- 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. (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree ( talk) 10:49, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: "Related-" is ambiguous and its not clear what the category is for. Is its songs about LGBT people? Songs with LGBT in the title? Songs about LGBT love? Many of the songs don't have any LGBT specific lyrics or connotations e.g. " Cool for the Summer" by Demi Lovato is included because she featured a pro-LGBT t-shirt in one performance. Equally " Dude (Looks Like a Lady)" which attracted some controversy for being transphobic, but was clearly written and released in a time when things were different socially. Having such a broad topic is problematic as its unclear what qualifies a song to be included. >> Lil-unique1 ( talk) — 19:44, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, 1) if the purpose of the category is not clear other measures than deletion should be proposed, e.g. rename to "LGBT-themed" or similar, or split; 2) (procedural oppose) "LGBT-related" appears in many other categories too, e.g. parent Category:LGBT-related music and several siblings, so it requires a broader discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:19, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment only Another category that needs an editor's eye to decide what is a relevant entry and what is not. Should same-sex love songs be in there, or HIV/AIDS related songs? What are the parameters of this category? Yes, I am angry, because this category Songs in memory of deceased persons was closed as editor to move the members as necessary, but only one editor bothered, not those that advocated such work. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 10:04, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose: I believe this category is defining enough that we should not delete it. However, it should be renamed or purged. Songs should only appear in this category if there is a significant amount of information about LGBTQ+ info within the article, whether or not it's about content or legacy or whatever else. Simply performing "Cool for the Summer" at one show is not enough; it just shows that Demi Lovato, not the song, has ties with with LGBTQ+ culture. On the other hand, pages for " Beautiful", " Born This Way", " I Wanna Be Bad", " Smalltown Boy", etc., provide enough information for the song to have legitimate ties with the culture, so they should stay.
- 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.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 21#Category:Deaths from dementia
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: merge/delete as nominated. However, I examined the articles and eponymous sub-cats and found that they were all from Al-Andalus, so I have moved them into the corresponding Andalus sub-cats. –
Fayenatic
London
12:53, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Propose merging
Category:Medieval Moorish astronomers to
Category:Astronomers of medieval IslamCategory:Astronomers of the medieval Islamic world - Propose merging
Category:Medieval Moorish mathematicians to
Category:Mathematicians of medieval IslamCategory:Mathematicians of the medieval Islamic world - Propose merging
Category:Medieval Moorish physicians to
Category:Physicians of medieval IslamCategory:Physicians of the medieval Islamic world - Propose merging
Category:Moorish scholars to
Category:Scholars of medieval IslamCategory:Scholars of the medieval Islamic world - Propose merging Category:Moorish writers to Category:Muslim writers
- Propose deleting Category:Moorish people by occupation
- Propose merging
Category:Medieval Moorish astronomers to
- Nominator's rationale: merge/delete, Moors is an outdated and ambiguous term that may refer to the Muslim population of Al-Andalus, or with Morocco, or with the rest of northern Africa. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:23, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Rathfelder ( talk) 10:35, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
- Object -- The medieval Muslim world stretched from Al-Andalus and Morocco to India. Much of this relates to the people from the two former. I appreciate Moors is an obsolete term, but if we are to abandon its use, we need to find a more specific alternative. Peterkingiron ( talk) 11:55, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- @ Peterkingiron: people of Al-Andalus are already in an Al-Andalus-specific subcategory, so I think that that should address your concern sufficiently. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Note: the target categories have been updated after speedy renaming. – Fayenatic London 11:16, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 16:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- I would withdraw my objection if all the bio-articles were distributed by applying appropriate Al-andalus or other national category. My objection would require manually empty. I am not convinced that all articles (e.g. in scholars) have appropriate more local categories.
Peterkingiron ( talk) 11:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Ok with merge, but prefer the merge is made into more specific categories than the proposed target categories which are very general. The corresponding categories for Al-Andalus listed below would be a good start as most articles belong to Al-Andalus (and create missing categories if necessary, e.g. Category:Maliki scholars of Al-Andalus). We can then untag the few articles that do not necessarily relate to Al-Andalus, e.g. a Muslim Sicilian person of supposedly "Moorish" descent.
