The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: I don't think that the intersection of being jewish and a prisoners and detainees is defining under
WP:EGRS. Do we have categories for Christian gulag detainees? I also think that Jews who died in prison custody in not a defining intersection between location of death and ethnicity.
Mason (
talk) 20:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I hope I don't derail the entire discussion by bringing up the Holocaust, but... being Jewish as a prisoner is perhaps one of the most defining identity aspects in the 20th century. Just saying... The religious aspect does not appear to be as important as the "ethnic" or "cultural" aspects of Jewishness, so the comparison with Christian prisoners only goes so far.
NLeeuw (
talk) 20:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
To be clear, I agree with you that the Holocaust is very much defining at this intersection; however, none of the other intersection at this category meet that criteria. Also notably, Holocaust victims/survivors was not in the category, when I stumbled upon it, which I think implicitly might indicate that the Holocaust wasn't what the category maker had in mind.
Mason (
talk) 18:37, 19 May 2024 (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:Ukrainian-Jewish emigrants to the United Kingdom
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: Non-defining intersection between being a Ukrainian emigrant to the United Kingdom, Being a Jewish emigrant to the United Kingdom, and being Ukrainian-Jewish.
Mason (
talk) 20:40, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose per
History of the Jews in Ukraine and
List of Ukrainian Jews. If these intersections are defining enough for two main articles, then it is not trivial. Such a person migrating to the UK is not an unreasonable extension in my view.
NLeeuw (
talk) 21:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't dispute that being Ukrainian and Jewish is defining, but this isn't that category; this category is at the 3xway intersection, with no other similar categories. We only have a handful of Jewish emigrant categories (that's actually named
Category:Jewish refugees). And those categories exist because they emigrated for a specific reason that had to do with their Jewish identity (e.g.,
Category:Jews who emigrated to escape Nazism). I also looked for other categories, like
Category:Ukrainian-Jewish emigrants, for both other nations and didn't find any. At the very least, I think that this category needs to be renamed, and if merged, I think adding the target
Category:British people of Ukrainian-Jewish descent would be worthwhile.
Mason (
talk) 18:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
That's actually a good idea. Dual merge per you and Marcocapelle.
NLeeuw (
talk) 21:58, 20 May 2024 (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:Freely licensed images of non-free subject
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: There are several major 'climbing' directors (e.g.
Jimmy Chin) that would fit in here but the category needs to be renamed (no need for two separate categories as there is a lot of overlap in the film sector).
Aszx5000 (
talk) 19:58, 18 May 2024 (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:nomination withdrawn as the issue has been sorted out with the creation of appropriate subcategories.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Misconceived category scheme without precedent or siblings. Despite the name of the parent category here, the contents are not actually "by year" -- Wikipedia does not categorize films for the intersection of country with individual year of release anyway, so that wouldn't even be supportable. Instead, what's actually here is two subcategories for Egyptian films by century -- but that's not a thing we do either, because that's far too wide a classification to be useful when it comes to film, and no other country has anything like this. And for added bonus, by far the majority of Egyptian films haven't even actually been filed under here at all:
Category:Egyptian films by genre has around 500 films under it, while this has just 37. We can and do cross-categorize films on the intersection of country with decade, so no prejudice against the creation of that scheme here if desired, but by-century is too broad to be a useful grouping when it comes to films. The
Category:Lists of Egyptian films by year subcategory is fine, but is already in
Category:Lists of Egyptian films, so no replacement of this is needed.
Bearcat (
talk) 15:49, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisted per
request. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 17:41, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted on the grounds that the second and third nominated categories do have siblings for other countries within e.g.
Category:20th-century films. –
FayenaticLondon 14:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Note that the request was on grounds that are not actually applicable. While it is true that some other countries do have "films by century" categories, no other country has them to contain individual films as these do — where they do exist, they exist exclusively as container-only parents for the by-decade categories that Egypt doesn't have, and no other country has individual films being directly catted "by century" at all. So, again, if somebody is willing to buckle down and create by decade categories for Egypt, then these could be kept as parents for those by decade categories — but until by decade categories do exist, these do not need to exist with individual films filed directly in them, because that just isn't how films are categorized.
