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 without prejudice against creation if it can be appropriately populated.
(non-admin closure)HouseBlastertalk 00:03, 23 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Small cat where there's only one family member and the family page
Bu Halim Shaybani familyMason (
talk) 23:28, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete for now without prejudice to recreation of the category if and when it can be populated better.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:11, 16 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per above --
Lenticel(
talk) 09:06, 18 October 2023 (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:People of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
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, none of these biographies are about people of the Islamic Republic.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:20, 16 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per above --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:20, 17 October 2023 (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:Australian people of Mandaean descent
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/delete a bunch of other actions are proposed here that are already discussed in standalone CfD discussions. The specific proposal here is uncontested.
* Pppery *it has begun... 23:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: the five articles are all about Mandaean priests and scholars from Iraq (in one case, Iran) who settled in Australia. Mandaean descent does not apply to any, as articles clearly identify each of them as Mandaean themselves, and say nothing about descent. I believe they would be better located in Iraqi/Iranian emigrants to Australia (already are) as well as an Australian Mandaeans category, per the format in
Australian people by religion. This change of scope would leave the second nominated category empty, to be deleted by default.
Place Clichy (
talk) 19:01, 15 October 2023 (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:Buildings and structures of the Greek Orthodox Church
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:rename, the current name is confusing because there is not a single church body with the name
Greek Orthodox Church.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:05, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. There's no single organisation called the Greek Orthodox Church, and these buildings belong to various churches, which are all Greek Orthodox.
Place Clichy (
talk) 19:25, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Rename per above --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:20, 17 October 2023 (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:Assassinated heads of state by type
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Support. per nom
Mason (
talk) 21:30, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support per nom --
Lenticel(
talk) 03:35, 17 October 2023 (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:Russian professors
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 "Russian/Moscow/Soviet professor foo" into "Russian/Moscow/Soviet academic foo". There was opposition because of the way Russia does titles in academia, but supporters argued that job title is less important than profession.
(non-admin closure)HouseBlastertalk 16:22, 22 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge, the important thing here (with respect to their occupation) is that they do research at a university, the exact title does not matter so much.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 17:45, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge per above --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:20, 17 October 2023 (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.
Keep - I think this is a case where the cat refers to a portion of a page rather than the primary topic of the page. In this case, this is a german studio. So, unsurprisingly, not a lot has been written about these german shows. In some cases, are "international" versions of an english language show. See for example
de:Hochzeit auf den ersten Blick, the german version of
Married_at_First_Sight_(American_TV_series)#International_versions. And worth noting that the "original" version of that show was from Demark. - jc37 00:07, 24 September 2023 (UTC)reply
But then, isn't the categorization incorrect? If Seven.One Studios only produces the German versions, the English versions have no business in the category.
Pichpich (
talk) 01:53, 26 September 2023 (UTC)reply
At times, page may be categorized based upon a section of a page, not necessarily the title of the page. This especially can happen due to a list of X on a page. In this case, listing of international versions. - jc37 00:27, 30 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 19:26, 5 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete, not a defining characteristic.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:57, 5 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I think that's more an issue of that these are international versions of the shows in question (which could/should probably have their own separate infobox in the articles - but that's merely a matter of editing), and because the company name keeps changing, per
ProSiebenSat.1_Media#Seven.One_Studios.
This seems to be something we're seeing more and more in categories with international versions. Some of which may or may not be in English.
WP:DEFINING doesn't help much, because they are presumably defining in their country of broadcast. Where should we draw the line on categorisation? - jc37 20:55, 6 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I think we should draw the line by whether international versions are notable in their own right.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:01, 7 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Which is (part of) why I asked where do we draw the line. Are we only talking notability in english media? Are we expecting en.wiki editors to go pull references from German media for this company?
Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources doesn't really help much either. - jc37 08:29, 7 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Setting that issue aside for a moment, going back to your original comment about infoboxes. Several of the category members show "Endor Productions" in the infobox, which, as we can see at
ProSiebenSat.1_Media#Seven.One_Studios, is a division of Seven.One_Studios. Which means, this would seem to meet your criteria of being mentioned in the infobox. Also noting that
Endor Productions redirects to
Hilary Bevan Jones. - jc37 09:40, 13 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 15:48, 15 October 2023 (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:Ethnic Albanian 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.