- Al-Andalusi ( talk)
- It is perfectly fine if you find more articles to be added to the Al-Andalus subcategories. That is just housekeeping per WP:SUBCAT, unrelated to whether the merge should go ahead or not. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:43, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
- 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. – Fayenatic London 12:59, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: I have my doubts about many of these "surnames by culture" categories (and most entries in them), but let's start by this one. The two entries are sourced to this, which is a wiki, not a reliable source. East Prussia existed roughly from 1773 to 1945, there is no evidence that these surnames are from there or then (most surnames are older than that). The cat is a member of the cat Category:Old-Prussian language, but that language became extinct in the early 18th century, or 50 years or so before East Prussia was founded. Basically, it is an unreliably sourced mess (just like most cats in this tree). Fram ( talk) 09:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Merge to
Category:German-language surnames, which is sufficiently precise.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
18:45, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Both entries are already in that cat, so nothing left to merge... Fram ( talk) 10:53, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment -- The question may be whether these two surnames are of German language origin of Old Prussian language origin, as that language was a Baltic language, not a Germanic one. I am not qualified to comment on that. Peterkingiron ( talk) 11:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Can you add Category:East German surnames to this discussion? How are East German names different from West German ones or just plain German names? Liz Read! Talk! 23:48, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 16:40, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Update, Category:East German surnames has meanwhile been tagged for WP:C1 deletion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:20, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- 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: merge and redirect.
bibliomaniac
1
5
17:04, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Ifriqiya under the Aghlabids to Category:9th century in Ifriqiya
- Propose merging Category:People of the Aghlabid dynasty to Category:9th-century people of Ifriqiya
- Nominator's rationale: merge (or reverse merge) per WP:OVERLAPCAT, the Aghlabid dynasty almost exactly covered the 9th century. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:18, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Merge per nom. I would prefer the merge in the direction as nominated, to maintain consistency with other chronological categories. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:11, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
- I see that I forgot to tag the categories, will do that now. This means the discussion shouldn't be closed in the coming week from now. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Merge somehow - the dynasty ruled 800-909, so that we do not need both of these. Peterkingiron ( talk) 11:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Political categories are different from chronological ones, and the Aghlabids are not coterminous with the 9th century, or with Ifriqiya during that period. An Aghlabid governor in Sicily who was in office in 902 for example is still a 'Person of the Aghlabid dynasty', but does not necessarily fall under '9th-century people of Ifriqiya'. Likewise, an event like the war with the Kutama in the 900s is part of 'Ifriqiya under the Aghlabids', but not of the 9th century. Constantine ✍ 11:47, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- The nom does not suggest they are coterminous, it does mean to say there is a very large overlap. Note that WP:OVERLAPCAT does not require an exact overlap. Of course a bit of purging may be needed dependent on the outcome of the merge direction. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- That still does not mean that one can be merged to the other without significant loss of accuracy. I really don't see why this is necessary or helpful. Constantine ✍ 19:29, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 16:30, 13 September 2022 (UTC)- It is helpful because it prevents articles to be dispersed among two different categories that have almost the same scope. By the way, I would be perfectly fine to leave redirects. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:03, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep It's useful to have dynastic categories and I agree with the comment by Cplakidas. Al-Andalusi ( talk) 02:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Support per nom, and OVERLAPCAT, but redirect after merging. —
Qwerfjkl
talk
17:36, 21 September 2022 (UTC)- Merge and redirect, and copy the parent categories where needed. There is not enough content to justify additional categories. Although the people category includes a small sub-cat of Aghladid governors of Sicily, they too were "of Ifriqiya". – Fayenatic London 06:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Support merge per nom and Fayenatic london and redirect. -- Privybst ( talk) 19:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗ plicit 14:38, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- 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: split.