Bearcat (
talk) 21:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Certainly it appears that decade categories for Egyptian films can be sufficiently well populated for the 1950s onwards. If there are very few for earlier decades e.g. Gawhara in 1940s, why should those pages not be categorised directly in C20 Egyptian films? Compare
Category:20th-century business films which has decade subcats for 1920s onwards, but holds The Love of Hetty Raimond (1917) directly. –
FayenaticLondon 14:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The Love of Hetty Raymond doesn't actually contain any explanation of how it's a "business film" anyway — so it's not even clear that the category was justified there either, and I've had to remove it as unsourced and unexplained. So there are no other siblings left in
Category:20th-century films that have any articles directly in them at all — they're all exclusively "decade subcategories only", and none of them contain even one film that isn't in a decade subcategory. And at any rate, I explicitly said that I was willing to withdraw this if somebody was willing to actually buckle down and create by-decade categories for Egypt — but they have to exist before they can be filed anywhere, so their potential to exist in the future is not a reason to keep provisional parent categories for them in advance of anybody actually being bothered to create them. Also, as I already noted above, there are several hundred other Egyptian films that haven't been filed in this scheme at all, so just because there aren't many 1940s Egyptian films here doesn't prove that we don't have others. I just did an AWB category-compare check of all Egyptian films against all 1940s films, and there are actually 35 Egyptian films under both trees, which is absolutely enough to support a 1940s category too.
Bearcat (
talk) 15:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Partial merge of the first to
Category:Egyptian cinema by year. Keep the century categories which I have sub-catted by decade. When recategorising pages, I found some already in e.g.
Category:1990s Arabic-language films. Should 1990s Egyptian be a diffusing sub-cat of 1990s Arabic-language? Or even if not sub-catted, should they be removed on the pattern of the rule stated at
Category:Songs in English? –
FayenaticLondon 08:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Since the century-vs-decade issue has been resolved by the creation of some the appropriate by-decade subcategories, I'm withdrawing this as promised since the century categories are now valid and warranted parentage and the "by year" category can now be resolved just by moving it.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:42, 23 May 2024 (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:Sportspeople who died in wars
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: A non-defining intersection of unrelated characteristics.
User:Namiba 15:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. I do think that the Olympians category could make an interesting list, but the category itself isn't defining at the intersection, unless the sportperson died while they were actively participating in the sport.
Mason (
talk) 15:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Does not seem defining. I am also dubious about all the contents of
Category:Lists of sportspeople who died in wars for similar reasons. However, the articles should be dealt with there before messing with the category. This is not a "but what about this one" situation where just because another bad category exists, this one can be kept.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 23:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I only made this category because both of the 2 preexisting subcategories were similar enough to each other.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 01:12, 19 May 2024 (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.
Yes, but the books aren't about the Deuteronomist.
Moreover, it's in the name: the
Book of Deuteronomy itself is not part of the Nevi'im but the Torah / Pentateuch. I think we agreed previously that we shouldn't be mixing up textual criticism with traditional Jewish and Christian divisions of the Bible; this is a logical follow-up of that agreement.
NLeeuw (
talk) 22:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
You are right insofar only part of the article
Deuteronomist is about the prophet books and the perhaps bigger part is about the book of Deuteronomy. I have instead added the redirect
Deuteronomistic history to the category. @
Fayenatic london: what do you think?
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't like it, but I'm not gonna make it a big problem. I'll accept it.
NLeeuw (
talk) 16:40, 26 May 2024 (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:Canadian musicians by ethnic or national origin
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.
Executed French 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: merge, primarily because this is diffusion by defunct administrative divisions (defunct since 2015), and secondarily because diffusion by administrative division leads to a trivial intersection. Manually merge insofar the articles aren't already in one of the other subcategories e.g.
Category:French people executed by Nazi Germany.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. There's really no need to diffuse by location. Century and crime would be more useful for diffusion
Mason (
talk) 15:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
NLeeuw (
talk) 20:59, 18 May 2024 (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:Drakengard
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: There seems to be enough articles for a split, with 11 going to Nier and 7 going to Drakengard. Bringing to CFD as I am uncertain in this split, and with Nier not having a series article yet. Category:Nier would also likely be a subcategory of Category:Drakengard.
(Oinkers42) (
talk) 22:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
OpposeDrakengard still concerns both series and is solely titled "Drakengard". If it is split off into a Nier series article I'd have no qualms with this, but it's putting the cart before the horse.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 04:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I do not think a series article needs to be created before a category is created.
(Oinkers42) (
talk) 18:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 01:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Zxcvbnm. As is, the Drakengard article covers both the Drakengard and Nier as part of the same series, and makes no implication that they should be separate. I am sure there is enough coverage that one could make a separate Nier article, but that none exists at this point suggests to me that it isn't necessary, or that it is better to keep them together. Regardless of the reason, the categories should follow suit.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions) 08:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: I don't think that the intersection of being jewish and a prisoners and detainees is defining under
WP:EGRS. Do we have categories for Christian gulag detainees? I also think that Jews who died in prison custody in not a defining intersection between location of death and ethnicity.
