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: This category is fundamentally subjective and vaguely-defined. It gives me the impression of promoting a particular obscure philosophy. I'm pretty familiar with environmentalism as a movement and I've never heard of "bright green environmentalism" except through this category.
Clayoquot (
talk |
contribs)
23:04, 25 June 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.
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:Football teams in Africa
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: Doesn't follow the pattern in the category tree of
Category:Association football teams (all articles previously categorized here were association football teams, not other football). And no other categories by continent in this category tree. P 1 9 9✉18:38, 25 June 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:National football teams in Africa
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:Argentine commanders in the Falklands War
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
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:Numismatic history of Ecuador
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:Blind cricket administration
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:Cities in Sevastopol
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.
That's my understanding too. I think my "delete all four" opinion should have mentioned Kacha as well as Inkerman. Sorry about that.
PearlyGigs (
talk)
05:16, 3 July 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:Irish provincial cricket unions
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:Lebanese Protestant hymnwriters
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:New Zealand men by occupation and 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.
Comment. I agree with upmerging "for now" given the obvious duplication here, but I think the whole question of men by occupation versus women by occupation will require some serious discussion. Outside of things like sport, men and women work together.
PearlyGigs (
talk)
22:38, 27 June 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:Male wartime nurses
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: Upmerge for now. This category has only one page in it, who is already in a more specific Wartime nurses category
Mason (
talk)
01:57, 25 June 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.
June 24
Category:Cabinets of Canadian provinces and territories navigational boxes
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:John Marshall Law School (Chicago) faculty
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 children by occupation
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: Nominating this again, this time for merge. Right now it is a
WP:NARROWCAT with only two subcategories. It might need to be dual merged, but either way it is clearly unnecessary with so few subcategories
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
13:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
There is no need to be rude and hostile, and most of the subcategories were removed for being blatantly incorrect so it's a different situation than last time.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
20:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge, redundant category layers with only two subcategories. I am discounting the two subcategories that were purged after the previous discussion as they do not belong here.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
23:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge as proposed. I can't see any real scope for expansion beyond, say, Victorian children who were forced to work in mines or as chimney sweeps. Even so, I doubt if there would ever be enough subjects in each "occupation" to create anything more than a small category.
PearlyGigs (
talk)
08:25, 26 June 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:Kenyon Owls
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:Mansas of Mali
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Alt rename or as per nom? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk17:07, 24 June 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.
Template:CartoonNetwork-stub
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: Template no longer needed. After the discussion at
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 1#Category:Cartoon Network stubs resulted in its dedicated category being deleted as underpopulated, the uses of this template were purged for whether they needed to be filed directly in
Category:Animation stubs or not, and it turned out that every article with this on it either didn't belong in that category at all or was simply redundant to the page already being in the
Category:Animated television series stubs subcategory, meaning it's now been completely stripped from articlespace and is now in use only on a single ten-year-old user sandbox page that's still completely unreferenced for the purposes of becoming salvageable as an article. Essentially, without a dedicated category this is just redundant to other templates, because any possible use of it would now just result in duplicate categorization of the page in both
Category:Animation stubs and one of its subcategories at the same time.
Bearcat (
talk)
13:21, 24 June 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:Northwest Community College Conference football standings templates
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:Defunct off-price department stores of the United 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.
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:History of Great Britain
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:Option A: remove header and a remove a number of parent categories. Option B: nominate subcategories for merger. In any case, the current content of the category is completely out of sync with how the category creator(s) intended.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle, Ah I see that now. Well I would go with Option B, removing any subcategories which aren't related to the period between 1707 and 1801. And also the removal of any article that does not fall between 1707 and 1801. We should try to bring it back into sync with the original purpose it was created for.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
09:06, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Just Delete & re-home articles as necessary. The period of the
Kingdom of Great Britain - from 1707 to 1800, is not really used by historians or the public. If kept it should be more clearly named to avoid confusion with the (main) geographical meaning of
Great Britain, which has clearly been taken by some adders as the intended meaning. In fact such a category might make more sense, at the top of trees with UK, English, Scottish & Welsh sub-cats.
Johnbod (
talk)
01:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him)
02:58, 3 June 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.
Category:Suicides by year
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.
Basically that its
WP:OVERCAT. If a person dies by suicide, they should be categorized in the year they died and the way they died and there is no need for a seperate "by year" category for a specific way of dying. I've only nominated a decade for now to see how this Cfd goes. Then, if it goes through, I will nominate the rest.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
20:55, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Lean oppose, there are a lot of suicides, so having them diffused by year is pretty helpful. Also either way, I think we should keep suicides in YEAR to be non-diffusing, so that everyone, regardless of cause of death can be found in the death by year category.
Mason (
talk)
22:34, 24 June 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.
Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as having been created by blocked or banned users
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: Based on the outcome of
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Enforcing ECR for article creatorsWP:CSD#G5 is no longer restricted to pages created by blocked or banned users but now also applies to pages created in violation of general sanctions (regardless of any attribute of the editor, to the faith in which they created the page, or even if they knew such sanctions existed, an action I continue to think is harmful to the project but alas the consensus was not with me) and so the category name needs to be updated and this unwieldy new title is the shortest one I can craft that is accurate. Splitting the category would be sensible but also contrary to the RfC outcome which explicitly rejected creating a new criterion, so I'm not proposing that. Speedy deletion categories are usually populated by templates, but as there are multiple of them and the templates do not need to be renamed I guess CfD is the appropriate venue, but feel free to move to this to TfD if I'm wrong on that. I'm not sure if I need to individually notify editors who participated in the RFC, but I will leave a message on the RFC talk page.
Thryduulf (
talk)
17:15, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Actually, since both of these categories already exist (I assumed the second one didn't when I wrote my !vote), there is nothing to do here unless nom wants to merge the two categories under the new name.
Nickps (
talk)
20:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That all the relevant templates put articles into the same category was the (it turns out incorrect) impression I got from the wording on the CSD page at the time which I didn't think to check. I'm OK with either a one or two category setup as long as the title of all the categories unambiguously match their scope. However, I oppose speedily closing this discussion as
Pppery has made a good-faith suggestion for an alternative renaming. I weakly oppose that suggestion for the same reasons as you (Nickps) but I see no reason to close the discussion while it remains on the table.
Thryduulf (
talk)
01:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Feel free to close this as withdrawn - my rename suggestion was just an attempt to produce a less clunky version of your rename under the same incorrect assumptions as you.
* Pppery *it has begun...01:25, 24 June 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:Crater Lake
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: Ambiguity problem. This category is for one specific lake-slash-national-park in the United States whose name is
Crater Lake, but I just had to clean it up for the misfiling of several generic
crater lakes in Uganda. As always, the mere presence of a usage note on the category itself is not necessarily sufficient to control the problem, as people frequently file things in categories that sound right and then walk away without checking the category to see if they're doing it wrong -- so the category itself should be named as precisely as possible to quash any ambiguity.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:30, 23 June 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:Films set in Velankanni
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: "Films set in [Place]" category for a small town, without enough films filed in it to need a dedicated category. As always, every town that exists does not automatically get one of these the moment a couple of films have been set there -- it would be fine if there were five or ten films to file here, but if there are less than five then the state level is sufficient.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:19, 23 June 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:Albert Henry Krehbiel
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Eponymous category for a person, without the volume of spinoff content needed to justify an eponymous category. Other than the eponymous biography itself, the only other things filed here are an alternate version of his name that elides the middle "Henry", and the title of a book about him, both of which are just redirects to the eponymous biography rather than separate articles. I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody can actually find evidence that there are enough other related articles that could be filed here, but we do not need a category just to hold three different ways of getting to the same place.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:15, 23 June 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:Television series about microbes
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: "[Form of media] about X" category with only one thing in it and little prospect of expansion since microbes are not a common subject of television series — and the television series here was a cartoon, so its being "about" microbes falls short of being a defining characteristic. As always, we do not automatically need an "about" category for every single possible thing that one television series has been "about" -- this would need to be common enough of a subject for television series to have at least five entries in it before it was justifiable.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:09, 23 June 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:Luarsab Sharashidze
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Eponymous category for a person, with no content in it besides the eponym himself. I'm not knowledgeable enough about the subject to know whether there are other things that could be filed here to populate it, so I'm not prepared to just speedy-delete it as a categorization error myself without discussion and am willing to withdraw this if enough other content can be found, but people do not automatically get categories at their own names just to hold their own main biographies.
Bearcat (
talk)
15:59, 23 June 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:Digital-only stations on the AM band
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: Wikipedia does not categorize radio stations for the matter of whether they're on the AM or FM bands, so we don't need to intersect digital-only status with a criterion that we don't otherwise categorize for.
Bearcat (
talk)
15:50, 23 June 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:Former Philippine Basketball League teams
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 female entertainers
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
I'm not sure. I suppose I'll change my !vote to Weak keep as I don't feel too strongly about it. No big deal if the proposal is accepted.
NLeeuw (
talk)
14:17, 2 July 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.
I would suggest to take out “I’m Not a Juvenile Delinquent” and “You Can’t Catch Me,” then just leave that category as it is. However, I guess deletion might be a solution for Wikipedia I guess. So fair enough. Inajd
Inajd0101 (
talk)
21:58, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
KeepWP:SMALLCAT has been deprecated, so opportunity for future growth is no longer an accepted argument. The two songs were written for the movie, so they appear to be intrinsically related.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
22:19, 7 June 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:Doki Doki Literature Club! characters
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 as creator. Admittedly entirely forgot about the parent category when creating the category, so I agree with the redundancy issue. Though I agree, I still would have appreciated it if we could have finished discussing this before nominating it for deletion.
Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (
talk)
14:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Small cat might not apply, but neither does saying that we should keep a category just because it's "established".
Mason (
talk)
23:54, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That is not what I am saying. I am saying that the practice of grouping characters by game is a well-established one. This falls under that scheme and there is no reason to remove it.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
04:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
It's not redundant when it's a valid subcategory. Categories don't have to have things directly in them to count as a full category. Having a fully populated subcategory still counts.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
11:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
NOTE: If we are going to keep this, I would support keeping both and oppose a merge. I think this category is redundant, but I think it makes sense to have the other category even if this one exists.
QuicoleJR (
talk)
16:52, 15 June 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:British women Marxists
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:no consensus. I don't see affirmative consensus to populate, but I also don't see consensus that this should not be populated. However, if a category is to exist, you don't need to get consensus to populate the category with pages that belong in it. Therefore, I see this result as implicitly endorsing the category being populated, and will ping
Nederlandse Leeuw in case they wish to do so. HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
00:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need to diffuse this category by nationality? Frankly, I have my doubts that the intersection of gender and Marxism is defining.
Mason (
talk)
00:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, but Populate with other women from
Category:British Marxists. If you have my doubts that the intersection of gender and Marxism is defining, why do you propose to take nationality out of the equation? If anything, you should propose to upmerge to
Category:British Marxists instead. Anyway, quick scan suggests the following members to diffuse from parent
Category:British Marxists:
More than enough to populate this category. I might add that a lot of subcategories in this tree do not feature a single woman. Women are underrepresented as part of biographies on British Marxists, and I don't think upmerging this category is going to help address that gender gap at all.
NLeeuw (
talk)
18:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on populating? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
00:54, 15 June 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:no consensus. The nominator and some other participants felt that the categories in question were overly specific; a few others claimed that the centuries were informative for the type of articles the categories contain. There was no agreement on whether the categories contained too few articles to be of navigational utility. Neither the nomination nor the alternative proposal reached a consensus, so at the status quo we stay.
(non-admin closure)—
TechnoSquirrel69 (
sigh)
23:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: 3x merge there are at most 6 people in this poet tree, without a real need to diffuse by century. I made a potential merge target category because
Category:Wallachian poets didn't exist as a category.
Mason (
talk)
21:16, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: I'm guessing I should create an indefinite number of articles for the Wallachian poets that are currently missing, because there being currently 6 articles is not enough (unlike the three articles in
Category:Emperors of Thessalonica and the four articles in
Category:Aqua (band) members, both of which are just right). I mean, what else are we to do with our time on wikipedia than to satisfy this type of requests?
Dahn (
talk)
21:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
It is significantly less of a chore to create small intersectional and valid categories than huge category trees, which can be created at any ulterior time for reuniting the smaller categories and any articles that remain loose. I would rather create "18th-century Wallachian poets" instead of "Wallachian poets" (or rather "Category:Poets from the Principality of Wallachia" -- the two nomenclatures currently compete), if the latter option has me tagging all the articles on Wallachian poets, then sorting them by retagging the same articles with the respective narrower category! It reduces my workload and it is sheer common sense. Note how, in the "military personnel" tree, you had them all fitted nicely for you to just unify the categories; but of course you didn't realize that a lot of articles on Wallachian soldiers from other centuries (say: the 15th) are now not in the category you created, and of course you didn't go searching for such examples to include in the larger category you created (you also didn't realize that the category level you created should now include other trans-chronological articles, such as
Category:Spatharii of Wallachia, all of whom were a sort of military personnel). You see: that would be the sort of work required for the part of the category tree that I hadn't bothered created, and the sort of workload you're now externalizing for others. (My contributions focus mainly on content creation, with all the intricate research this requires. I find category creation necessary, but boring -- implying that I should spend my time here on creating potentially immense categories, or hunting down articles to fill out the immense categories that others create, is a bit presumptuous. Just like other requests of that nature, for instance that I should fill out more redlinks to demonstrate to my colleagues here that a category is sufficiently valid -- that "18th-century Wallachian poets" is at least as valid a category as "Aqua members".)
