, then rename as proposed. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:51, 1 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge to parent categories: when the war in ongoing, it's illogical to speak of a post war situation.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 08:44, 2 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge -- Until the war is over, it is too soon to talk of what happens after it
WP:CRYSTAL!
Peterkingiron (
talk) 18:14, 3 July 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:Power Rangers stubs
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:delete. –
FayenaticLondon 22:09, 11 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: When I first found this category, it had about 20 articles in it. Because most were either a.) not stubs or b.) not directly related to MMPR, this left the article with four articles. Of those, two are at prod and the other two are also in other relevant stub categories. tl;dr:
WP:OCAT#SMALL. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 03:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
@
TenPoundHammer: shouldn't it be merged to either one of its stubs parent categories, or both?
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
One article is at AFD and the other two are in other stub categories, so I see no reason to do so. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 02:51, 9 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:28, 29 June 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:Films featuring Andy Panda
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:rename per nom, in line with the other discussions.
(non-admin closure)Qwerfjkltalk 18:41, 2 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: "Featuting" is not defining.
★Trekker (
talk) 08:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose The proposed title does not define the scope.
Dimadick (
talk) 08:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Support in principle but it would be recommendable if someone would check every article manually, to see if the film is really "about" this topic. Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:24, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Characters are very much topics.
★Trekker (
talk) 10:06, 24 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Close this discussion in line with all similar discussions on yesterday's log page.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:37, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:26, 29 June 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 result of the discussion was:delete. –
FayenaticLondon 22:16, 11 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Not a defining trait. Most of them just have "cry" in the title and aren't exactly about it. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 05:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, and it is an utterly trivial topic.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:55, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. No tears from me to see such a silly intersection category go. --
Richhoncho (
talk) 07:56, 29 June 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:Free panorama software
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, currently two articles in the category.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 03:50, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
That seems a reasonable alternative.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 11:51, 1 July 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:Political comic strips
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:rename to
Category:Comics about politics and purge entries that are not significantly about politics. This is without prejudice to re-creation if there are sufficient entries for a useful subcat. –
FayenaticLondon 16:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Piotrus, you say: "while it contains comic strips, it also contains many regular comic books that are not just comic strips". Can you provide one or two examples so we can better understand this nomination?
gidonb (
talk) 10:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 15:45, 20 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 03:45, 29 June 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:Gandhians
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 01:24, 29 June 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:Television stations in the Champaign–Springfield–Decatur market
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: Consistency with main article's name; don't want to use the Nielsen market name
Mvcg66b3r (
talk) 22:14, 21 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 02:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 01:23, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Upmerge per Marcocapelle. ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:47, 2 August 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:Delisted digital-only 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: The title of this category unnecessarily excludes some relevant subjects of interest to this topic. While it is called "Delisted digital-only games," not all past video games that have been delisted from sale on digital stores were "digital-only." As an example, Deadpool is a game widely noted to have been delisted from digital storefronts multiple times, and remains so, and is as a consequence more difficult to find and play. However it was released physically initially for seventh and again for eight generation console systems, which technically precludes its inclusion even though it cannot be bought and played unless one seeks out a secondhand copy of its long-since discontinued physical runs. As a second example, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World: The Game, a game initially released only digitally, was notably delisted, but has since been relisted and also received a limited physical run- again, technically disqualifying it from inclusion per the name of this category. Both are prominent examples of "delisted games" which technically are not included per the name of this category (although I added them anyways in deliberate disregard of these technicalities, as their past and present delistings have been of general note to the gaming press).
Having been once released physically means little for the potential availability of a game no longer available on digital storefronts, as extant physical copies of video games inevitably dwindle in quantity and increase in price on the secondhand market, only degrading their wider availability with time. Further, video games are now often digital first, physical second, somewhat negating "digital-only" as a defining trait of a game. With digital sales having become the dominant means of acquiring games, discontinuing a game's digital release has significant impact on its ability to find an audience, regardless of its physical release status or lack thereof. I therefore suggest that, given these facts, it is better for this category to have a more inclusive name.
Joyce-stick (
talk) 02:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Marcocapelle (
talk) 04:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC) reply
Oppose — Legally, the distinction is fairly important, as a digital-only work delisted from sale is legally unavailable to the general public, whereas a work also released physically is still legally available due to the First Sale doctrine. The legal ambiguity of ownership of digital goods and the difficulty of preservation of digital-only works is a notable topic covered by many reliable sources, so the distinction is encyclopedically relevant.
Also, the relisting and later limited physical release of the Scott Pilgrim game you brought up as an example would not negate its inclusion in the category, as the original Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions are still delisted and legally unavailable.
I would not, however, be opposed to the seperate creation of the category you propose, with the current one as a subcategory of it.