(non-admin closure)
Qwerfjkl
talk
17:32, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Propose splitting Category:Women in municipal politics to Category:Women in politics and Category:Women local politicians
- Nominator's rationale: ~This category layer is not very helpful, as it contains only one article and three sub-cats, which are already otherwise interlinked in various ways. Manually merge it to its parent and sub-cat. – Fayenatic London 15:23, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:53, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- 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.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 21#Category:Madura
- 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. – Fayenatic London 13:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: I would argue that "HD-2D" is a marketing term, not a legitimate graphical style. It has not been adopted by any game developer besides Square Enix, despite similar games existing elsewhere for a very long time (the Disgaea series uses the style as well, just minus the fancy lighting). It could be renamed to "Video games that combine 2D and 3D graphics" but that might still count as overcategorization without a relevant primary topic article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 03:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete agree with nom that this is a marketing term without any third party neutral support for it as a concept. I wouldn't disqualify a category based on being a marketing concept, but we'd need to see it become a more enduring phenomenon to avoid WP:SMALLCAT. Jontesta ( talk) 23:43, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- 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: keep. (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree ( talk) 10:49, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: "Related-" is ambiguous and its not clear what the category is for. Is its songs about LGBT people? Songs with LGBT in the title? Songs about LGBT love? Many of the songs don't have any LGBT specific lyrics or connotations e.g. " Cool for the Summer" by Demi Lovato is included because she featured a pro-LGBT t-shirt in one performance. Equally " Dude (Looks Like a Lady)" which attracted some controversy for being transphobic, but was clearly written and released in a time when things were different socially. Having such a broad topic is problematic as its unclear what qualifies a song to be included. >> Lil-unique1 ( talk) — 19:44, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, 1) if the purpose of the category is not clear other measures than deletion should be proposed, e.g. rename to "LGBT-themed" or similar, or split; 2) (procedural oppose) "LGBT-related" appears in many other categories too, e.g. parent Category:LGBT-related music and several siblings, so it requires a broader discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:19, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment only Another category that needs an editor's eye to decide what is a relevant entry and what is not. Should same-sex love songs be in there, or HIV/AIDS related songs? What are the parameters of this category? Yes, I am angry, because this category Songs in memory of deceased persons was closed as editor to move the members as necessary, but only one editor bothered, not those that advocated such work. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 10:04, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose: I believe this category is defining enough that we should not delete it. However, it should be renamed or purged. Songs should only appear in this category if there is a significant amount of information about LGBTQ+ info within the article, whether or not it's about content or legacy or whatever else. Simply performing "Cool for the Summer" at one show is not enough; it just shows that Demi Lovato, not the song, has ties with with LGBTQ+ culture. On the other hand, pages for " Beautiful", " Born This Way", " I Wanna Be Bad", " Smalltown Boy", etc., provide enough information for the song to have legitimate ties with the culture, so they should stay.
- 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.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 21#Category:Deaths from dementia
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: merge/delete as nominated. However, I examined the articles and eponymous sub-cats and found that they were all from Al-Andalus, so I have moved them into the corresponding Andalus sub-cats. –
Fayenatic
London
12:53, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Propose merging
Category:Medieval Moorish astronomers to
Category:Astronomers of medieval IslamCategory:Astronomers of the medieval Islamic world - Propose merging
Category:Medieval Moorish mathematicians to
Category:Mathematicians of medieval IslamCategory:Mathematicians of the medieval Islamic world - Propose merging
Category:Medieval Moorish physicians to
Category:Physicians of medieval IslamCategory:Physicians of the medieval Islamic world - Propose merging
Category:Moorish scholars to
Category:Scholars of medieval IslamCategory:Scholars of the medieval Islamic world - Propose merging Category:Moorish writers to Category:Muslim writers
- Propose deleting Category:Moorish people by occupation
- Propose merging
Category:Medieval Moorish astronomers to
- Nominator's rationale: merge/delete, Moors is an outdated and ambiguous term that may refer to the Muslim population of Al-Andalus, or with Morocco, or with the rest of northern Africa. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:23, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Rathfelder ( talk) 10:35, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
- Object -- The medieval Muslim world stretched from Al-Andalus and Morocco to India. Much of this relates to the people from the two former. I appreciate Moors is an obsolete term, but if we are to abandon its use, we need to find a more specific alternative. Peterkingiron ( talk) 11:55, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- @ Peterkingiron: people of Al-Andalus are already in an Al-Andalus-specific subcategory, so I think that that should address your concern sufficiently. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Note: the target categories have been updated after speedy renaming. – Fayenatic London 11:16, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 16:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- I would withdraw my objection if all the bio-articles were distributed by applying appropriate Al-andalus or other national category. My objection would require manually empty. I am not convinced that all articles (e.g. in scholars) have appropriate more local categories.
Peterkingiron ( talk) 11:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Ok with merge, but prefer the merge is made into more specific categories than the proposed target categories which are very general. The corresponding categories for Al-Andalus listed below would be a good start as most articles belong to Al-Andalus (and create missing categories if necessary, e.g. Category:Maliki scholars of Al-Andalus). We can then untag the few articles that do not necessarily relate to Al-Andalus, e.g. a Muslim Sicilian person of supposedly "Moorish" descent.