Mason (
talk) 20:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I hope I don't derail the entire discussion by bringing up the Holocaust, but... being Jewish as a prisoner is perhaps one of the most defining identity aspects in the 20th century. Just saying... The religious aspect does not appear to be as important as the "ethnic" or "cultural" aspects of Jewishness, so the comparison with Christian prisoners only goes so far.
NLeeuw (
talk) 20:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
To be clear, I agree with you that the Holocaust is very much defining at this intersection; however, none of the other intersection at this category meet that criteria. Also notably, Holocaust victims/survivors was not in the category, when I stumbled upon it, which I think implicitly might indicate that the Holocaust wasn't what the category maker had in mind.
Mason (
talk) 18:37, 19 May 2024 (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:Ukrainian-Jewish emigrants to the United Kingdom
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: Non-defining intersection between being a Ukrainian emigrant to the United Kingdom, Being a Jewish emigrant to the United Kingdom, and being Ukrainian-Jewish.
Mason (
talk) 20:40, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose per
History of the Jews in Ukraine and
List of Ukrainian Jews. If these intersections are defining enough for two main articles, then it is not trivial. Such a person migrating to the UK is not an unreasonable extension in my view.
NLeeuw (
talk) 21:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't dispute that being Ukrainian and Jewish is defining, but this isn't that category; this category is at the 3xway intersection, with no other similar categories. We only have a handful of Jewish emigrant categories (that's actually named
Category:Jewish refugees). And those categories exist because they emigrated for a specific reason that had to do with their Jewish identity (e.g.,
Category:Jews who emigrated to escape Nazism). I also looked for other categories, like
Category:Ukrainian-Jewish emigrants, for both other nations and didn't find any. At the very least, I think that this category needs to be renamed, and if merged, I think adding the target
Category:British people of Ukrainian-Jewish descent would be worthwhile.
Mason (
talk) 18:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
That's actually a good idea. Dual merge per you and Marcocapelle.
NLeeuw (
talk) 21:58, 20 May 2024 (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:Freely licensed images of non-free subject
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: There are several major 'climbing' directors (e.g.
Jimmy Chin) that would fit in here but the category needs to be renamed (no need for two separate categories as there is a lot of overlap in the film sector).
Aszx5000 (
talk) 19:58, 18 May 2024 (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:nomination withdrawn as the issue has been sorted out with the creation of appropriate subcategories.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Misconceived category scheme without precedent or siblings. Despite the name of the parent category here, the contents are not actually "by year" -- Wikipedia does not categorize films for the intersection of country with individual year of release anyway, so that wouldn't even be supportable. Instead, what's actually here is two subcategories for Egyptian films by century -- but that's not a thing we do either, because that's far too wide a classification to be useful when it comes to film, and no other country has anything like this. And for added bonus, by far the majority of Egyptian films haven't even actually been filed under here at all:
Category:Egyptian films by genre has around 500 films under it, while this has just 37. We can and do cross-categorize films on the intersection of country with decade, so no prejudice against the creation of that scheme here if desired, but by-century is too broad to be a useful grouping when it comes to films. The
Category:Lists of Egyptian films by year subcategory is fine, but is already in
Category:Lists of Egyptian films, so no replacement of this is needed.
Bearcat (
talk) 15:49, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisted per
request. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 17:41, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted on the grounds that the second and third nominated categories do have siblings for other countries within e.g.
Category:20th-century films. –
FayenaticLondon 14:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Note that the request was on grounds that are not actually applicable. While it is true that some other countries do have "films by century" categories, no other country has them to contain individual films as these do — where they do exist, they exist exclusively as container-only parents for the by-decade categories that Egypt doesn't have, and no other country has individual films being directly catted "by century" at all. So, again, if somebody is willing to buckle down and create by decade categories for Egypt, then these could be kept as parents for those by decade categories — but until by decade categories do exist, these do not need to exist with individual films filed directly in them, because that just isn't how films are categorized.