Ding Chavez (
talk) 13:23, 17 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 01:22, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose Per Ding Chavez. I would also oppose the creation of the latter category, as it would be an example of
WP:NONDEF. Being delisted from digital sale is not defining for a game unless it literally makes the game unobtainable from that point on. (Although there is a hazy line where physical versions cost so much that a delisted game effectively becomes unplayable in a legal manner to most over time).
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 12:17, 2 July 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.
Nominator's rationale: For former countries we do not need the separate category for political history.
BlackBony (
talk) 20:28, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Support, everything in these categories is history so there is no point in having two separate categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:17, 1 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. and Marcocapelle. -
Vipz (
talk) 17:34, 10 July 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.
Nominator's rationale: For former countries we do not need the separate category for political history.
BlackBony (
talk) 20:23, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Support, everything in these categories is history so there is no point in having two separate categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:18, 1 July 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:Alpha-lactones
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:no consensus.
✗plicit 13:14, 11 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Since these are spelt "α-Lactone", "β-Lactone" at the start of a sentence, I believe this should also be done here. (Articles such as
alpha-Propiolactone format it like "alpha-Propiolactone".)
1234qwer1234qwer4 10:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose, as this is about capitals at the start of a sentence, the "A" in Alpha should probably suffice.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 00:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename as Α-Lactones, Β-Lactones, Γ-Lactones, Δ-Lactones, Ε-Lactones, using Greek letters, as is done with some of the content. I am not sure there is enough content for Α-Lactones and Β-Lactones to merit separate categories, so that these should perhaps be merged to parents. I would have no objection to using α β γ δ and ε, rather than the capitals.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 19:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)reply
If this is technically possible in Wikipedia (which I do not know) then this sounds like a reasonable solution.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Not in the actual title, but you can modify how it is displayed with {{lowercase title}}. Currently, this will not be respected by the category navigation, however (there might be a task for this somewhere on Phabricator).
1234qwer1234qwer4 14:32, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Then the alternative solution should wait until that is fixed.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 04:40, 9 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:34, 29 June 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.
Fictional locations of Disney
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:keep. There was no consensus on a possible merge, which could be the topic of a new, separate discussion.
(non-admin closure)JBchrchtalk 09:50, 16 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Most of these articles in these categories are either redirects, things that share the name of fictional locations, or locations that originate in non-Disney media.
(Oinkers42) (
talk) 05:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Do not merge, merging would only be useful in case of a SMALLCAT nomination which is not applicable here. Either delete per SHAREDNAME or keep.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:02, 31 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 00:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep Disney has produced a large number of adaptations from novels, plays, etc. It makes sense to group the locations of such adaptations together, as they are settings for films. Though I would agree removing articles which do not actually cover fictional locations.
Dimadick (
talk) 03:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:34, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep This seems well populated and a cohesive grouping as I click through it. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:47, 1 July 2022 (UTC)reply
That is cleaner and I support the rename, if kept. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 01:59, 13 July 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:Sports competitions in Novosibirsk
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, currently only one article in the category. Two more articles might be added but then it is still small.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:33, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge for Now With no objection to recreating if it ever gets up to 5 articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:48, 1 July 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:Medieval Tunisian people
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: That was the country from 1048−1574
Rathfelder (
talk) 13:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Support, to the best of my knowledge
Ifriqiya was a historical region rather than a state, but in any case it is more accurate than Tunisian.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:12, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename Clearly ahistorical. Not opposed to a broader reworking as proposed by Hugo999 but that would involve a larger nomination. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:50, 1 July 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:Aftermath of the Russo-Ukrainian War
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 -- Since the war is ongoing, it is too soon to talk about its aftermath.
WP:CRYSTAL seems relevant.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 19:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Why not just rename them as suggested as above?
Charles Essie (
talk) 21:31, 3 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename The war has had a worldwide impact on supply chains and inflation, but we have not yet seen its aftermath.
Dimadick (
talk) 02:34, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge to parent categories, "impact" is not a clearly separate characteristic. The articles are simply about the war. (Or if they are not, like
2022 Peruvian protests, they should be purged.)
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:29, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge to parent cats until war is over. If there is not a consensus for that, then rename as proposed. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:51, 1 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge to parent categories: when the war in ongoing, it's illogical to speak of a post war situation.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 08:44, 2 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge -- Until the war is over, it is too soon to talk of what happens after it
WP:CRYSTAL!