Dahn (
talk)
02:25, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Also:
Category:Moldavian and Wallachian poets is rather pointless. I had created
Category:Moldavian and Wallachian chroniclers back when we didn't have a category tree for both former countries, and to address the fact that chroniclers, a sort of occupation that is entirely in the past (for a genre that ended in the early 19th-century), had a trans-border shared tradition of history-writing (and a limited number of articles to fit in there). While this shared tradition can also be argued for poets: if we already have poets in the Wallachian category, what is the exact point of creating a category (other than the already existing larger Romanian one) for "Wallachian and Moldavian poets"?
Dahn (
talk)
02:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
And I have to say I do not understand the logic whereby we "only" have a category for "foo fooians" if it is demonstrated that there are "enough" (a never-defined "enough") articles to populate it. Sure it would be absurd to have a category for just two articles (though, again, three is apparently enough
in other cases). But a category exists not just to neatly group the articles in a shelf; it exists to facilitate navigation, to quickly allow our readers, through this unique instrument offered by our platform, to see all the connections between a set of articles. The evidently absurd example you provide with
Category:20th-century Aqua (band) members (I do understand
the rhetorical point, but still) shows that you simply do not regard this as an important feature, that you do not conceive of any practical situation in which a reader may need a quick navigational tool for seeing what and how many were the Wallachian poets in the 18th century (including all the utterly mediocre ones that would not be mentioned in a properly developed
Literature of Romania), and that you do not see it fit to ask why me as an editor would conceive of a tool to assist such a reader. I find that a bit arresting.
Dahn (
talk)
02:56, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak support 6 is not a lot for a category, but although there is no consensus on the mininum amount of items per category at any given time,
WP:MFN (the work-in-progress guideline) recommends to merge for now if a category has fewer than 5 items. I don't feel too strongly about the need to merge these categories, but it's fine with me to do so.
NLeeuw (
talk)
18:07, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Merge target? (see Marcocapelle's alt proposal) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk12:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose century categories are useful and standard for poets, and the rationale invoked is vague — there is no clear consensus about how small is too small. —
BiruitorulTalk18:50, 15 June 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:Women who experienced pregnancy loss
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. Overall I find the delete !votes are more convincing. This is not going to be defining for the majority of articles that it fits, so this content is better suited for a list (if at all).
(non-admin closure)Qwerfjkltalk19:14, 10 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Delete; the idea for this category clearly came from a good faith place but I don't see how helpful it is. Losing a pregnancy is a lot more common than people think, and the further back you go in history the more common it was. Its not a defining characteristic of any of these women even though it was likely a defining moment (or moments) in their lives.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
20:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. and agree with the assessment that its creation was in good faith. There might be a handful, like Catherine of Aragon, where you could make a case that it was defining, but it's a stretch. (And if anything henry the 8th's experience with pregnancy loss would probably be more defining...)
Mason (
talk)
21:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Procedural oppose I do not see any arguments being advanced why the
earlier discussion (less than a year ago) should be disregarded, or how all the opposing arguments presented then should be ignored, or why those arguments have somehow been undermined or overturned. If you're just here to redo a discussion without bringing new policy and guideline-based reasons to do so, that is not helpful for the process.
NLeeuw (
talk)
18:01, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Nederlandse Leeuw, I wasn't aware of the previous discussion until Marco added a link to this. But I can give you a more detailed reasoning. You can say this category can also come under
WP:TRIVIALCAT since, as painful it is, it is trivial that a famous woman lost a pregnancy. It may even be
WP:SUBJECTIVECAT since even an abortion can be considered pregnancy loss to some and not to others and also, to some people, giving birth to a child who died soon after birth can be too.
What does
WP:TRIVIALCAT say? In general, if something could be easily left out of a biography, it is likely that it is a trivial characteristic. I think that depends. I know women to whom a miscarriage was traumatising and life-changing, but I also know women to whom a miscarriage was kind of okay since the pregnancy was unplanned anyway. Furthermore, I know women who consciously opted to abort their pregnancy when the circumstances were not right to complete the pregnancy, and to some of them, it wasn't a big deal, while to others it was (even though they didn't regret it, as it was the best choice in the situation). Nevertheless, pretty much all these women only disclosed their experiences to me in a private setting, with a clear understanding that I should keep it a secret from others; they wish to control which people are allowed to know it, as they consider it a private and sensitive matter, even if in the end it wasn't a big deal to some of them. I think this wish should be respected.
For our purposes here, I think this would call for a case-by-case assessment of what impact the person in question says in
WP:RS that the pregnancy loss has had on their life. We shouldn't be labelling people to whom it wasn't that important, as this could needlessly stigmatise them. Especially in
WP:BLPs, as pointed out in the previous discussion, we should be very careful not to categorise such people unless they come forward with their stories and explain it was very important in their lives.
I agree with you that the current catdesc is vague about whether it includes intentional abortions. The linked article
pregnancy loss suggests it includes both intentional and unintentional cases. If that is the objection, though, the logical solution would be a split of the category rather than a deletion, wouldn't you agree?
I agree that non-binary people can get pregnant and experience pregnancy loss as well. If that is the objection, though, the logical solution would be a renaming of the category rather than a deletion, wouldn't you agree?
@
Nederlandse Leeuw, respectfully I wouldn't agree with any split or rename because I also think this category is
WP:NONDEF in addition to being trivial and subjective. If its worth adding, the information about pregnancy loss should be added - which is to say written into - to the article of the person. Indeed, in most cases it matters, it is gone into detail.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
11:35, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Nederlandse Leeuw, where did I suggest I no longer support deletion? I very much do. I merely stated that if a person has lost a pregnancy and it is important to their lives, that information should be incorportated into their article.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
12:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ah sorry, then I misunderstood what you said. I guess I can understand that argument. I'll wait to see what others have to say for now. Thanks for your clarifications so far.
NLeeuw (
talk)
12:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, the above, and last time. Simply not defining, plus except for a few high profile women, we usually just don't know about this aspect of lives. To judge by the category as it is, this virtually only seems to happen to European royalty and American actresses.
Johnbod (
talk)
15:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The current contents might, of course, not be representative of humanity at all. But it is a good question who should and shouldn't be in here, if we are to have this category.
NLeeuw (
talk)
15:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The question is, and would be, who we have RS information for. That will only be a very small minority of our population of 397,000 women with biographies, reinforcing how non-defining it is.
Johnbod (
talk)
15:56, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure I follow why a very small number of biographies falling into the category reinforces the argument that it is non-defining? That's true for many non-controversial categories.
Chocmilk03 (
talk)
04:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Because this is extremely common, and if it was defining we would have far more entries, even given the frequent lack of information.
Johnbod (
talk)
12:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Chocmilk03,
WP:DEFINING means characteristics that person is notable for. I think you would agree that, while these women may have lost a pregnancy, they aren't defined by them nor are their lives characterised by losing pregnancies. The only serious exception is royalty for obvious reasons.
@
Chocmilk03, well you can make that argument but, at the same time, not everything is categorized. Not every medical condition is categorized, not every disability. Its why "People with infertility issues" (or something similar) is not categorized and why I feel this category should not be either. I've given my reasons for why above, not least of which is that losing pregnancy is something very common and, going back further, was a lot more common.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
21:27, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I would also not go with the old Cfd's arguments. It really turned into a huge row which was not about debating whether the category was
WP:OVERCAT or not (I think it is in many ways) but rather about people saying "what about this" and so on. I hope this Cfd will be more on actual policy than the previous one.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
21:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Omnis Scientia: My views are based on my own reading of the policies including
WP:CATDEF,
WP:TRIVIALCAT,
WP:COPDEF etc, not the previous CFD arguments. In my view, this category does meet the criteria of defining for some people (even though it is unlikely to be the sole reason for notability). "A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to in describing the topic"; pregnancy loss meets this criteria for some people.
I wasn't arguing that "other stuff exists"; those categories were simply examples to illustrate my point, in the same way you've used "People with infertility issues" as an example of why you feel this category should not exist.
I've read your arguments (and those of others above) and respectfully disagree, hence my vote for 'keep'. I don't seek to persuade you of the correctness of my views, and understand you take a different view.
Chocmilk03 (
talk)
22:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. I've read through the arguments in the previous discussion and what else has been written here. Fundamentally, something is defining if it's often (or could reasonably be) mentioned in the lead. For 99% of these pages, its not defining. I still think that the category should be deleted as it isn't defining. For the very few who it could be defining, they can be added to a list. At the very very very least, this category needs to be purged.
Mason (
talk)
22:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
OK, thanks for that clarification. Note to closer: Mason already !voted Support per nom above, so the word deleted in this comment shouldn't be counted.
NLeeuw (
talk)
13:16, 16 June 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:Hinglaj Mata
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:Battles of the American Revolutionary War by state
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.
do not merge this is simply another step in the path of destroying useful category information at the US state level. US state boundaries are in no way akin to the boundary problems found in some European countries, which was misused used as a precedent by this editor to destroy the state categorization of the Battles of the War of 1812. State boundaries have not generally changed since their formation, unlike the shifting boundaries of European geographic entities.
Hmains (
talk)
20:02, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I would respectfully request that you
WP:assume good faith, and base your opposition to the proposal on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, rather than a personal POV of how things supposedly were in the past in North America compared to Europe so that
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN conveniently does not apply to categories you created. I am simply applying our polices and guidelines, confirmed by consensus established in precedents, and I would urge you to do the same. Have a good day.
NLeeuw (
talk)
22:01, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
There is nothing about 'the past' involving the boundaries of the federal states of the United States. Unlike Europe of the past, the boundaries of these states are generally the same as when they were created over of last 200+ years. That means a battle that took place in a populated place of state x is still correctly stated as having been a battle in state x. I am not doing things in WP for my own convenience, whatever that may be. I am stating the facts. You have requested deletion of all these categories so I assume that is your intent--this does not involve 'faith' of any kind. Thanks
Hmains (
talk)
23:07, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Don't worry, no offence taken. I only took issue with the passage ...which was misused used as a precedent by this editor to destroy the state categorization.... This way of saying things implies that I am deliberately doing something wrong, and that what I am doing is harmful. The first bit is conduct that users should avoid:
WP:Assume good faith means that we always assume that fellow editors are trying to do the right thing, even if they make mistakes. (And I do make plenty of mistakes, and I'll happily be corrected if you can point out what I should have done instead). The last bit may be your opinion, but it is rather strongly worded; it's better not to use words such as "destruction" when it comes to reorganising category trees in a way you don't like. Hopefully that clears things up?
My intention is to upmerge rather than outright delete these categories. Even though deletion is the result, the contents of the former categories will be preserved in their parent categories, and the logbooks will note which categories were merged into which. E.g. battles in New York state will still be in
Category:Military history of New York (state), where readers and editors alike can still find them. This upmerging is based on
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN, a guideline which has existed since about 2007. If you think there is something wrong with that guideline, you are free to raise the issue at
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Military history. Making arguments here at CFD for why this guideline should not apply to the United States, however, is not very helpful.
I should explain that I have only noted how many P and C there are in each of them as a secondary argument, but according to
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN (the primary argument), it doesn't matter what size the category is, as all such "battles in X" categories are considered inappropriate. (Even if we were to keep the "large" ones, which categories would you consider "large" and which ones "small"?)
My remark that the list already mentions the locations anyway is intended to address the concern of Hmains, the creator of these categories, that valuable information or overview might be lost if the proposal receives approval, because the list covers it. Personally, I'm not sure if it is necessary to mention the locations in any list or category, but keeping them in the list while upmering the categories seems an acceptable compromise to me.
The problem that
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN attempts to address—issues arising when modern and historical names differ—is largely irrelevant here. The boundaries of South Carolina, for instance, are the same now as they were during this conflict. You're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. -
Eureka Lott14:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Lots of states, provinces and especially territories didn't have their modern boundaries yet. More importantly,
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN doesn't say anywhere that it doesn't apply in some places, but not in others. It's a universal rule, it should be applied everywhere. If someone thinks there should be exceptions to the rule, they're free to start the process of seeking to amend it. But until it is amended, we should apply the guideline as it is, and not engage in
special pleading.
Given the many recent precedents in both the category space and the article space, there is a running consensus to phase out "battles in Fooland" categories and articles.
NLeeuw (
talk)
17:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia and Maine did not exist as defined areas during this war let alone separate colonies which is exactly the problem that
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN is trying to avoid. I don't think placing these in the contemporary colony would make sense since the undefined western boundaries were still Native American controlled, regardless of what European maps claimed. And good luck sorting out the as-of-then
unresolved competing claims on Vermont! -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
19:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: Will you please stop accusing me of "destroying" things?! Said categories were upmerged by community consensus.