Oppose, ethnicity is something different than descent from an emigrant.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:08, 16 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 15:00, 27 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per the reasoning at
this CfD about "ethnic" Armenians. Nobody is in fact ever primarily defined as an ethnic Albanian, as
Dante is still arguably a well-known Italian writer although he was never a citizen of any state called Italy. JPL has a history of placing this moniker indiscriminately for people who are not citizens of the nation-state that bears the name of the language they speak. This recent re-creation is putting together content that was already perfectly fine where it was before, especially in
Albanian diaspora,
People of Albanian descent and other ethnic group categories. Especially, the intersection categories with occupations are made-up gatherings or loosely related people that do not seem eligible under
WP:OCEGRS. If kept, merge as nom as a damage control measure.
Place Clichy (
talk) 15:53, 28 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 01:20, 7 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Note that the category has apparently been purged, so that it does not contain any diaspora/descent categories. Place Clichy is right that diaspora/descent categories do not belong here, but they aren't here either.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:31, 7 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 15:43, 15 October 2023 (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:Companies of insular areas of the United States by city
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. A majority of participants supported deleting this category; their arguments were centered upon
WP:DEFINING, and the redundancy of both this category and
Category:Aston Villa F.C. players. There were two people who supported keeping this category, both for different reasons. The first was an argument that it is, in fact, defining. However, this argument is simply not enough to overcome the four !voters who expressed the belief that it is not defining. The second was an explicit appeal to
WP:ITSUSEFUL, followed up by
WP:ITSHARMLESS, and thus was given less weight. Therefore, there is consensus for deletion.
(non-admin closure)HouseBlastertalk 00:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Not needed, not defining, we already have
Category:Aston Villa F.C. players and no similar categories for other clubs exist as far as I'm aware (and if they do, they also need to go). Indeed, I recall similar youth categories being deleted in the past (one for Celtic ringing bells?).
GiantSnowman 14:57, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.
GiantSnowman 14:58, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Per
Wikipedia:Defining: a defining characteristic is one that reliable, secondary sources commonly and consistently use to define the subject.Google shows that this is the case. It is a defining Characteristic for only certain footballers. Some of whom have never played a senior game for the club which one would expect in order to be categorised as a Villa player.
Tiny Particle (
talk) 16:13, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. The existing players category is sufficient.
Mattythewhite (
talk) 16:56, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose, this is a useful category as many players do not make a senior debut before leaving for another club, Aston Villa is generally considered to be among the elite academies in England and has produced hundreds of academy players, a substantial proportion though did not play for the first team. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Mountaincirque (
talk •
contribs) 11:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC)reply
and how is not playing for a club defining? This is not a problem that needs fixing, the main category covers all players who have been signed with the club.
In the same way that attending a school or university is a defining feature of a person, the same can be said for being part of a football academy, even if you didn't go on to play for the senior side. The fact that there are not categories for other sides is whataboutery, there is no
WP:Football consensus on not having academy categories, it's just your opinion. I genuinely don't see how having this extra piece of information does any harm, in fact for me personally it is a massive boon to be able to see who came through the Villa academy easily, even if they didn't go on to play senior football at the club.
Mountaincirquetalk 08:47, 20 October 2023 (UTC)reply
There's no
WP:FOOTY consensus to keep this, people shouldn't be creating categories for one team just because they
WP:LIKEIT. If people think that academy categories should be created, a centralised discussion proving them as defining should be had. None of the discussion here actually proves that playing for Villa youth and not the senior team is a defining characteristic of their career.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 09:39, 20 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Exactly - this is not a school, this is a football team, and a category already exists.
GiantSnowman 17:40, 20 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete if players also played for the senior team, then this is a category duplication. If they only played for the youth team, then that's
WP:NOTDEFINING, as youth football isn't likely to be the most important thing they've done in their career (as players who only played youth football aren't generally notable). Either way, this category is unnecessary, which is why it correctly doesn't exist for every other football team.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 09:36, 20 October 2023 (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: Fails
WP:CATDEFINING. Also, eldest sons become barons after their fathers kick the aristocratic bucket (unless of course they predecease them or the title gets taken away for some reason), and there are plenty of baronial categories.