Bearcat (
talk) 21:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Certainly it appears that decade categories for Egyptian films can be sufficiently well populated for the 1950s onwards. If there are very few for earlier decades e.g. Gawhara in 1940s, why should those pages not be categorised directly in C20 Egyptian films? Compare
Category:20th-century business films which has decade subcats for 1920s onwards, but holds The Love of Hetty Raimond (1917) directly. –
FayenaticLondon 14:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The Love of Hetty Raymond doesn't actually contain any explanation of how it's a "business film" anyway — so it's not even clear that the category was justified there either, and I've had to remove it as unsourced and unexplained. So there are no other siblings left in
Category:20th-century films that have any articles directly in them at all — they're all exclusively "decade subcategories only", and none of them contain even one film that isn't in a decade subcategory. And at any rate, I explicitly said that I was willing to withdraw this if somebody was willing to actually buckle down and create by-decade categories for Egypt — but they have to exist before they can be filed anywhere, so their potential to exist in the future is not a reason to keep provisional parent categories for them in advance of anybody actually being bothered to create them. Also, as I already noted above, there are several hundred other Egyptian films that haven't been filed in this scheme at all, so just because there aren't many 1940s Egyptian films here doesn't prove that we don't have others. I just did an AWB category-compare check of all Egyptian films against all 1940s films, and there are actually 35 Egyptian films under both trees, which is absolutely enough to support a 1940s category too.
Bearcat (
talk) 15:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Partial merge of the first to
Category:Egyptian cinema by year. Keep the century categories which I have sub-catted by decade. When recategorising pages, I found some already in e.g.
Category:1990s Arabic-language films. Should 1990s Egyptian be a diffusing sub-cat of 1990s Arabic-language? Or even if not sub-catted, should they be removed on the pattern of the rule stated at
Category:Songs in English? –
FayenaticLondon 08:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Since the century-vs-decade issue has been resolved by the creation of some the appropriate by-decade subcategories, I'm withdrawing this as promised since the century categories are now valid and warranted parentage and the "by year" category can now be resolved just by moving it.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:42, 23 May 2024 (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:Sportspeople who died in wars
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: A non-defining intersection of unrelated characteristics.
User:Namiba 15:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. I do think that the Olympians category could make an interesting list, but the category itself isn't defining at the intersection, unless the sportperson died while they were actively participating in the sport.
Mason (
talk) 15:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Does not seem defining. I am also dubious about all the contents of
Category:Lists of sportspeople who died in wars for similar reasons. However, the articles should be dealt with there before messing with the category. This is not a "but what about this one" situation where just because another bad category exists, this one can be kept.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 23:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I only made this category because both of the 2 preexisting subcategories were similar enough to each other.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 01:12, 19 May 2024 (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.
Yes, but the books aren't about the Deuteronomist.
Moreover, it's in the name: the
Book of Deuteronomy itself is not part of the Nevi'im but the Torah / Pentateuch. I think we agreed previously that we shouldn't be mixing up textual criticism with traditional Jewish and Christian divisions of the Bible; this is a logical follow-up of that agreement.
NLeeuw (
talk) 22:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
You are right insofar only part of the article
Deuteronomist is about the prophet books and the perhaps bigger part is about the book of Deuteronomy. I have instead added the redirect
Deuteronomistic history to the category. @
Fayenatic london: what do you think?
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't like it, but I'm not gonna make it a big problem. I'll accept it.
NLeeuw (
talk) 16:40, 26 May 2024 (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:Canadian musicians by ethnic or national origin
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.
Executed French 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: merge, primarily because this is diffusion by defunct administrative divisions (defunct since 2015), and secondarily because diffusion by administrative division leads to a trivial intersection. Manually merge insofar the articles aren't already in one of the other subcategories e.g.
Category:French people executed by Nazi Germany.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. There's really no need to diffuse by location. Century and crime would be more useful for diffusion
Mason (
talk) 15:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
NLeeuw (
talk) 20:59, 18 May 2024 (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:Drakengard
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: There seems to be enough articles for a split, with 11 going to Nier and 7 going to Drakengard. Bringing to CFD as I am uncertain in this split, and with Nier not having a series article yet. Category:Nier would also likely be a subcategory of Category:Drakengard.
(Oinkers42) (
talk) 22:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
OpposeDrakengard still concerns both series and is solely titled "Drakengard". If it is split off into a Nier series article I'd have no qualms with this, but it's putting the cart before the horse.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 04:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I do not think a series article needs to be created before a category is created.
(Oinkers42) (
talk) 18:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 01:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Zxcvbnm. As is, the Drakengard article covers both the Drakengard and Nier as part of the same series, and makes no implication that they should be separate. I am sure there is enough coverage that one could make a separate Nier article, but that none exists at this point suggests to me that it isn't necessary, or that it is better to keep them together. Regardless of the reason, the categories should follow suit.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions) 08:50, 18 May 2024 (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.