NLeeuw (
talk)
18:15, 4 July 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:Substitution tracking templates
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: Unclear if this is used anymore by any template as it isn't found in an "insource" search. If still used the category description should be updated with where this is used from.
Gonnym (
talk)
10:08, 23 June 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.
Nominator's rationale:merge, the category only contains the eponymous article and a subcategory. That is not helpful for navigation.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
09:34, 23 June 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:Historic buildings and structures in the United 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.
Notes: Not many full merges are necessary because I went through all the individual articles to make sure none of them would be orphaned; however, a number of subcategories would need to be selectively reparented to stay in their category tree. If this nomination passes I'll have a follow up one for the sibling categories which have different heritage register situations. An
earlier nomination in 2018 ended in "no consensus" with the following participants: @
Marcocapelle,
SportingFlyer,
Thincat,
Black Falcon, and
Good Olfactory:. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
03:07, 23 June 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.
Ambassadors of the Republic of Venice 2
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: No other WikiProject has a comprehensive list of members. It is also tagged as NA-Class, which does not match the intended purpose. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
21:50, 22 June 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:Television series based on novels
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: Categories without a clear point of distinction from their parents. In theory, a distinction could be drawn between television series and television films, but the parent category isn't actually doing that: there's no
Category:Television films based on novels at all, and instead virtually everything in
Category:Television shows based on novels or its "Television shows based on [Country] novels" subcategories is a series (sometimes even with this and one or more of those both sitting alongside each other), so in actual practice this undergrown sapling is just duplicating the parent tree unnecessarily. And even populating it more fully would just entail moving virtually everything out of the parents anyway, so they'd still just be fundamentally redundant to each other. I'm willing to withdraw this if there's any kind of editorial will to start creating and populating "Television films based on novels" categories to sister this, but as things currently stand this isn't offering a clear differentiation from its parent.
Bearcat (
talk)
21:36, 22 June 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:B-Class vital articles in Games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
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.
X in the Republic of Artsakh
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:Populated places in the Republic of Artsakh
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. Artsakh is history, and Artsakh content should be in history categories, not geography categories. If we categorize every place on Earth by every former administrative division they were in at one point, there will be no end to that. It's perfectly fine to have articles about the defunct provinces and other subdivisions of Artsakh though.
Place Clichy (
talk)
19:04, 25 June 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.
Submerged settlements in X
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:Settlements demolished to make room for airports
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:Polish social activists of the Prussian partition
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: This category should either be merged or renamed to make it clearer how this is defining.
Mason (
talk)
01:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
In short: we'll need to choose whether we mean "Polish" as an ethnicity (as Marcocapelle suggested), or as a nationality (as Mason is indirectly suggesting, since
Category:Polish activists is in the
Category:Activists by nationality tree). Ethnicity is always a difficult one to establish and results in lots of sourcing problems, and it means we can't put these people in the
Category:Polish people tree (because it is part of the
Category:People by nationality tree). So nationality seems the best approach. For our purposes here, the Prussian partition is best understood as the
Grand Duchy of Posen, though it is a little more complicated than that (I'll get back to that).
But how do we grant a Polish "nationality" in a time when they did not have a state? My proposal was to recognise certain historic non-sovereign entities as "Polish":
Should we categorise all inhabitants of these polities as having "Polish nationality", or not? Currently, only inhabitants of Congress Poland and the preceding
Duchy of Warsaw are deliberately categorised as
Category:Polish people.
Perhaps others? Prior to 1815 and after 1848, there was no
Grand Duchy of Posen which at least nominally granted autonomy to the mostly-Polish population. But from 1792 to 1807, the four Prussian provinces
New East Prussia,
South Prussia,
West Prussia and
Netze District had no autonomy at all, and the post-1848
Province of Posen didn't either. It may be too much of a stretch to grand all inhabitants of these Prussian provinces (which we might understand as the Prussian partition) a "Polish nationality" just so that we can put them in the
Category:Polish people (by nationality) tree.
Until we resolve that question, it's probably difficult to do anything with these Polish Partition categories. We do not want to erase Polish history, but it's really challenging to categorise it either.
NLeeuw (
talk)
07:01, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That seems a good idea! Most of them were even born or died in the city of Posen / Poznan itself. Only the first one,
Florian Ceynowa the Kashubian, seems to have spent his whole life in Eastern Pomerania, not Posen / Greater Poland.
NLeeuw (
talk)
21:46, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: For the second time, thoughts on the (new) alt rename target
Smasongarrison? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk20:26, 22 June 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:Jewish Palestine Liberation Organization members
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 Defining characteristic
WP:COPDEF, not some random members of the PLO who happen to be Jewish. No, their significance is in being Jewish members of the PLO. --
Yabroq (
talk)
21:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation between related articles. No objection to recreate the category when some more articles can be added.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:24, 23 June 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:Drake & Josh video games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
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:Roman generals
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: Uphelpful bundling of Roman people. This category contains Ancient Romans and Byzantine people.
Mason (
talk)
03:03, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge It doesn't matter if Byzantine people are Romans if there is no navigational benefit in having an intermediate layer that, by its very nature, completely overlaps with two subcategories. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
19:15, 21 June 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:Battles of the War of 1812 in Canada
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.
do not merge There is nothing stated in
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN that requires the deletion of geographic sub-categories within a 'battles of xx war' category. And doing so will harm the reader's navigation to desired articles, forcing them to mentally merge several requests together and open and read multiple articles together to obtain information such as 'what are the battles of the War of 1812 in Canada?' or 'what are the battles of the war of 1812 in Ontario?' WP information consists not only of article content but also the category structure. This is destroying content. Thanks
Hmains (
talk)
00:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I concur. Hmains (who created these categories) tried to use the same argument last time, and it was not accepted then either.
NLeeuw (
talk)
18:10, 23 June 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.
Nominator's rationale:merge/delete for now, currently only 1-2 articles in each category, this is not helpful for navigation. No objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:26, 14 June 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.
Why though? The name of the category clearly indicates that it should include individual people (Jews) as well as Jewish institutions. Unless there is a mass rename, that doesn't make sense. Jewish elected officials (for example) are obviously defined by their connection to the city.--
User:Namiba12:53, 26 June 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.
June 21
Category:Major League Baseball Triple Crown winners
Category:Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador alumni
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: These battles concern a specific subgroup of Qarmatians, namely those of the Qarmatian 'republic' of Bahrayn under the al-Jannabi family. This was the main Qarmatian group, but by no means the only one, and at any rate it should be distinguished. Other "Qarmatian" battles, like the
Battle of Hama (even though the Qarmatian label is debatable here), are not included.
Constantine ✍ 07:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Because that is the most common transliteration in the literature. It also does not refer to the modern state of Bahrain, but the whole region of
Eastern Arabia (historical Bahrayn/Bahrain).
Constantine ✍ 14:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Nom has actually worked on this topic and may be suggesting this move because of this knowledge, not just because of a flight of fancy. Qarmatianism is a broader phenomenon than the Qarmatian state of Bahrayn, hence the two should be kept separate, with the Qarmatians remaining as the overarching parent category/article. There ideally should be a different, dedicated parent article for the state, like
ru:Карматское государство, but one thing at a time.
Constantine ✍ 07:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Are there "Battles involving the Qarmatians" that DON'T involve Bahrayn? Because if there aren't, I'm not sure this change is necessary. LizRead!Talk!17:49, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Good point. Main article
Qarmatians has an Infobox former country and an Infobox war faction, both of which provide exactly the same beginning and end dates of 899–1077.
It also claims that it all started with Bahrain and ended with Bahrain (or Bahrayn if you will):
Start: Eventually, from Qatar, he captured Bahrain's capital Hajr and
al-Hasa in 899, which he made the capital of his state...
End: According to the maritime historian
Dionisius A. Agius, the Qarmatians finally disappeared in 1067, after they lost their fleet at
Bahrain Island and were expelled from
Hasa near the Arabian coast by the chief of Banu, Murra ibn Amir.
1067 may be a typo, as the rest of the article insists on 1077, referring to
Overthrow of the Qarmatians, which is dated to 1058–1077.
Finally, the example of
Battle of Hama is so ambiguous as to what the "Qarmatians" have to do with it (which is discussed at length in the article itself, with good sources), that it cannot count as evidence for non-Bahraini "Qarmatians".
But the Battle of Hama is counted as a Qarmatian battle by primary sources, and will be found as such even in some modern literature. And no, the Qarmatians != Bahrayn, no matter what the article currently claims. Bahrayn was the only successful Qarmatian state, but Qarmatianism is broader than that, with adherents across the Middle East, of lesser prominence due to the lack of state power, but still following their own doctrines and with their own histories.
Constantine ✍ 16:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)reply
As said, the Battle of Hama is questionable, as other primary sources contradict it, and many modern scholars do not think it involved Qarmatians (read
Battle of Hama#Background). Have you got examples of battles other than Hama that supposedly involved non-Bahraini Qarmatians?
NLeeuw (
talk)
11:59, 19 June 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:Wesean National Leaders
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: This counts as a
WP:HOAX. Nothing called "Wesea" actually exists. It is an aspiration for certain separatist political movements.
Kautilya3 (
talk)
18:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment It was emptied by the nominator. There are scripts that can show you who has added or removed articles or categories from a category. LizRead!Talk!20:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes, indeed. That is why I didn't use
WP:G3 as my rationale. The issue is deeper than just being an empty category. But even G3 should be good enough, for now. --
Kautilya3 (
talk)
22:16, 21 June 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:Legendary creatures
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Merge per nom. "Legendary" supposes that there might be some truth to it, but all contents here seem to fall outside of the realm of serious modern biology.
NLeeuw (
talk)
21:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep At the moment, "Legendary" sits above "Folklore" and "Mythological creatures" - rather a lot of the contents of the first two should probably be moved to the last. As a matter of English meaning, I don't think "Legendary" supposes that there might be some truth to it" is at all true. "legendary" suggests to me a literary source(s) somewhere quite early on, & I think there is a distinction, if a rather vague one.
Johnbod (
talk)
21:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
At the moment "legendary" sits above, but the hierarchy could just as well be reversed because there isn't a clear distinction. The fact that the above two editors disagree on what Legendary means illustrates the confusion.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
While I'm not necessarily opposed to merging related folklore/legend/mythology categories together, I don't know which goes where.
AHI-3000 (
talk)
01:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I assume a redirect would be needed after merging. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk16:02, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
A redirect certainly seems helpful, especially if we agree a merger is a good idea, but are in doubt about the best target. One way or the other, readers and editors will thus find their way.
NLeeuw (
talk)
17:23, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Reverse merge Per nom so that the original single category for this is restored, for the most part the contents of the category have nothing to do with being from folklore, and it's an
WP:OVERLAPCAT anyway with folklore falling under the purview of legends. The article itself is
Legendary creature.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
01:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Either Keep, or do the following: RenameCategory:Mythological creatures to
Category:Creatures in myth and legend, and RenameCategory:Folklore creatures to
Category:Creatures in folklore. Then selectively SplitCategory:Legendary creatures to each of those renamed categories. I think I said this in a previous discussion on CfD, but the Myth/Legend/Folklore distinction is a bit fluid in the sources. I think for our purposes, if we use Folklore as the overall term, and then have a separate "in myth and legend" (or "in myths and legends", if preferred), then I think that should resolve most things, and help a bit more to guide editors away from applying
WP:OR. But we need to be careful about Myth, especially in regards to people and creatures, because belief and religion can be involved there. - jc3720:16, 22 June 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:Romans from Africa
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.
Fair point. I was worried about that already. This presumably isn't a problem for
Category:Arabs in the Roman Empire then? The
Nabataean Kingdom and
Roman Judea were annexed after 27 BCE, but I'm not sure about the demographics of
Coele-Syria (Roman province) (annexed in 64 BCE). Perhaps other scholars could correct me on this, but by my knowledge, Coele-Syria in the 1st century BCE was populated by a mixture of Greeks and Hellenised Aramaeans, Syriacs, and Jews / Samaritans, and Romans. I'm not sure there was a substantial population of "Arabs" there at a time (though no doubt the occasional Arabian merchant would pass through the region). If Arabs didn't form a significant population within the Roman Republic, perhaps this category doesn't have the same scope issues as our Roman-era Africans.
NLeeuw (
talk)
06:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Some more explicit support/opposition to various potential names for the categories would be appreciated :) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
01:42, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose the first, lean oppose the second: the
Constitutio Antoniniana of AD 212 granted citizenship to all free residents of the Roman empire, and while there were non-free inhabitants (slaves, prisoners), we would probably consider them Romans irrespective of their legal status. So in theory the only non-Romans from that point onward would be travelers passing through—and they probably do not represent a significant proportion of these categories. Even before this, most of the inhabitants of areas under direct Roman governance are people we would consider "Romans" in the broadest sense.