Clarityfiend (
talk) 12:56, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. per nom
Mason (
talk) 16:08, 15 October 2023 (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:Twin sportspeople
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: Per
WP:TRIVIALCAT. This category has been nominated twice before
here and
here with no consensus reached but not since 2020. It has been nominated for deletion rather than merging since allow of the articles are presumably already in their national subcategories. While I am skeptical as to whether being a twin is defining at all, having X profession and being a twin seems like a totally trivial intersection. As TRIVIALCAT states, "For biographical articles, it is usual to categorize by such aspects as their career, origins, and major accomplishments."
User:Namiba 12:53, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete. I agree that the intersection between twinness and occupation isn't defining (although I could see a case being made for actors/entertainers). In terms of twinness in general, I'd argue that it's a notable feature, but I'm biased in that regard because I do a lot of behavior genetic work.
Mason (
talk) 21:23, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete arbitrary intersection of two things, being a twin is
WP:NOTDEFINING for almost all people in that category.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 08:16, 16 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per above --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:21, 17 October 2023 (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:English diplomats
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.
OpposeNeutral. English is supposed to describe people whose nationality is English. If you want diplomats who are representing the England/the Kingdom of England, then the category shouldn't use "from" (i'm not sure what the norm is -- either of or for). I think we should split the category, and update the descriptions.
Mason (
talk) 23:51, 29 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Fair point, in this case (while representing a country) it should be "of" rather than "from". No need for a split though.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:53, 30 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment That's a good point on the description. I'm on the fence about splitting now, as you make good points.
Mason (
talk) 13:58, 30 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 01:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow •
talk 12:16, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
@
LaundryPizza03 and
Edward-Woodrow: may I respectfully ask why the double relisting? My understanding is that all opposition has been withdrawn.
Place Clichy (
talk) 19:56, 15 October 2023 (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:Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer subsidiaries
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. OP was subsequently blocked as a sock, so there is zero legitimate support for a merger.
(non-admin closure)HouseBlastertalk 23:32, 22 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow •
talk 12:13, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Support. per nom
Mason (
talk) 16:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support per nom --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:21, 17 October 2023 (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:Establishments in the Burgundian Netherlands by century
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, redundant category layer for a polity that lasted only one century.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:32, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. per nom
Mason (
talk) 16:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support per nom --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:21, 17 October 2023 (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:Women of the Crusader states
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: from, not of
Mason (
talk) 02:41, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Rename, "from" is default. The subcategories should be nominated too.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:38, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I speedied the child categories. I misclicked and didn't speedy this one.
Mason (
talk) 21:26, 15 October 2023 (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:Interethnic marriage
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:Fictional indigenous Siberian 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.
The result of the discussion was:delete. In terms of strength of the arguments, the opposition to deletion rebutted some OP's concerns about the factual accuracy of the category. However, subsequent delete !voters pointed out that few of the articles in the category tree are actually "Fictional indigenous people from Siberia", tipping both numbers and strength of the arguments in favor of deletion.
(non-admin closure)HouseBlastertalk 23:30, 22 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: This category does not make sense. The only content is 3 child categories (
Fictional Ainu people,
Fictional Eskimo and Inuit people,
Fictional Mongolian people, none of which can be primarily defined as indigenous Siberian people. This category serves as a bridge to
Category:Fictional indigenous people of the Arctic, which clearly does not apply to Ainus (a Japanese people) or Mongolian people, and is already a parent of the Eskimo and Inuit category. This category is just useless for fictional characters category, and not defining.
Place Clichy (
talk) 00:24, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose.
Ainu,
Eskimo (
Yupik), and
Mongol people all live in Asian Russia (AKA Siberia), and are all indigenous to regions within Siberia. Your rationale doesn't make much sense.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 03:10, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Not all Siberia is Arctic, or North of the Arctic circle.
Mongolia cannot be placed in the Arctic, however you stretch it. Same for Hokkaido and Sakhalin, the homeland of the Ainu people.
Place Clichy (
talk) 10:05, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I removed the Arctic category, try a different reason for why this should be deleted.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 16:48, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete, hardly any of the articles in this tree is about a fictional Siberian character.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete. per nom
Mason (
talk) 16:07, 15 October 2023 (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:Korean tea culture
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: 1 item in category
Mason (
talk) 00:02, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Dual merge (not split), per nom.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:48, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Dual merge per Marcocapelle. --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:23, 17 October 2023 (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 without prejudice against creation if it can be appropriately populated.