Peterkingiron (
talk) 18:14, 3 July 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:Power Rangers stubs
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:delete. –
FayenaticLondon 22:09, 11 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: When I first found this category, it had about 20 articles in it. Because most were either a.) not stubs or b.) not directly related to MMPR, this left the article with four articles. Of those, two are at prod and the other two are also in other relevant stub categories. tl;dr:
WP:OCAT#SMALL. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 03:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
@
TenPoundHammer: shouldn't it be merged to either one of its stubs parent categories, or both?
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
One article is at AFD and the other two are in other stub categories, so I see no reason to do so. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 02:51, 9 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:28, 29 June 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:Films featuring Andy Panda
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:rename per nom, in line with the other discussions.
(non-admin closure)Qwerfjkltalk 18:41, 2 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: "Featuting" is not defining.
★Trekker (
talk) 08:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose The proposed title does not define the scope.
Dimadick (
talk) 08:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Support in principle but it would be recommendable if someone would check every article manually, to see if the film is really "about" this topic. Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:24, 30 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Characters are very much topics.
★Trekker (
talk) 10:06, 24 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Close this discussion in line with all similar discussions on yesterday's log page.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:37, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 16:26, 29 June 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 result of the discussion was:delete. –
FayenaticLondon 22:16, 11 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Not a defining trait. Most of them just have "cry" in the title and aren't exactly about it. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 05:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, and it is an utterly trivial topic.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:55, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. No tears from me to see such a silly intersection category go. --
Richhoncho (
talk) 07:56, 29 June 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:Free panorama software
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, currently two articles in the category.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 03:50, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
That seems a reasonable alternative.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 11:51, 1 July 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:Political comic strips
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:rename to
Category:Comics about politics and purge entries that are not significantly about politics. This is without prejudice to re-creation if there are sufficient entries for a useful subcat. –
FayenaticLondon 16:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Piotrus, you say: "while it contains comic strips, it also contains many regular comic books that are not just comic strips". Can you provide one or two examples so we can better understand this nomination?
gidonb (
talk) 10:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 15:45, 20 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 03:45, 29 June 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:Gandhians
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 01:24, 29 June 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:Television stations in the Champaign–Springfield–Decatur market
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: Consistency with main article's name; don't want to use the Nielsen market name
Mvcg66b3r (
talk) 22:14, 21 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 02:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 01:23, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Upmerge per Marcocapelle. ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:47, 2 August 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:Delisted digital-only 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: The title of this category unnecessarily excludes some relevant subjects of interest to this topic. While it is called "Delisted digital-only games," not all past video games that have been delisted from sale on digital stores were "digital-only." As an example, Deadpool is a game widely noted to have been delisted from digital storefronts multiple times, and remains so, and is as a consequence more difficult to find and play. However it was released physically initially for seventh and again for eight generation console systems, which technically precludes its inclusion even though it cannot be bought and played unless one seeks out a secondhand copy of its long-since discontinued physical runs. As a second example, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World: The Game, a game initially released only digitally, was notably delisted, but has since been relisted and also received a limited physical run- again, technically disqualifying it from inclusion per the name of this category. Both are prominent examples of "delisted games" which technically are not included per the name of this category (although I added them anyways in deliberate disregard of these technicalities, as their past and present delistings have been of general note to the gaming press).
Having been once released physically means little for the potential availability of a game no longer available on digital storefronts, as extant physical copies of video games inevitably dwindle in quantity and increase in price on the secondhand market, only degrading their wider availability with time. Further, video games are now often digital first, physical second, somewhat negating "digital-only" as a defining trait of a game. With digital sales having become the dominant means of acquiring games, discontinuing a game's digital release has significant impact on its ability to find an audience, regardless of its physical release status or lack thereof. I therefore suggest that, given these facts, it is better for this category to have a more inclusive name.
Joyce-stick (
talk) 02:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Marcocapelle (
talk) 04:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC) reply
Oppose — Legally, the distinction is fairly important, as a digital-only work delisted from sale is legally unavailable to the general public, whereas a work also released physically is still legally available due to the First Sale doctrine. The legal ambiguity of ownership of digital goods and the difficulty of preservation of digital-only works is a notable topic covered by many reliable sources, so the distinction is encyclopedically relevant.
Also, the relisting and later limited physical release of the Scott Pilgrim game you brought up as an example would not negate its inclusion in the category, as the original Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions are still delisted and legally unavailable.
I would not, however, be opposed to the seperate creation of the category you propose, with the current one as a subcategory of it.
Ding Chavez (
talk) 13:23, 17 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 01:22, 29 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose Per Ding Chavez. I would also oppose the creation of the latter category, as it would be an example of
WP:NONDEF. Being delisted from digital sale is not defining for a game unless it literally makes the game unobtainable from that point on. (Although there is a hazy line where physical versions cost so much that a delisted game effectively becomes unplayable in a legal manner to most over time).
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 12:17, 2 July 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.