The first proposed category could theoretically include people of any origin living anywhere on the continent of Africa between the eighth century BC and the sixth century AD—possibly later, depending on whether you include the Byzantine Empire under "Roman era". In theory this would include the Carthaginians, Numidians, Egyptians, and various other Phoenician and Greek colonists, as well as native peoples, even before they had contact with, much less governance by Rome. But the clear intent of the category under its current title is to include inhabitants of Roman Africa, not other areas, and this also limits the time period—there was no Roman era in Africa until the latter half of the second century BC, and other areas only gradually came under Roman control (for instance, Numidia, Tripolitania, Egypt). Renaming the category as proposed would dramatically increase the nominal scope in a way that is not intended.
"Roman-era people by province" is not quite as bad, since its geographic scope would be limited to people within the borders of Roman territories, but again it would include relatively few non-Romans, since once a place became a Roman province, its free inhabitants typically became citizens, or in the case of non-free inhabitants who were owned by citizens, or natives under direct Roman governance, we would still typically call them Roman: although there must have been many non-citizens at various early stages, but there will be very few articles about them, and since the category name does not explicitly refer to citizenship, they could still be included under a broad reading of "Romans". The only people who would definitely not be included, again, would be travelers from foreign lands, and there cannot be a significant number of articles about foreign travelers in the Roman Empire—and they would not be "from" the provinces named, so it's not clear they would be included even under the proposed title.
In all, "Roman-era African people" is a really bad choice, as its title gives it a potentially unlimited scope, unconnected with either Romans or Roman territory; "Roman-era people by province" would be misleading, since it implies a broader scope than that which is evidently intended, even though there would hardly be any non-Romans in it (possibly various Huns, Goths, Franks, or Vandals toward the end of the Western Empire, though some of these became nominally Roman).
P Aculeius (
talk)
12:02, 26 June 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:Violence in the Palestinian territories
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, all four articles in the category are about events after the establishment of the State of Palestine.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That's a good point. The State of Palestine didn't exist until 1988, while Palestinian territories have existed since 1967 (or 1949), depending on definition.VR(Please
ping on reply)09:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ping me when you found some articles because then we do not need to merge. Until that happens the merge can go ahead, we do not keep empty categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
21:35, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
It's a good question. I had always assumed that whatever area of the former British mandate of Palestine was not incorporated into the State of Israel after the war of 1948 was known as "Palestinian territories", but I would have to consult the historiography on this.
NLeeuw (
talk)
06:51, 11 June 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:Mayoralties of municipalities in the United 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: Category whose name is a bit confusing and not accurately descriptive of its contents. The contents here are subpages where a political figure (usually a person who went on from the mayoralty to hold much more prominent national offices, and thus has a very, very long biographical article that needed to have stuff chunked out from it for size management) has had a "Mayoralty of [Person]" article created as a spinoff from their base biography -- but that means that the defining characteristic here is "mayoralties of individual people", not "mayoralties of municipalities" (which could be too easily confused with a redundant duplication of
Category:Mayors of places in the United States, and thus potentially have stuff misfiled in it by editors who weren't paying attention to the actual contents of the categories.) So it should likely be renamed to make its intentions clearer.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:42, 21 June 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.
Category:Saadi Shirazi
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. Only the writer and work of theirs in the category. Unhelpful for navigation when there are only two pages like this
Mason (
talk)
13:38, 21 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: I haven't listed all of the child categories of this, but the problem is not the parent category. The problem is that the parent category contains a massive 39 largely-overlapping categories for just 24 actual articles. I suggest that every child of this category should be merged back to the parent.
PepperBeast(talk)02:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Hie, Creator of many of the Categories here. To explain why so many categories were created. I actually created all the "in Meitei mythology" to basically UNCLOUT other categories. Apparently ALL the deities of Meitei mythology are Deities of Everything-and-Its-Neighbour and one of the creator of pages put each and every one (or close to it) in dozens of categories for basically almost every god and goddess. I don't know anything about Meitei Mythology, so I can't tell which god really belong in a category or not (apparently basically all goddesses or close to it are Goddess of Abundance, Beauty, Arts, Fertility, Love and lust, Peace, Magic, among other things...) Though some divinities in each Pantheon can have lots of domains (like
Apollo in greek mythology,
Sucellos in the celt one), and I can't tell which really belong in each category or not. Still, I note that most don't have anything in the description or a reference that would justify many of the various categories listed (I think one of the rational seems to be that if a goddess is beautiful then she's deemed a goddess of Beauty, Fertility as well as Love and lust, any divinity that is not a warrior is automatically pushed into God/Goddess of Peace and basically all divinities are Fortune ones just by existing, unless linked to something unfortunate...) This caused a bit of a strange situation in the various categories, as for exemple if you went to
Category:Abundance goddesses to have a look at the goddesses of this domain, half the goddesses (17 out of 34) were the Meitei Goddesses alone, the other half for ALL the other Pantheons in the world put together... Same with the other categories, 20 out of the 44 pages in
Category:Beauty goddesses were the Meitei goddesses, 19 out of the 47 pages of
Category:Fortune goddesses, etc. Though when so many categories in a pagebelongs to just one other pantheon, usually creating a child page is preferable. --
Zeynel (
talk)
07:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Many of these categories have been prematurely emptied by the nominator, Pepperbeast. I'm not sure why they couldn't wait until this had a formal closure before taking action. That's a task for the closer, not the nominator. LizRead!Talk!20:30, 14 June 2024 (UTC)reply
You emptied multiple categories that are currently up for discussion! Why did this action happen now, during this discussion period? It upends any decision made here by the participants and renders this discussion moot. Couldn't you have done this emptying before or after the nomination? LizRead!Talk!23:18, 14 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Category contents were changed without clear explanation. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
13:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't know if it matters but the categories that were emptied after this CFD discussion was opened are:
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: Most of these categories were speedily renamed to their current names from the proposed names in May 2023. Discussions at
the Formula One WikiProject and
the Motorsport WikiProject resolved that these speedy renames should be reversed because, unlike many other sporting teams, auto racing teams may compete all over the world and their national identity is defined by their racing licence and is not necessarily related to the location of their base of operations. Consider the current Formula One World Champions:
Red Bull Racing - they are universally recognised as an Austrian team (they use an Austrian racing licence and when they win a race, the Austrian national anthem is played) but their base of operations is in England. The category rename in May 2023 moved the article from the accurate
Category:Austrian auto racing teams to the inaccurate
Category:Auto racing teams in Austria.
DH85868993 (
talk)
11:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: because I don't want to close a 44-category CfD as "unopposed". Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Queen of Heartstalk04:56, 21 June 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.
For the record, my request was to get feedback on whether universalism should be parented by denomination or placed in the main category as a philosophy/theory. I never said that the revision from 2016 was inappropriate, I said that was a stable edit. I don't have a strong opinion, on the parent category, but I did want others to weigh in about how it should be categorized.
Mason (
talk)
04:42, 21 June 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.
Sixteen Kingdoms Buddhist monks
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, the
Sixteen Kingdoms contains partially parallel and mostly very short-living kingdoms, typically a few decades. No need to categorize Buddhist monks by each of them separately.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
04:33, 21 June 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:Scottish women embroiderers
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: Dual upmerge. This is a non-defining intersection between the type of textile artist and gender.
Mason (
talk)
03:18, 21 June 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:Pretenders to the Mexican throne
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.
Some deceased people in this category also appear to be inappropriately labelled pretenders:
Agustín de Iturbide y Green: When he came of age, Iturbide, who had graduated from
Georgetown University, renounced his claim to the throne and title and returned to Mexico. So as soon as he was legally capable, he renounced his claim.
María Josepha Sophia de Iturbide: [She inhered] the Habsburg claim on the throne. Maria Josepha was a very traditional Lady, and a devout Roman Catholic, and stayed as far away from politics as she could. Doesn't seem to have actively pursued her claim either; seems more like other people expect(ed) her to pursue it for purely genealogical reasons (but
WP:NOTGENEALOGY).
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Associated TfD was closed as delete. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
01:22, 21 June 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:Defunct Catholic schools in Louisville, Kentucky
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: Dual merge. There's only one page in here, and no other city (or state) level categories in Defunct Catholic schools in the United States
Mason (
talk)
01:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That's probably what happened. There's definitely been changes to how notability for schools should be handled, so its totally reasonable that it made sense at the time.
Mason (
talk)
04:44, 21 June 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.
Category:High Peak
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:Tamil Nadu MLAs 1967–1972
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:Game of Thrones templates
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: Category for a single template. Unnecessary level. Add the template to the parent category.
Gonnym (
talk)
05:41, 20 June 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:The Taste contestants
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: Upmerge for now. There is only one person in this category for a tv show that ran for 3 seasons
Mason (
talk)
04:18, 20 June 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.
Buildings and structures completed by year, before 1000
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 long list of
WP:OCYEAR categories — 504 in total — that all contain 3 or fewer unique articles each, overwhelmingly about religious buildings. However, almost all of these years have enough categories to justify a decade category. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
01:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Dual merge per Marcocapelle. By the way, there are probably several articles about buildings from this era which were never categorized in an establishment category.
Dimadick (
talk)
07:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Some of these categories are being deleted by the CFD bot as if this discussion had been closed (which it hasn't) and other categories are being emptied. This is a huge group of categories and shouldn't be handled piecemeal. LizRead!Talk!02:11, 28 June 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.
June 19
Category:Moomin locations
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 is only one article in this category, with low chances that it will ever be a meaningful size.
Jontesta (
talk)
23:25, 19 June 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.
Category: Philosophy majors
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:Australian-themed retailers
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: The only category of its kind that I can find with the name of a nation and themed retailers on Wikipedia. This category does not make any sense as these are companies with operations in Australia, but are not Australian-themed. Themed would imply something implicit about Australian culture or history. This can be considered to be OR as the majority of articles don't make mention that they are based on the concept of Australian culture.
They would include Bloomin' Brands, Deliveroo, Gillyhicks, Kangaroo (video on demand), KangaRoos, and Kangol. Australia Dairy Company has little to do with it other than materials imported from the country. Australian Homemade is just the name of a sweets company. Bloomin' Brands is just a holding company that owns several restaurant chains.
Outback Steakhouse and Walkabout (pub chain) are the only two businesses with a theme based on Australia, but even then two articles would be too small for a category like this.
The categories that this is under Retailers by type of merchandise sold, Works about Australia, and Retailing in Australia have no relevance as these are not works in terms of literature, films, music, etc. usually considered in the line of popular culture. No evidence they sell Australian-type merchandise if that is even a thing.
And while Retailing in Australia would be considered since a couple of them do business in Australia, they should be in the Retailing category than this one if it applies. Australian Homemade is under Category:Restaurant chains in Australia, under a subcat of Australian brands, which is a subcat of the main Retailing in Australia category.
WikiCleanerMan (
talk)
13:46, 19 June 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:Albanian basketball players by populated place
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:Children of two peers and peeresses created life peers
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:Kryvyi Rih National University, General Faculty alumni
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: Upmerge. Kryvyi Rih National University, General Faculty is a redundant category layer, and the alumni category only has 1 person in it.
Mason (
talk)
01:58, 19 June 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.
Athletes by religion
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:OCTRIVIAL, there is a long-standing consensus against intertwining sports and religion on Wikipedia (see
here for example), and I struggle to see how these categories are any different. Because the article entries appear to be only from the United States, perhaps there could be a move discussion to something like
Category:American Muslim athletes or
Category:American athletes by religion as that may have been the creator's intention, but that still would seem to fail the site's category guidelines.
Inter&anthro (
talk)
20:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Please note that this differs from Jewish athletes since Judaism is both an ethnicity and a religion (an
ethnoreligion) and most Jewish athletes identity as Jewish by virtue of being born Jewish and very few (VERY few) actually convert.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
23:36, 19 June 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.
29 to 35 days old
June 18
Category:Usain Bolt
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:Refugees ennobled in 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: Delete. A cross-section between refugees and nobles. While defining seperately, they aren't defining together. Also, one of them was not ennobled but rather married into the British royal family.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
19:49, 18 June 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.
Fooian Barons
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 would have speedied this but will go through Cfd first then the rest can be speedied. Rename; the name can be misleading and I think the correct form should be "Fooian barons", like it is "Fooian baronesses" and so.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
19:36, 18 June 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:Barons from the Austrian Empire
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:Japanese films by 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.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:merge/keep/delete respectively.
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:Companies in the MSCI KLD 400 Social Index
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: Not a defining category -- one of many indices that these companies would be on. Index's own article doesn't demonstrate notability.