(non-admin closure)HouseBlastertalk 00:03, 23 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Small cat where there's only one family member and the family page
Bu Halim Shaybani familyMason (
talk) 23:28, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete for now without prejudice to recreation of the category if and when it can be populated better.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:11, 16 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per above --
Lenticel(
talk) 09:06, 18 October 2023 (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:People of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
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, none of these biographies are about people of the Islamic Republic.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:20, 16 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per above --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:20, 17 October 2023 (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:Australian people of Mandaean descent
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/delete a bunch of other actions are proposed here that are already discussed in standalone CfD discussions. The specific proposal here is uncontested.
* Pppery *it has begun... 23:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: the five articles are all about Mandaean priests and scholars from Iraq (in one case, Iran) who settled in Australia. Mandaean descent does not apply to any, as articles clearly identify each of them as Mandaean themselves, and say nothing about descent. I believe they would be better located in Iraqi/Iranian emigrants to Australia (already are) as well as an Australian Mandaeans category, per the format in
Australian people by religion. This change of scope would leave the second nominated category empty, to be deleted by default.
Place Clichy (
talk) 19:01, 15 October 2023 (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:Buildings and structures of the Greek Orthodox Church
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:rename, the current name is confusing because there is not a single church body with the name
Greek Orthodox Church.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:05, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. There's no single organisation called the Greek Orthodox Church, and these buildings belong to various churches, which are all Greek Orthodox.
Place Clichy (
talk) 19:25, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Rename per above --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:20, 17 October 2023 (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:Assassinated heads of state by type
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Support. per nom
Mason (
talk) 21:30, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support per nom --
Lenticel(
talk) 03:35, 17 October 2023 (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:Russian professors
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 "Russian/Moscow/Soviet professor foo" into "Russian/Moscow/Soviet academic foo". There was opposition because of the way Russia does titles in academia, but supporters argued that job title is less important than profession.
(non-admin closure)HouseBlastertalk 16:22, 22 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge, the important thing here (with respect to their occupation) is that they do research at a university, the exact title does not matter so much.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 17:45, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge per above --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:20, 17 October 2023 (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.
Keep - I think this is a case where the cat refers to a portion of a page rather than the primary topic of the page. In this case, this is a german studio. So, unsurprisingly, not a lot has been written about these german shows. In some cases, are "international" versions of an english language show. See for example
de:Hochzeit auf den ersten Blick, the german version of
Married_at_First_Sight_(American_TV_series)#International_versions. And worth noting that the "original" version of that show was from Demark. - jc37 00:07, 24 September 2023 (UTC)reply
But then, isn't the categorization incorrect? If Seven.One Studios only produces the German versions, the English versions have no business in the category.
Pichpich (
talk) 01:53, 26 September 2023 (UTC)reply
At times, page may be categorized based upon a section of a page, not necessarily the title of the page. This especially can happen due to a list of X on a page. In this case, listing of international versions. - jc37 00:27, 30 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 19:26, 5 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete, not a defining characteristic.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:57, 5 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I think that's more an issue of that these are international versions of the shows in question (which could/should probably have their own separate infobox in the articles - but that's merely a matter of editing), and because the company name keeps changing, per
ProSiebenSat.1_Media#Seven.One_Studios.
This seems to be something we're seeing more and more in categories with international versions. Some of which may or may not be in English.
WP:DEFINING doesn't help much, because they are presumably defining in their country of broadcast. Where should we draw the line on categorisation? - jc37 20:55, 6 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I think we should draw the line by whether international versions are notable in their own right.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:01, 7 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Which is (part of) why I asked where do we draw the line. Are we only talking notability in english media? Are we expecting en.wiki editors to go pull references from German media for this company?
Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources doesn't really help much either. - jc37 08:29, 7 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Setting that issue aside for a moment, going back to your original comment about infoboxes. Several of the category members show "Endor Productions" in the infobox, which, as we can see at
ProSiebenSat.1_Media#Seven.One_Studios, is a division of Seven.One_Studios. Which means, this would seem to meet your criteria of being mentioned in the infobox. Also noting that
Endor Productions redirects to
Hilary Bevan Jones. - jc37 09:40, 13 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 15:48, 15 October 2023 (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:Ethnic Albanian 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.