- Al-Andalusi ( talk)
- It is perfectly fine if you find more articles to be added to the Al-Andalus subcategories. That is just housekeeping per WP:SUBCAT, unrelated to whether the merge should go ahead or not. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:43, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
- 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. – Fayenatic London 12:59, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: I have my doubts about many of these "surnames by culture" categories (and most entries in them), but let's start by this one. The two entries are sourced to this, which is a wiki, not a reliable source. East Prussia existed roughly from 1773 to 1945, there is no evidence that these surnames are from there or then (most surnames are older than that). The cat is a member of the cat Category:Old-Prussian language, but that language became extinct in the early 18th century, or 50 years or so before East Prussia was founded. Basically, it is an unreliably sourced mess (just like most cats in this tree). Fram ( talk) 09:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Merge to
Category:German-language surnames, which is sufficiently precise.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
18:45, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Both entries are already in that cat, so nothing left to merge... Fram ( talk) 10:53, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment -- The question may be whether these two surnames are of German language origin of Old Prussian language origin, as that language was a Baltic language, not a Germanic one. I am not qualified to comment on that. Peterkingiron ( talk) 11:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Can you add Category:East German surnames to this discussion? How are East German names different from West German ones or just plain German names? Liz Read! Talk! 23:48, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 16:40, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Update, Category:East German surnames has meanwhile been tagged for WP:C1 deletion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:20, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- 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: merge and redirect.
bibliomaniac
1
5
17:04, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Ifriqiya under the Aghlabids to Category:9th century in Ifriqiya
- Propose merging Category:People of the Aghlabid dynasty to Category:9th-century people of Ifriqiya
- Nominator's rationale: merge (or reverse merge) per WP:OVERLAPCAT, the Aghlabid dynasty almost exactly covered the 9th century. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:18, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Merge per nom. I would prefer the merge in the direction as nominated, to maintain consistency with other chronological categories. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:11, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
- I see that I forgot to tag the categories, will do that now. This means the discussion shouldn't be closed in the coming week from now. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Merge somehow - the dynasty ruled 800-909, so that we do not need both of these. Peterkingiron ( talk) 11:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Political categories are different from chronological ones, and the Aghlabids are not coterminous with the 9th century, or with Ifriqiya during that period. An Aghlabid governor in Sicily who was in office in 902 for example is still a 'Person of the Aghlabid dynasty', but does not necessarily fall under '9th-century people of Ifriqiya'. Likewise, an event like the war with the Kutama in the 900s is part of 'Ifriqiya under the Aghlabids', but not of the 9th century. Constantine ✍ 11:47, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- The nom does not suggest they are coterminous, it does mean to say there is a very large overlap. Note that WP:OVERLAPCAT does not require an exact overlap. Of course a bit of purging may be needed dependent on the outcome of the merge direction. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- That still does not mean that one can be merged to the other without significant loss of accuracy. I really don't see why this is necessary or helpful. Constantine ✍ 19:29, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 16:30, 13 September 2022 (UTC)- It is helpful because it prevents articles to be dispersed among two different categories that have almost the same scope. By the way, I would be perfectly fine to leave redirects. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:03, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep It's useful to have dynastic categories and I agree with the comment by Cplakidas. Al-Andalusi ( talk) 02:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nom, and OVERLAPCAT, but redirect after merging. —
Qwerfjkl
talk
17:36, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect, and copy the parent categories where needed. There is not enough content to justify additional categories. Although the people category includes a small sub-cat of Aghladid governors of Sicily, they too were "of Ifriqiya". – Fayenatic London 06:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Support merge per nom and Fayenatic london and redirect. -- Privybst ( talk) 19:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗ plicit 14:38, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- 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: split.
(non-admin closure)
Qwerfjkl
talk
17:32, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Propose splitting Category:Women in municipal politics to Category:Women in politics and Category:Women local politicians
- Nominator's rationale: ~This category layer is not very helpful, as it contains only one article and three sub-cats, which are already otherwise interlinked in various ways. Manually merge it to its parent and sub-cat. – Fayenatic London 15:23, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:53, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- 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.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 21#Category:Madura
- 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. – Fayenatic London 13:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: I would argue that "HD-2D" is a marketing term, not a legitimate graphical style. It has not been adopted by any game developer besides Square Enix, despite similar games existing elsewhere for a very long time (the Disgaea series uses the style as well, just minus the fancy lighting). It could be renamed to "Video games that combine 2D and 3D graphics" but that might still count as overcategorization without a relevant primary topic article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 03:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete agree with nom that this is a marketing term without any third party neutral support for it as a concept. I wouldn't disqualify a category based on being a marketing concept, but we'd need to see it become a more enduring phenomenon to avoid WP:SMALLCAT. Jontesta ( talk) 23:43, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- 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.