Nat Gertler (
talk)
19:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - MSCI literally publishes the inclusion criteria/methodology. A company wouldn't "just be on" a list like this (ie Apple isn't). It's exclusive enough (only about 10% of companies in the US). Only reason article doesn't list them all is because there's 400 of them. And that's what a category is for. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
213.78.190.234 (
talk)
20:24, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. For this to be a useful category, when independent reliable sources (probably in the business press) are writing articles about companies that are in the index, those sources would have to mention that, for example, "Company X, a member of the MSCI KLD 400 Social Index, etc." or write articles noting that a company was added to or removed from the Index. Those sorts of mentions would have to be made in reliable sources of a company's inclusion in the Index in order to add a sentence to the article asserting as an important fact about the company that it is in the Index. Then enough such sentences in enough such articles would have to exist before it would make sense to have a category like this. This category in recent days has been added to dozens of articles and although I haven't looked at all of them, the articles I have looked at don't even mention in the body of the article that the company belongs to the Index. This means that the many editors who have worked on these many articles have hitherto not felt that being in the Index was a notable or important fact about the companies they were writing about which might be because reliable news sources don't mention it either, with respect to the companies that belong to the Index.
Novellasyes (
talk)
09:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
In the interest of clarity, I should note that the IP user who responded "Keep" above actually did add text mentioning the Index listing to dozens of articles about companies on the Index (in the wake of the category being deleted from a company's page because it was not mentioned in the text.) However, the source they were using was a promotional page for an Index-based fund on Blackrock, which is not only selling a fund based on the index but is one of the companies in the Index. As such, it is not truly an independent source... and even if it were, it's not a source for the listing of a company on the source being significant to that company. I reverted those additions, as so many links to a sales page add up to the strong scent of spam. --
Nat Gertler (
talk)
17:03, 19 June 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.
Category:Rugby league players by city or town in Namibia
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:White Southerners (United 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: Non-defining category. Half of Americans could conceivably belong to this group. First two applications of this cat (
Confederados,
Jefferson Davis) demonstrate the user's intention. This new category is associated with category creator's reverted new versions of
White Southerners article.
BusterD (
talk)
13:45, 17 June 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:Lists of Emmerdale characters
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: Selective merge/major purge. Only two of the pages actually fit in this category; the rest are medical professionals who treated the plague.
Mason (
talk)
01:48, 17 June 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.
June 16
Category:Mexican baseball players by populated place
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.
Weak keep. There's only one subcat because one or two American baseball fans decided that baseball shouldn't be split by city (unlike every other sport). A fewcouple of Mexican city categories (such as Monterrey) were deleted at that time. I've added one that didn't exist before, so there are now two in the proposed category, but if that's seen as unnecessary, you have my permission (as sole author) to delete it too.
Grutness...wha?03:11, 17 June 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:Cheerleader video games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: All other activity-related video game categories follow the format of referring to the name of the activity rather than an individual participant in it. For instance, "Cooking Video Games" rather than "Chef Video Games" and "Association Football Video Games" rather than "Footballer Video Games". The category should therefore follow this naming convention.
SummerPocket (
talk)
20:49, 16 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I am going to procedurally close this and nominate it for speedy renaming instead, as it is an uncontroversial rename based on the parent category.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
03:37, 20 June 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.
Works by year and decade, 500-1000
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 The date of creation of most works from this era is not percisely known. Most of the lower-level categories are also overly small. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
01:18, 20 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: We don't need to distinguish that the shooting was terrorist related. And this is really giving off the same vibes
Mason (
talk)
18:47, 16 June 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:Bombings
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: Empty pile of categories by a new editor who's category creation behavior is reminiscent of @
Brudelman:. I'm nomiating the cats to just get them all out of the way in one go.
Mason (
talk)
18:38, 16 June 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:Com Truise
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: With only subcategories for albums (and their covers, which are only image files) along with a discography page, this is overcategorization per
WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me16:55, 16 June 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:Basshunter instrumentals
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:Knights of Boufflers
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: Dual upmerge. The only person is each of these category doesn't mention this knighthood.
Mason (
talk)
14:27, 16 June 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:Defunct off-price department stores of the United States
Category:Expulsions of Jews in 19th-century Europe
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.
Purge and merge, many articles aren't about an expulsion at all. Too few really are about an expulsion so we do not need this diffusion.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
14:39, 16 June 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:Philippine Military Academy Class of 1986
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:Primary sources on Philippine history in the 16th 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. Is a non-defining 3x intersection category, and several of the documents in 16th century aren't actually from the 16th century
Mason (
talk)
12:54, 16 June 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:Authors of Spanish ethnographic accounts of the Philippines in the 16th 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: Multiple merge this Narrow category. If not merged, it should be renamed to Spanish ethnographers of the colonial Philippines or something to that effect
Mason (
talk)
12:47, 16 June 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:21st-century Somali-Canadian women engineers
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: Extremely narrow intersection, made by a user who hasn't really learned how categories work
Mason (
talk)
04:14, 16 June 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:African women mathematicians
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.
Just delete, articles are already in a mathematicians by nationality category. It is odd to have biographies directly in a continent category.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:06, 16 June 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:African women in engineering
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's no African engineers category parent category. Delete per EGRS. I'm working on adding each person to the proper parent categories.
Mason (
talk)
03:44, 16 June 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.
June 15
X 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.
Category:20th century rump 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: Upmerge this isolated category. If not merged, it should be renamed to 20th-century rump states
Mason (
talk)
21:59, 15 June 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:21st century in Malé
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:Battles of the American Revolutionary War by state
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
I see that I previously defended this category, but some former members may have been merged, leaving less content to make these two categories worthwhile. I now support the proposed merge. –
FayenaticLondon15:12, 18 June 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:Antagonists by role
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:United Hospitals
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:Hotel Transylvania television series
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:People with substance use disorder
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.
Comment Shouldn't this be something like List of foods/dishes by cuisine? All child categories are named Fooian cuisine-related lists, while almost all articles are named List of Barian dishes/foods/drinks/desserts/ingredients. It seems like Barian is explicitly meant to include diaspora communities of Barian emigrants around the world, who have taken their Barian cuisine dishes and stuff with them. If we rename to "by country", we could be excluding diaspora communities, while "nationality" (though problematic) at least includes first-generation emigrants from Bar. I'm not sure what a better alternative would be, though. Thoughts?
NLeeuw (
talk)
14:55, 8 June 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.
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:Cultural policy of East Germany
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:delete, overall poorly fitting content. One article is about a festival, the other article is about general duties of citizens.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:01, 15 June 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:18th-century German Jewish theologians
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:Ambassadors of Australia to Kosovo
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.
Film posters by country
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: The current category names are ambiguous as to whether they're, for example, posters of Swedish films or film posters from Sweden. I'd recommend renaming to "Film posters of Sweden" like the
Commons categories.
hinnk (
talk)
21:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Question I hate to be pedantic, but do you mean:
Film posters made in Sweden?
Film posters hung in Sweden?
Posters of films made in Sweden?
Posters of films made by Swedish crew members or crew members from Sweden?
Film posters that show "Sweden" (e.g. its landscapes or symbols associated with Sweden)?
Film posters made or owned by the government of Sweden?
Poster of films made by the government of Sweden?
Etc.
All of these are more or less reasonable interpretations of Film posters of Sweden. I'm glad you're trying to clarify the catnames, but I don't see it getting much clearer.
NLeeuw (
talk)
22:11, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment, regardless of renaming I do not think this is very ambiguous. Posters of Swedish films (i.e. in other countries than Sweden) would be a rather odd reading.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:06, 30 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.
Keep. 9 pages now that I have put the communes into the category. 14 when articles are started for the capitals of the communes. And a region with over 600,000 people surely has many more settlements that deserve an article.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
21:44, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
According to the wikipedia articles, each of the seven communes in
Kirundo Province has a capital with the same name. The capital of the
Commune of Bugabira is
Bugabira. The capital of the
Commune of Busoni is
Busoni, and so on. Kirundo Province had a population of 628,256 as of the 2008 census. The 2018 population was estimated as 927,761, or about 130,000 per commune. Our coverage of this region is atrocious. Let's not make it even harder for editors to improve it.
This source describes Bugabira as a small town with colonial-era architecture. Bugabira commune is divided into the collines of Kiri, Kiyonza, Gaturanda, Rubuga, Kigina, Nyakarama, Nyamabuye, Nyabikenke, Rugasa, Gitwe and Kigoma.
[2] Google maps shows Gaturanda as a region south of an arm of
Lake Cyohoha South with labelled villages named Gaturanda, Rugondo and Rubuga. Gaturanda village looks substantial.
[3] In 2012 the Global Water Partnership Eastern Africa gathered data related to drought in Rubuga, Kigina, and Gaturanda in Bugabira commune.
[4] In August 2014 six houses were burned in Bugabira commune, including five in Gaturanda and one in Kigoma.
[5] In April 2016
Gaston Sindimwo, President of Burundi, visited Gaturanda, which lies on the border with
Rwanda, to ask the people not to stir up problems over refugees.
[6] In 2023 Bugabira municipality issued a call for tenders for extension of the Gaturanda health center.
[7].
Clearly these is enough information online to piece together sketches of the many populated places in Kirundo Province. The category structure should be ready for them.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
13:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Aymatth2: "Five" is often mentioned at CFD as some editors' opinion of a sensible minimum. Personally, I would create a category for four. In a case like this, where additional stubs could easily be created, I would not bother nominating a category that had three members – but I would still not encourage you to create it for less than four. –
FayenaticLondon08:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I have often included Commune and town in the same article for African countries. Makes sense for places in the developing world where there may not be an abundance of sources. Though I don't think we should really have the commune and town in the same article for places which cover an area of 235 square kilometres like Bugabira. Either way, it would be silly to delete a category simply because the region is underdeveloped. ♦
Dr. Blofeld14:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
As Aymatth2 admits, even the other 5 capitals of communes in Kirundo Province do not have articles yet. For some reason a
famous cat-stroking Wikipedian created 50 stubs for
Populated places in Bubanza Province 16 years ago, mostly villages, then apparently petered out part-way into Buriri Province. As and when articles are created for more settlements in this province, the category may then be re-created when it becomes justifiable, but
Template:Kirundo Province is sufficient and appropriate for navigational needs at the moment; I have added
Vumbi into it. –
FayenaticLondon12:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Kirundo Province has more people than Alaska, which has at least
148 populated places. If
Category:Populated places in Kirundo Province is deleted, and then a new editor decides to create articles for some of the places in the province, they will likely try to recreate the category. They will see a big red warning saying the Wikipedia community has decided there should not be such a category. I would just go ahead and recreate it anyway, but a newbie may be discouraged. That is the last thing we want to happen for an area which is so poorly covered.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
13:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Seven articles as of relisting. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
00:48, 15 June 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:Women's Premier League (cricket) franchise owners
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: It should be franchise owners, as the member pagers are franchise owners rather than team owners. Vestrian24Bio (
TALK)
14:13, 14 June 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.
Category:War of 1812 on the National Register of Historic Places
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:Washington, D.C., in the War of 1812
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:Holidays related to the War of 1812
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:Presidents General of the General Society of the War of 1812
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.
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:Mexican engineer stubs
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub category with no evidence of approval by
Category:WikiProject Stub sorting. As always, stub categories are not free for just anybody to create on a whim, and require a minimum of 60 articles for entry -- but even after deep-scanning the
Category:Mexican people stubs parent for any missed engineers, this still only has 17 articles in it. The stub template is fine, since it can always just sort articles into the target categories, but there would have to be at least 43 more articles before a dedicated category was warranted.
Bearcat (
talk)
19:54, 13 June 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.
Muwahhidism
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 propose the deletion of these categories because they make no sense. Muwahiddism isn't a separate branch (like Sunni, Shia, Ibadi, Ahmadi, Quranism), it's not a fiqh school (like Hanafi/Shafii/Maliki/Hanbali divide among Sunnis), it's not an aqeeda school (like Athari/Maturidi/Ashari divide among Sunnis or Usuli/Akhbari divide among Twelver Shia) or anything.
Anyone who considers himself a Muslim (no matter what school he follows) considers himself a muwahhid (موحِّد) which means "a monotheist" in Arabic, literally a follower of tawhid (توحيد), monotheism, the central concept of Islam. It's just a term which is more often used as a self-description by Sunni Salafis to highlight their purism in contrast to anyone else (for example, Sufis have a practice of visiting graves of their sheikhs, Salafis see this act as a departure from the concept of tawhid in Islam. Although Sufis don't consider it as a violation of tawhid, they still see themselves as muwahhideen (monotheists). But anyone who claims to follow Islam, he by definition considers himself a muwahhid regardless). That's it. It's not a separate branch of Islam. It's just a "label" or a "trademark", so to speak. These categories are excessive and absolutely uncalled for. Sorry for bad formatting, by the way (I'm editing off my phone).
Fixmaster (
talk)
19:24, 13 June 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:Socialist film directors
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.
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 event managers
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'm on the fence about speedying this category, however, I'm not 100% sure that I've correctly mapped this category to the right parent of event planning.
Mason (
talk)
02:50, 13 June 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:Australian metal workers
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 three ways this category can be handled. Either rename this to match the parent category of Metalworkers, merge to Australian metalsmiths or rename to reflect that the intent of this category Metal manufacturing companies of Australia.
Mason (
talk)
02:48, 13 June 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:Artesian 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 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.