Oppose, ethnicity is something different than descent from an emigrant.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:08, 16 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 15:00, 27 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per the reasoning at
this CfD about "ethnic" Armenians. Nobody is in fact ever primarily defined as an ethnic Albanian, as
Dante is still arguably a well-known Italian writer although he was never a citizen of any state called Italy. JPL has a history of placing this moniker indiscriminately for people who are not citizens of the nation-state that bears the name of the language they speak. This recent re-creation is putting together content that was already perfectly fine where it was before, especially in
Albanian diaspora,
People of Albanian descent and other ethnic group categories. Especially, the intersection categories with occupations are made-up gatherings or loosely related people that do not seem eligible under
WP:OCEGRS. If kept, merge as nom as a damage control measure.
Place Clichy (
talk) 15:53, 28 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 01:20, 7 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Note that the category has apparently been purged, so that it does not contain any diaspora/descent categories. Place Clichy is right that diaspora/descent categories do not belong here, but they aren't here either.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:31, 7 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 15:43, 15 October 2023 (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:Companies of insular areas of the United States by city
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. A majority of participants supported deleting this category; their arguments were centered upon
WP:DEFINING, and the redundancy of both this category and
Category:Aston Villa F.C. players. There were two people who supported keeping this category, both for different reasons. The first was an argument that it is, in fact, defining. However, this argument is simply not enough to overcome the four !voters who expressed the belief that it is not defining. The second was an explicit appeal to
WP:ITSUSEFUL, followed up by
WP:ITSHARMLESS, and thus was given less weight. Therefore, there is consensus for deletion.
(non-admin closure)HouseBlastertalk 00:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Not needed, not defining, we already have
Category:Aston Villa F.C. players and no similar categories for other clubs exist as far as I'm aware (and if they do, they also need to go). Indeed, I recall similar youth categories being deleted in the past (one for Celtic ringing bells?).
GiantSnowman 14:57, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.
GiantSnowman 14:58, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Per
Wikipedia:Defining: a defining characteristic is one that reliable, secondary sources commonly and consistently use to define the subject.Google shows that this is the case. It is a defining Characteristic for only certain footballers. Some of whom have never played a senior game for the club which one would expect in order to be categorised as a Villa player.
Tiny Particle (
talk) 16:13, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. The existing players category is sufficient.
Mattythewhite (
talk) 16:56, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose, this is a useful category as many players do not make a senior debut before leaving for another club, Aston Villa is generally considered to be among the elite academies in England and has produced hundreds of academy players, a substantial proportion though did not play for the first team. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Mountaincirque (
talk •
contribs) 11:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC)reply
and how is not playing for a club defining? This is not a problem that needs fixing, the main category covers all players who have been signed with the club.
In the same way that attending a school or university is a defining feature of a person, the same can be said for being part of a football academy, even if you didn't go on to play for the senior side. The fact that there are not categories for other sides is whataboutery, there is no
WP:Football consensus on not having academy categories, it's just your opinion. I genuinely don't see how having this extra piece of information does any harm, in fact for me personally it is a massive boon to be able to see who came through the Villa academy easily, even if they didn't go on to play senior football at the club.
Mountaincirquetalk 08:47, 20 October 2023 (UTC)reply
There's no
WP:FOOTY consensus to keep this, people shouldn't be creating categories for one team just because they
WP:LIKEIT. If people think that academy categories should be created, a centralised discussion proving them as defining should be had. None of the discussion here actually proves that playing for Villa youth and not the senior team is a defining characteristic of their career.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 09:39, 20 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Exactly - this is not a school, this is a football team, and a category already exists.
GiantSnowman 17:40, 20 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete if players also played for the senior team, then this is a category duplication. If they only played for the youth team, then that's
WP:NOTDEFINING, as youth football isn't likely to be the most important thing they've done in their career (as players who only played youth football aren't generally notable). Either way, this category is unnecessary, which is why it correctly doesn't exist for every other football team.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 09:36, 20 October 2023 (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: Fails
WP:CATDEFINING. Also, eldest sons become barons after their fathers kick the aristocratic bucket (unless of course they predecease them or the title gets taken away for some reason), and there are plenty of baronial categories.