June 12
Category:Live at the Fillmore East albums
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:Croat Roman Catholic clergy from Bosnia and Herzegovina
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: Ethnicization of entire tree of Category:Catholic clergy of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It's a one editor's attempt to squeeze ethnic labels onto categories regarding one of the religious communities of the country. It should be checked if this issue was already dealt with once before. Note that other two communities (Orthodox and Islamic) are categorized only with their respective denomination labels not with their eventual ethnicities.
౪ Santa ౪99°16:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I find it unhelpful that you have removed the parent categories. Now I can't easily see what the creator was trying to do, and whether it might be better to upmerge instead of delete.
NLeeuw (
talk)
17:21, 12 June 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:Croat Christian clergy from Bosnia and Herzegovina
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: Ethnicization of entire tree of Category:Catholic clergy of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It's a one editor's attempt to squeeze ethnic labels onto categories regarding one of the religious communities of the country. It should be checked if this issue was already dealt with once before. Note that other two communities (Orthodox and Islamic) are categorized only with their respective denomination labels not with their eventual ethnicities.
౪ Santa ౪99°16:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I find it unhelpful that you have removed the parent categories. Now I can't easily see what the creator was trying to do, and whether it might be better to upmerge instead of delete.
NLeeuw (
talk)
17:21, 12 June 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:Croat Greek Catholic clergy from Bosnia and Herzegovina
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: Ethnicization of entire tree of Category:Catholic clergy of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It's a one editor's attempt to squeeze ethnic labels onto categories regarding one of the religious communities of the country. It should be checked if this issue was already delt with once before. Note that other two communities (Orthodox and Islamic) are categorized only with their respective denomination labels not with their eventual ethnicities.
౪ Santa ౪99°16:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I find it unhelpful that you have removed the parent categories. Now I can't easily see what the creator was trying to do, and whether it might be better to upmerge instead of delete.
NLeeuw (
talk)
17:21, 12 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: I'm not really sure what to do with this category name, because it isn't particularly helpful/descriptive. Is this painters from after 1948 who painted the "holy land" or is it painters of what the "holy land" looked like after 1948.
Mason (
talk)
13:12, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion/merging? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him)
15:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep' The nomination seems confused, perhaps fatally - the category is "PRE-1948" so it is not for "painters from after 1948 who painted the "holy land" or is it painters of what the "holy land" looked like after 1948." In the 19th-century context "
Holy Land" is certainly the term that would have been used by the artists and their publics, & I don't think it is POV. If people want to delete it on those grounds they should think of alternatives, as it seems a valid category. Rather than being "an extremely narrow theme", it saw a big boom in the 19th century, partly as a branch of
Orientalist painting. The category misses the most famous people, at least in the Anglosphere - where are
William Holman Hunt,
Edward Lear,
James Tissot and many others?
Johnbod (
talk)
15:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I see only one of the 5 described as "Orientalist" (and Marcocapelle just categorised then as such). James Tissot is indeed a name I recognise as painting events from the Hebrew Bible, though not necessarily "the Holy Land". E.g.
File:Tissot The Women of Midian Led Captive by the Hebrews.jpg supposedly took place in southern Transjordan in what is now Saudi Arabia.
Moreover, a lot of them were apparently Jewish, while "Holy Land" is a Christian term. It's really difficult to shape a category around such a vague concept with the people currently and proposed to be in there.
I should add that "Holy Land" can be an appropriate term if the subject in question is entirely Christian, for, by and about Christians, e.g.
Recovery of the Holy Land. No other phrase will describe that late medieval Christian literary genre that aptly. But for these painters...? I'm not convinced.
NLeeuw (
talk)
21:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
It's highly unclear where the events of
Numbers 31 took place (if anwhere), but it seems more likely to be in modern Israel or Jordan than Saudi. In any case, Tissot spent time in Palestine to get his settings right, without I think getting as far as modern Saudi. I don't think that a century ago "Holy Land" was exclusively a Christian term - it would be rather ironic if it was.
Johnbod (
talk)
21:57, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, Arabic Wikipedia
ar:الأراضي المقدسة says: The Holy Land is a term used in the Christian and Jewish religions to refer to the holy places in Palestine, especially Jerusalem , Bethlehem, and Nazareth...
Hebrew Wikipedia
he:ארץ הקודש says: Jews usually refer to the Land of Israel as the "Holy Land".[Source needed] However, the Bible refers to it explicitly as "holy land" in only one passage, the book of Zechariah, chapter 2, verse 16.
It doesn't seem like it is very common (at least not in the arguably main languages used by the most relevant religions and populations) to use the term "Holy Land" in Judaism or Islam. They may regard the land as sacred in some way, but calling it "Holy Land", capital H capital L, seems very much a Christian practice.
At any rate, if 19th-century and early 20th-century Orientalist is our scope, why not use the term
Levant instead? It fits the period well, is broader than just Palesrael, and is not as politically and religiously charged.
NLeeuw (
talk)
01:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
A fine piece of OR, & reliance on primary sources! You contradict your own research superbly there! "Jews usually refer to the Land of Israel as the "Holy Land"" and you conclude "It doesn't seem like it is very common (at least not in the arguably main languages used by the most relevant religions and populations) to use the term "Holy Land" in Judaism or Islam. They may regard the land as sacred in some way, but calling it "Holy Land", capital H capital L, seems very much a Christian practice." Wonderful! "Palestine" (much less controversial in this period, & the official name for some of it) would be better than "Levant". I don't mind splitting off the 2-3 proto-Israeli figures, who I agree are rather different.
Johnbod (
talk)
02:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Well no, I'm not claiming this is in-depth research lol. Let's try something a bit more empirical:
Google Books search: landscape "orientalist paintings" "holy land": 2.110 results
Google Books search: landscape "orientalist paintings" "levant": 1.950 results
Google Scholar search: landscape "orientalist paintings" "holy land": 207 results
Google Scholar search: landscape "orientalist paintings" "levant": 223 results
Neither "holy land" or "levant" is particularly likely to be part of the title. Painting the Holy Land in the Nineteenth Century (1997) and Visions of the East: Influence of the Levant on the Italian Renaissance (2015) are two rare exceptions to this rule.
David Roberts is often mentioned, but more frequently with "Palestine" than with "Holy Land". His bio
David Roberts (painter) uses the term "Holy Land" no fewer than 12 times, though usually in conjuction with other 'countries' around it: his travelogue The Holy Land, Syria, Idumea, Arabia, Egypt, and Nubia comprises about half of those mentions.
Gustav Bauernfeind (not yet in this category) is more usually associated with "Levant"; in fact, his bio has
Gustav Bauernfeind#Painting the Levant, mentioning 'the Levant, the Orient, Ottoman Palestine, Jerusalem, Lebanon, Syria, the Holy Land'. Seems to me that Levant is the broadest, most encompassing and inclusive term of the two (or three if we count 'Palestine'). As it is broader, it could also include paintings of certain biblical narratives that are set in Transjordan (such as the one of Tissot referenced above), which may or may not be included under the term "Holy Land". It might be a good idea to add a catdesc that gives a description of what we mean by 'Levant', and the term 'Holy Land' does seem fitting there (amongst the other regions/countries I mention in this comment) instead of in the catname itself. Maybe that's an acceptable compromise?
NLeeuw (
talk)
13:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
PS: Something like catname: Category:Orientalist painters of the Levant
It might (moving out the proto-Israelis), but I don't understand why people keep talking about "landscape" painters/paintings. Some, like Lear and Roberts, mostly were, but others, like Hunt and Tissot, concentrated on
history paintings of Biblical narrative subjects, obviously many with landscape backgrounds. I'd still prefer Palestine to Levant. But I think it is important that we explicitly restrict the category to those who had actually spent time in the area, rather than working things up in Europe.
Johnbod (
talk)
17:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
"Palestine" could work as an alternative, certainly for the British mandate period. Johnbod also preferred Palestine over Levant. For me Rename to
Category:Painters of pre-1948 Palestine is a second choice (my primary choice remains Upmerging, see above). This could work as a compromise.
NLeeuw (
talk)
23:11, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment - I am still not sure if this is about painters from "Holly Land" or painters of the "Holly Land", where the "Holly Land" is the label for a theme not a country or state, and I am reading through this discussion for the second time?--
౪ Santa ౪99°14:32, 16 June 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:Polish social activists of the Prussian partition
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.
Also I'm not too sure about it but maybe rename to "Pro-Palestinian activists". Any other suggestion would be helpful; this one seems rather vague.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
14:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support rename to "Pro-Palestinian activists", if only because that new name would be shorter and simpler, yet also straight to the point.
AHI-3000 (
talk)
15:30, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I'll wait for some consensus here before I proceed with the subcategories. Honestly, going through them, I don't think any of these people in any of these categories were checked to see if they actually were activists for Palestinian solidarity, particularly given a number of these aren't pro-Palestinian but rather anti-Israeli.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
14:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I would prefer keeping this category, I should add, since there is a big Palestinian movement and activists who are pro-Palestinian. I just think we should be careful who to put in. Some of these "pro-Palestinian" people aren't pro-Palestinian at all.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
14:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support doing something, but mixed on the alternative rename. I think that the "Pro-Palestinian activists" are indeed a more specific subgroup that are definitely nested within Anti-racist activists. Perhaps splitting or nesting/reorganizing to acknowledge that there are also activists for Palestinian civil rights etc. idk 🤷 It's really complicated.
Mason (
talk)
18:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Smasongarrison, it is quite complicated, you're right. I'm not too sure about myself but, IMO and as you have said yourself, "Pro-Palestinian" is less vague and more definable than "Activists for Palestinian solidarity".
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
19:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
That's a fair point. (To be clear, I'm not opposed to the rename if that's were consensus goes. ) I've started cleaning up the ethnic/religious intersections with the group in the hope that I'll have some inspiration.
Mason (
talk)
19:37, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: No clear consensus on rename. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
02:56, 3 June 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.
They do sound a bit like containercats, but if we treat them like that, it forces us to either upmerge articles, or diffuse articles and create small cats, for which we would need to upmerge them again, but two levels. Hence a bit of pragmatism seems called for until we've got more options.
NLeeuw (
talk)
06:26, 13 June 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:Invasions of the Republic of Genoa
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:Pretenders to the Albanian throne
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.
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 cafeteria workers
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: This is a rather small and narrow category with no real-life equivalent. We don't need a hyperspecific category for literally every job. Edit: Actually it should probably just be deleted, when you remove Chef from South Park, who is already under "Fictional chefs", there is nothing pertinent here.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
06:03, 12 June 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:Fictional extraterrestrial royalty
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:Mythological male/female royalty
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: Yet another
WP:NARROWCAT pointless category. This is such a narrow intersection (mythical + gender + royalty) that a category is not necessary. I don't believe it should be merged to "fictional" as myth and fiction are separate.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
05:38, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Nom is right that having categories with just 2 subcategories isn't very useful for navigation, but we should upmerge to all parents.
NLeeuw (
talk)
06:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Fiction may overlap with mythology in some cases but the two are distinct concepts. Mythology can also contain embellished or rumored versions of real events. The Bible has mythological elements, but most would not agree it is a pure "work of fiction".
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
07:39, 12 June 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:Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms economists
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.
Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms Buddhist monks
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:Socialists by occupation
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.
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:History of Lithuania (1569–1795)
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 - early modern age in Lithuania according to my knowledge starts a century before 1569 (if we take 1453 as the starting year of early modern age). Seems a bit much to make out those to be identical.--
+JMJ+ (
talk)
22:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Around 1500 is most often mentioned as the start of the early modern age and articles about the period between 1500 and 1569 can still be put in the early modern category.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
18:54, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Agree with Marco. "1453" is a bit arbitrary, as it takes the fall of Constantinople as the measure of world history, instead of a rather minor event that was bound to happen to a Byzantine Empire in terminal decay for centuries. "1500" may also be arbitrary as a random round number, but at least it does not assign an arbitrary value of significance to any event, and it has been a commonly used convention in historiography. For Lithuania, of course, 1569 is much more significant, but given that we've already got 2 categories and it doesn't make sense to create separate categories for 1500 to 1568, and 1796 to 1799.
NLeeuw (
talk)
06:35, 12 June 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:PAW Patrol (franchise)
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Merge or reverse merge, too little content for two categories. Technical note, if it is going to be a downmerge then parent categories have to be added to the target manually.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
02:41, 12 June 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:Members of the League of Women Voters
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on renaming and purging? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him)
02:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose given that both nominee and target are very large categories, and no navigational value seems to be served by throwing them together.
NLeeuw (
talk)
19:35, 5 June 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:Coke Studio (franchise)
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:Character songs
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: Category hardly has any entries, with Megalovania being more of a theme song than "sung by the voice actor", of which there is none. The current category members could be merged to parent categories if they aren't in them already.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
00:12, 12 June 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.
36 to 42 days old
June 11
Category:Cute 'em ups by series
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:Kurdish physicists
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: Upmerge. Narrow intersection for small category, which isn't helpful for navigation. There's not even a Kurdish biologist category, so why would we need a subfield?