Clarityfiend (
talk) 12:56, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. per nom
Mason (
talk) 16:08, 15 October 2023 (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:Twin sportspeople
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: Per
WP:TRIVIALCAT. This category has been nominated twice before
here and
here with no consensus reached but not since 2020. It has been nominated for deletion rather than merging since allow of the articles are presumably already in their national subcategories. While I am skeptical as to whether being a twin is defining at all, having X profession and being a twin seems like a totally trivial intersection. As TRIVIALCAT states, "For biographical articles, it is usual to categorize by such aspects as their career, origins, and major accomplishments."
User:Namiba 12:53, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete. I agree that the intersection between twinness and occupation isn't defining (although I could see a case being made for actors/entertainers). In terms of twinness in general, I'd argue that it's a notable feature, but I'm biased in that regard because I do a lot of behavior genetic work.
Mason (
talk) 21:23, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete arbitrary intersection of two things, being a twin is
WP:NOTDEFINING for almost all people in that category.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 08:16, 16 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per above --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:21, 17 October 2023 (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:English diplomats
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.
OpposeNeutral. English is supposed to describe people whose nationality is English. If you want diplomats who are representing the England/the Kingdom of England, then the category shouldn't use "from" (i'm not sure what the norm is -- either of or for). I think we should split the category, and update the descriptions.
Mason (
talk) 23:51, 29 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Fair point, in this case (while representing a country) it should be "of" rather than "from". No need for a split though.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:53, 30 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment That's a good point on the description. I'm on the fence about splitting now, as you make good points.
Mason (
talk) 13:58, 30 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 01:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow •
talk 12:16, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
@
LaundryPizza03 and
Edward-Woodrow: may I respectfully ask why the double relisting? My understanding is that all opposition has been withdrawn.
Place Clichy (
talk) 19:56, 15 October 2023 (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:Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer subsidiaries
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. OP was subsequently blocked as a sock, so there is zero legitimate support for a merger.
(non-admin closure)HouseBlastertalk 23:32, 22 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow •
talk 12:13, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Support. per nom
Mason (
talk) 16:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support per nom --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:21, 17 October 2023 (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:Establishments in the Burgundian Netherlands by century
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, redundant category layer for a polity that lasted only one century.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:32, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. per nom
Mason (
talk) 16:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Support per nom --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:21, 17 October 2023 (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:Women of the Crusader states
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: from, not of
Mason (
talk) 02:41, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Rename, "from" is default. The subcategories should be nominated too.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:38, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I speedied the child categories. I misclicked and didn't speedy this one.
Mason (
talk) 21:26, 15 October 2023 (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:Interethnic marriage
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:Fictional indigenous Siberian 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.
The result of the discussion was:delete. In terms of strength of the arguments, the opposition to deletion rebutted some OP's concerns about the factual accuracy of the category. However, subsequent delete !voters pointed out that few of the articles in the category tree are actually "Fictional indigenous people from Siberia", tipping both numbers and strength of the arguments in favor of deletion.
(non-admin closure)HouseBlastertalk 23:30, 22 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: This category does not make sense. The only content is 3 child categories (
Fictional Ainu people,
Fictional Eskimo and Inuit people,
Fictional Mongolian people, none of which can be primarily defined as indigenous Siberian people. This category serves as a bridge to
Category:Fictional indigenous people of the Arctic, which clearly does not apply to Ainus (a Japanese people) or Mongolian people, and is already a parent of the Eskimo and Inuit category. This category is just useless for fictional characters category, and not defining.
Place Clichy (
talk) 00:24, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose.
Ainu,
Eskimo (
Yupik), and
Mongol people all live in Asian Russia (AKA Siberia), and are all indigenous to regions within Siberia. Your rationale doesn't make much sense.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 03:10, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Not all Siberia is Arctic, or North of the Arctic circle.
Mongolia cannot be placed in the Arctic, however you stretch it. Same for Hokkaido and Sakhalin, the homeland of the Ainu people.
Place Clichy (
talk) 10:05, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I removed the Arctic category, try a different reason for why this should be deleted.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 16:48, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete, hardly any of the articles in this tree is about a fictional Siberian character.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete. per nom
Mason (
talk) 16:07, 15 October 2023 (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:Korean tea culture
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: 1 item in category
Mason (
talk) 00:02, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Dual merge (not split), per nom.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:48, 15 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Dual merge per Marcocapelle. --
Lenticel(
talk) 02:23, 17 October 2023 (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.