Mason (
talk)
23:14, 11 June 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:Jeremy Jordan (singer) albums
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:Medieval Kurdish philosophers
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: Upmerge for now. There's no need to diffuse the Kurdish philosophy category by period. There are only 9 people in the entire tree (at the time of nomination).
Mason (
talk)
23:08, 11 June 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.
Middle Ages by country
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 all children of
Category:Middle Ages by country to Medieval history of Fooland per precedent Early modern history of Fooland, and indirectly the Military history of Fooland precedents, as well as consistency (an indirect
WP:C2C argument) with sibling categories
Category:Ancient history by country,
Category:Early modern period by country, and
Category:Modern history by country. Follow-up to
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Early modern period, where we decided to rename all categories to Early modern history of Fooland. Renaming could avoid a lot of anachronisms about modern countries that did not yet exist as such, or not with their modern-day borders, or at least not under their modern names, in the Middle Ages. It's also a lot like how we are currently reframing battles in (former country/region) to military history of (current country/region). Although it has relatively few main articles following this formula (such as
Medieval history of Nepal, or the variation
History of medieval Tunisia,
History of medieval Cumbria, or
Political history of medieval Karnataka), it has been found that article titles using the formula ...in the Middle Ages or ...in antiquity are usually not about countries, but social or cultural phenomena, and that the formula Ancient history of Fooland or History of ancient Fooland is very common, leading to a relatively strong basis in the article space (an indirect
WP:C2D argument). Therefore, the result of the preliminary discussion was Option 1: rename to Medieval history of Fooland. All nominees will be tagged as such (but options for alternative target names remain open if participants can provide compelling rationales).
Preliminary discussion on renaming options
There may also be a need to harmonise the categories further according to either one of the following options:
Medieval Fooland: one option is to keep the current category names, but seek to change the main article titles instead, per a small minority of main articles, such as
Medieval India,
Medieval Croatia,
Medieval Armenia,
Medieval Jerusalem,
Medieval Corsica, and some derivatives like
Norman and medieval London or
Europeans in Medieval China,
Slavery in medieval Europe. This would save us a lot of trouble renaming categories, it just adds to our trouble of renaming articles, which is a different projectspace. And although it is more concise, this option does not have my preference, because it makes the anachronism problem much worse. It will not be consistent with our recent renaming of Early modern history of Fooland either, and we might have to revisit it. But for the sake of completeness, I do offer it for your consideration.
Thank you for this big nomination and elaborate rationale. Option 3 is clearly a no-go for reasons already outlined. Initially I thought I'd have a clear preference for option 1 but at second thought I no longer see a good reason why, they each have their own pros. So either option 1 or 2.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
21:47, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
You're welcome, and thank you for paving the way with the early modern period precedent, as well as voicing your support earlier today when I asked your advice. I also thought this was gonna be a lot easier beforehand, but there is a substantial number of Fooland in the Middle Ages articles that gave me pause. In the end, the article space should always be prioritised over the category space, and
WP:C2D will almost always be a stronger argument than
WP:C2C. So I've currently got a slight preference for option 2 over option 1, but it's close. I hope others can persuade us to a better perspective.
NLeeuw (
talk)
22:58, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
PS: One reason why the ...in the Middle Ages might be so popular, whereas ...in the early modern period is essentially unheard of, might be because we often speak and think of the Middle Ages as a "place" rather than a time. Say "Middle Ages" or "medieval", and someone else may soon imagine castles and catapults, convents and chronicles, commerce and crusaders. But if someone says "early modern", I struggle a lot more to paint a picture for myself of what that time looked like, and to imagine it as a "place" where people walked around. Strange thing how that works linguistically. Not sure if I'm the only one? But that might help to explain why these articles and categories are titled so differently.
NLeeuw (
talk)
23:14, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Hmmm no other input? I guess we'll have to wait for relisting or I'll have to start tagging pages... At the moment, option 2 seems most promising due to its strong basis in the article space. Many could be C2D'd if we wanted to. The other articles could be BOLDly moved per TITLECON... But I prefer to have a discussion, as we still to justify ignoring the early modern history of Fooland precedent which Marcocapelle set.
NLeeuw (
talk)
23:05, 16 June 2024 (UTC)reply
After thinking about this some more, I've realised that the Renaissance category tree should be within the early modern category tree. I've also found lots of instances of Prehistory of Fooland as opposed to Prehistoric Fooland (which weren't previously in
Category:National prehistories), so perhaps an Early modern history of Fooland–style naming schema can work for prehistory after all.
Ham II (
talk)
17:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Hmm. Well, at the very least the catname should be clarified.
Category:Prehistory by country? Parents
Category:History by country and
Category:Prehistory by region suggest catname Prehistory by country as a logical intersection. (The catname "national prehistories" had me think they meant 'the history of nation X before it became a nation-state (in the 19th century)', or something like that. But they do mean prehistory in the sense of "before the time of written sources". Just an odd catname for it).
NLeeuw (
talk)
20:36, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
"Ancient history of" works much better to get country-themed articles. Lots of articles are names "Ancient history of Fooland" or "History of ancient Fooland". Option 1 has a very strong basis in the article space, unlike with "Medieval history of" / "History of medieval". Option 2 seems to be strongly tied to countries "in the Middle Ages", but very weakly tied to countries "in antiquity".
Option 3, "Ancient Fooland", has similar problems to option 2: it's often not about countries. And if it is, it may sometimes be considered anachronistic. E.g. "Ancient France' seems wrong, but with "Ancient Gaul" we probably have no problem (although "Ancient" seems redundant: we assume Gaul to be places in antiquity). "Ancient Russia" or "Ancient Ukraine" are somewhat dubious, but "Ancient Rus' " is sometimes used (although it refers to Middle Ages rather than antiquity, and the preferred term is "
Kievan Rus'"). Similarly "Ancient England"... why should we call it "England" before there are any
Angles there? Ancient history of England seems much more tenable, because that way we're less trying to force "England" into antiquity where it wasn't yet known as such. And so on.
Overall, I think I'm starting to favour option 1 Ancient/Medieval/Early modern history of Fooland for all catnames now.
A few exceptions may be made, especially for countries / societies / cultures which were already called by that name at the time. I don't think we should rename articles
Ancient Rome and
Ancient Greece to
History of ancient Rome and
History of ancient Greece, or something. That seems superfluous, especially with Rome. But for countries that didn't exist yet, Ancient history of Fooland seems the way to go, both as maim articles titles and as catnames
NLeeuw (
talk)
15:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ancient Egypt is another one. I'm not sure how strong "they were called that at the time" is as a rationale; possibly a better argument might be that they're ancient civilisations more than countries, with those names as
WP:COMMONNAMEs.
Ham II (
talk)
16:12, 28 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm leaning option 1 now: Ancient / Medieval / Early modern history of Fooland. It is the least ambiguous and anachronistic, and therefore most justifiable. It has a pretty strong basis in category and precedent, and some presence in the main article space (especially ancient history of Fooland).
Option 2 seems best fitted for subjects that aren't about countries, but social and cultural phenomena. Apart from several Fooland in the Middle Ages articles, it does not have a strong basis in the article space, and virtually no basis in the category space.
Option 3 has decent bases in both, but is most at risk of anachronisms. We seem to agree already that this is a no-go (also given precedent Early modern history of Fooland). Only given exceptions such as
Ancient Rome and
Ancient Greece need not be changed.
NLeeuw (
talk)
01:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Update: I've now tagged all nominees with the Option 1 target name as a result of the preliminary discussion. I'd like to thank
Marcocapelle and
Ham II for their input. I've got two further questions at the moment:
1. Should we leave the current names as redirects as soon as the proposal is approved? That would help editors (and readers) navigate and edit, and prevent re-creation and thus duplication. The current names often correspond to several main articles and links, so leaving redirects seems appropriate. Thoughts?
Support renaming to Medieval history of Fooland, per my earlier comments. And, eventually, Prehistory of / Ancient history of / Modern history of Fooland, to match Medieval history of / Early modern history of Fooland.
Ham II (
talk)
16:12, 28 June 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:Battles involving Germanic peoples
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:Former synagogues Nebraska
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:Former synagogues Wisconsin
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:Bond (string quartet)
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: With subcategories only for the quartet's albums and their covers, the eponymous category is unnecessary per
WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me15:56, 11 June 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:Battles involving the Nizari Ismaili state
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:Central March
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 per nom. In addition, governor of the Central March seems to be a relatively minor position, not contributing much to the notability of the subject of the article.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
17:07, 11 June 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.
Oppose. The category is part of a wider category family on governments of historical states. What exactly is the gain of deleting it and upmerging, that is enough to counterbalance the loss in categorization? There are likely even more articles already on WP that can be added there, and certainly still more that can be written, as the topic is under-represented.
Constantine ✍ 16:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. The two articles aren't really about government of the Ayyubid Sultanate, they are about the outskirts of it. If anything, they are about social geography rather than about government, but having them simply in the main category is even better.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
17:57, 11 June 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:Government of the Samanid Empire
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:Ambassadors of the Republic of Venice to the Kingdom of Sardinia
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 P, 0 C.
WP:MFN. There are many, many underpopulated (1 to 4 P) ambassador cats like this created in February–May 2024 by the same person. Others were created longer ago.
NLeeuw (
talk)
14:50, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The category is not arbitrary and has clearly room of expansion, as the Republic of Venice and the Kingdom of Sardinia overlapped by several centuries. If the category exists, articles will be added to it. If it is deleted, they won't; not many WP members are actively engaged in categorization. If a reader, like myself, is interested in the bilateral relations between Venice and specific other states, why should they go hunting in more generic categories? This equally applies to the other 'underpopulated categories' mentioned in the nomination. I really don't understand what the project gains from deletions like this.
Constantine ✍ 16:12, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The purpose of categories is easy navigation between articles. Categories in categories in categories which contain only 1 article do not ease navigation.
NLeeuw (
talk)
19:02, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge, per nom. One may be interested in this intersection, sure, but if there aren't any other articles then the most closely related articles are in the more general categories and merging helps navigation to them. Of course, no objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
18:21, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge per nom. There categories are indeed extremely underpopulated, and often isolated from where readers expect to see them (somewhere in the modern country category typically).
Mason (
talk)
22:24, 11 June 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:SaarLorLux Open
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:Government of the Almohad Caliphate
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Government of the Khwarazmian Empire
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:People by ethnic 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.
Nominator's rationale: These categories are for people of different ethnic descents. There is nothing here specific to any particular continent. Additionally, the names might wrongly imply that this is the person's own ethnicity when, in reality, it refers to their ancestors' ethnicity.
Aldij (
talk)
12:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Most of the categories are already included through the nationality descent category. However, I agree to the duplicate merge as well.
Aldij (
talk)
07:11, 12 June 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.
Category:Gilgit-Baltistan history stubs
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:merge, poorly populated stub categories and we usually do not have stub history categories by Pakistani province.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:28, 11 June 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:Events at the Amway Center
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on FL's proposal? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
00:49, 11 June 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.
My point was the OP's argument was not compelling by itself because that would mean that anything defunct would be worth deleting. (I picked the Roman Empire because it was obviously worth keeping, but would fail using op's argument)
Mason (
talk)
05:02, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Lean keep Main article
This TV does not say anywhere explicitly that the network is defunct, just that its website went down in May 2024. Secondly, this category has a main article,
List of This TV affiliates, implying that this subject qualifies for a stand-alone page. Personally, I think that article is poorly sourced, and perhaps it should be AfD'd, which would open the way for a deletion of this category. But until that happens, I don't see a compelling reason to delete the category just yet.
NLeeuw (
talk)
15:32, 11 June 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:Wesley L. McDonald Distinguished Statesman and Stateswoman of Aviation Award
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.
This is probably the most prominent award for civil aviation that exists in the United States. It more than a defining characteristic.
Nayyn (
talk)
11:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
00:42, 11 June 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.
June 10
Category:Gaborone task force
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.
Keep The main article is
Ex-Muslims. ”apostate is a pejorative label and is meant to reflect the sense of betrayal felt by those who remain members of the religion”.
[8] --
Thi (
talk)
20:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ok does the category exist because of discontent with the name of the parent category?
Apostasy in Islam is commonly defined as the abandonment of Islam by a Muslim, in thought, word, or through deed. There is nothing pejorative about it.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:49, 10 June 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:Berber former Christians
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:Lists of film festivals in Oceania
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: Category which exists solely to hold one list at the same level of differentiation. This would be fine if one or more Oceanian countries had their own separate standalone lists independently of the continent-wide list, but none do, so the list does not need an "eponymous" category just to recursively contain itself if there are no supplementary sublists for specific Oceanian countries to file along with it. The list, further, was left double-filed in all of the parent categories alongside this, so no upmerging is needed.
Bearcat (
talk)
15:24, 10 June 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:Lists of awards received by Ugandan writer
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:Lists of awards received by Ugandan film director
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:Society of Kurdistan
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. The only proponent is a blocked sock; anyone else is welcome to renominate this category if they wish to pursue this further. HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
15:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Kurdistan is a region, not an ethnicity. The nom has been blocked, and they also changed the parent category from Category:Society by region to Society by ethnicity
Mason (
talk)
21:32, 14 June 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.
Battles in Spain 2
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:Aunty Disco Project
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:Unreal Engine 5 games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Duplicative with
Category:Unreal Engine games. No merge required, as all members of the nominated category are in the original already. Each version of Unreal Engine is not independently notable or distinct. --
ferret (
talk)
22:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I disagree because Category:Unreal Engine games is very large and spans more than two decades of video games. There isn't much use in knowing that a game was made with "just" Unreal Engine from the point of view of someone reading about the game compared to knowing that it was made in Unreal 5 which tells you a lot more about what you can expect from the game both in terms of graphics and gameplay (that is, within a given specific genre). Similarly, there isn't much use in knowing a game was made in "just" Unreal from the point of view of someone reading about Unreal itslef as nobody develops games in "Unreal Engine." Consider also that the Video Game infobox Engine field usually has the Unreal Engine version listed, not just "Unreal Engine", because just listing "Unreal Engine" is not so useful. Each version of Unreal is a separate piece of software. Also, not all members of the nominated category are in the original already (at least at the time that I added some of them).
I propose instead of deleting the category, it should be a sub-category under
Category:Unreal Engine games. In fact, I think the all the pages under this category also should be sorted by Unreal Engine type, i.e. UE1, UE2, UE3 and UE4. This rationale is made since the list of games for each Unreal Engine version is deleted, and there should be categories that list by version to clean up
Category:Unreal Engine games. Otherwise the alternative is to simply delete
Category:Unreal Engine games. ~
Limyx826 (
talk)
19:30, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
WP:DEFINING requires that reliable sources consistently describe the games as having this property.
WP:TRIVIALCAT may also be applicable. Can you please point me to the discussion about the — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Marcocapelle (
talk •
contribs)
Thanks. I can see how
WP:DEFINING is applicable here (even though there're enough sources to model this in Wikidata, like ModDB, those are mostly unreliable in enwiki). But then I don't see how the same logic is not applicable to the general
Category:Unreal Engine games (since the
List of Unreal Engine games was deleted). To me it looks like either we should delete most of the engines' categories, or we can keep separate categories for Unreal Engine versions. Whenever a media covers game engines, it usually specifies UE version (
Stormgate,
Mass Effect Legendary Edition,
Sin City, etc).And I don't see how
WP:TRIVIALCAT is applicable. The difference between Unreal Engine 1 and Unreal Engine 5 is very significiant, both from user's and developer's perspective, so in my opinion it actually helps the navigation.There were no inwiki discussion about splitting the category as far as I can remember. We discussed some aspects of it on Russian WPVG Discord server, but that's probably it.
A particle for world to form (
talk)
06:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. The separate versions pretty much characterize the games, comparing to just "Unreal Engine", given its existence for many years. The UE versions are quite different from each other, both in terms of development and end result. They all have their own separate version tree as well, so I would even say to some extent these are the different engines under the same brand name. The versions are also extensively covered in the sources, just as the versions for individual games are often supported by sources and are listed in the infobox. There may not be enough material for individual articles (needs to be verified), but there is enough material to split up this clogged category. The difference between the versions is enormous and obvious to anyone who follows the industry, and generally useful to any reader. Practically, you'll have little use for the information that
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (video game) and
Tekken 8 were made on the same engine. But looking at them as separate versions is already a defining characteristic -
WP:DEFINING. The distinct version categories also correspond better to
WP:CATDD, which explicitly states to use the most specific categories.Therefore, I support splitting c:Unreal Engine games into 5 subcategories with gradual moving of articles to corresponding versions and turning the main category into a meta category. On Russian Wikipedia it really looks much cleaner and more informative than the endless listing we have now.
Solidest (
talk)
05:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep Either we get rid of the "Unreal Engine games" category entirely, or this should stay. Unreal Engine 5 is absolutely distinct from something like the original Unreal Engine, to the point that it's essentially two separate pieces of software sharing a similar name. The argument that they are the same thing doesn't hold water from either a technical or a visual standpoint.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
08:57, 10 June 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:Female drug traffickers
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 gender, criminal, and specific kind of crime committed. I don't think that this holds up under
WP:EGRS.
Mason (
talk)
03:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Split There is no main article for female drug traffickers, which is a good indication it's not defining. If someone can prove otherwise and/or make a main article, I would think otherwise.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
05:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Question: Can any of the opposers (@
AHI-3000@
Dimadick) make the case that this specific intersection with gender and type of crime is actually defining per EGRS? No one is saying that crime and gender isn't defining, but I struggle to see how this specific crime type is defining.
Mason (
talk)
00:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: For those in favor of getting rid of the category, what should it be replaced with? Single merge? Double merge? Split? For those in favor of keeping the category, evidence that this is defining? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
02:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I didn't realize most were already under gangsters, so I can support the single merge. As long as this category is removed.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
06:20, 10 June 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:Accidents during the New Year celebrations
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.
June 9
Category:Ipswich town preachers
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.
Propose capitalisation: move
Category:Ipswich town preachers to
Category:Ipswich Town Preachers. When this category entered the jigsaw world of signs, known as wikipedia, it was unclear whether the category should use uppercase letters to initialise not merely Ipswich, but also "Town Preacher". The Oxford Academic use lower case, but local historian
John Blatchly goes for uppercase. I think the advantage of this that it is clear that this refers to people who held a formal role, rather than a simply being a wikipedia category that lists Clergy from Ipswich. Often
Ipswich Corporation appointed people from elsewhere. Bearing in mind the significance of some of those who occupied this role such as
Samuel Ward (minister) or
Cave Beck, it would seem appropriate to have such a category. I feel that capitalisation will indicate the category is more formal/historical.
Leutha (
talk)
12:08, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Question: I've reverted your unexplained removal of this category from the proposed merge target. How is this category not Clergy from Ipswich? And why is the current category parented by 17th-century clergy.
Mason (
talk)
12:50, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
As can be seen from the discussion above, the category is quite formal. Many people filing this role were not from Ipswich:
Samuel Ward (minister) was from
Haverhill,
Matthew Lawrence (preacher) was from North
Lincolnshire,
Cave Beck was from London. The references for the Town Preachers are largely consistent from 1604, G. R.Clarke gives a list of 7 before 1604 in his 1830 The history and description of the town and borough of Ipswich: 343 . However only one appears in Blatchly's list in his book on The Town Library of Ipswich (1989): 177 . Any suggestions as regards how to handle the earlier individuals such as
Roger Kelke, the
Marian exile who returned to become Ipswich Town Preacher from 1560 until 1575, according to Blatchly? ibid : 4 .
Leutha (
talk)
15:56, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Ok... so it sounds like this information would be better served as a list. Categories are supposed to be there to help people navigate between pages. I would *strongly* encourage you to look at how other categories handle clergy from a region.
It seems like you are under the impression that People from a city is only for people who were born from the city. That's too narrow of a definition, as Bishops of CITY/ diocese are placed within the clergy from CITY/REGION etc category. And, so if I am understanding your very long comment, you're added the parent because there's only one example of of a precher from before the 17th century, but you don't speak to what about after the 17th century.
Mason (
talk)
00:44, 17 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.
Category:Battles by location in Greece
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:Housing rights activists from Detroit
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:Acquired citizenship
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:Drake–Kendrick Lamar feud
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.
not sure this is a good idea. because some things might not be a song for example the New Ho King restaurant which got very famous because of the feud. there was also a pizzeria, and if more things comes up "songs" would not make sense Freedun (
yippity yap)
00:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I will note that Freedun has been blocked as a sock (in other words, I consider this unopposed as of now). Given that there is a potential objection, I will relist, but in a week if there are no further comments I would close this as soft rename. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
22:01, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree with this decision. As long as there are articles about the feud that are not about songs, having the parent category will be pretty handy.
RPI2026F1 (
talk)
00:28, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I also support a partial merge per Relinus, considering there are multiple articles in this category that aren't songs, a full rename wouldn't be appropriate. ULPS(
talk •
contribs)16:39, 25 June 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:Internet technology companies by Bangladesh
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.
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:Hamas bombers
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: "Bomber" and "military wing membership" aren't specific roles – they are attributions or in some cases here allegations or associations. Leadership is also a vague concept in the context and can refer to individuals at all different levels up and down the hierarchy, so "leader" is also not a specific role here. There's no reason why these sub-categories wouldn't simply be more usefully listed under the main category anyway.
Iskandar323 (
talk)
04:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The category wasn't populated with any "bombers", which are aircraft. It contained five military engineers and bomb markers and one suicide bomber, which is a precise term.
Iskandar323 (
talk)
18:08, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I have restored the six members. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk17:51, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
It can be merged to
Category:Hamas military members, but that would only prequel a further discussion on renaming/deletion. At the moment, it is imprecise and could be readily deleted as vapid and meaningless. Alternatively, five members are "bomb markers", not "bombers", so it could be renamed to that; however, the last is a suicide bomber, which would need removing in case of renaming.
Iskandar323 (
talk)
18:28, 9 June 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:Ancient villages in Israel
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. There is no need to merge, the subcategory is already in appropriate parents.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
16:51, 9 June 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:People with acquired citizenship
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 People can acquire citizenship through other means than naturalization. Many jus sanguinis countries allow people to register as citizens without going through the naturalization process if they have family ties to the country. The discussion was poorly attended and flat out wrong because most people with acquired Israeli citizenship got it via a different process than naturalization. (
t ·
c) buidhe05:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I would lean towards opposing merge because heritage citizenship acquisition is very different from naturalization, and could be a defining difference. Besides naturalization is a more common term, because most countries with a lot of new citizens get them via naturalization primarily or exclusively. (
t ·
c) buidhe05:47, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle, @
Smasongarrison I think merging as is would be better, don't you? I would also open to reverse merge too since "aquired" is a more broader term covering types of citizenships. I just don't think splitting hairs between types of methods is advisable here.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
20:41, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That is also true, so I am not wedded to a particular merge direction. I do think that these categories should be merged somehow since the difference between the two is pretty trivial.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
21:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I think it was already processed two days ago, but the categories can be retagged and included here, if there is consensus to revert we can revert.
Ymblanter (
talk)
05:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Note 1: If a merge does go ahead, the parent categories will need to be edited manually. Note 2: I only found this after merging Wikidata on some of the former set. I am willing to undo that work if there is consensus to revert. –
FayenaticLondon10:09, 11 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: I don't think we need to diffuse Bavand or Baduspanid dynasty by century. Instead I think we should repurpose it to be a nationality category.
Mason (
talk)
20:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, the category only contains two centuries... and we don't typically have categories at the intersection of occupation+century+family dynasty. And we don't have parent categories for several of the two way intersections, which makes it hard for me to see a case for why this narrow intersection is defining.
Mason (
talk)
20:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Lots of differing options; any compromise? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
16:14, 9 June 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:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia
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: no accurate reliable sources to verify such a classification, even the category descroption says "This category is not necessarily indicative of total loss of population, traditions, language or culture - each specific case may have particular individual contexts" that its unable to be clearerly define or even confirm that the launguage, culture, people, knowledge, country is actually extinct Wikipedia should not be categorising as such.
Gnangarra13:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Gnangarra The category description can be changed. If articles can use past tense words like "were" and "was" in reference to a tribe, I'm not seeing why the word "extinct" is out of question.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
18:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The thing is the issue of using the "
tribes" to decsribe Indigenous Countries, Cultures and People in Australia is inaccurate at best racist at worst. The term itself implies a lot of colonial misinformation and a distinct lack of understanding of Indigenous Cutlures in Australia. The use of past tense in words like were or was is also not an indicator of the Indigenous Countries, cultures, languages or peoples continuation. Very specifically by calling a Country extinct that frees the restriction of cultural protocols applying when working on with Indugenous Cultural materials. All countries are still in existance and are represented through Land Councils who manage everything from protocols on entering a country, to land rights. My reasoning is not playing words games its saying that the assumption of being extinct is a misnomer, even in languages and cultures where a recent Language conference in Queensland a professor was luaghed off stage when he stated that a language was extinct yet multiple people stood up and spoke the language. Without rocksolid gold plate sources published within the last 4 years the label of extinct is a false narrative derived from the recent history wars, and anti landrights campaigners. The other issue we have is the Australian Bureau of Statistics problematic collection of reliable data as it records just one language spoken not all In the context of the Census, 'Indigenous' or 'First Nations' results are defined by respondents who have answered that they are of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander background. There are over 230 Australian Indigenous Languages that the Census records which is less than the actual number of Indigenous languages.[9].
Gnangarra09:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, the use of "tribe" isn't my decision. It is used for many articles about Aboriginal Australian groups, so that seems to perhaps be a wider issue worth fixing. What is the continuation of a group like the
Toogee? What is the relevant land council?
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
07:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Tribe is not used in Australia, the poor use of terms in Wikipedia articles is one of the many barriers people working with Indigenous cultures struggle to address as shows Wikipedia in a bad light and not respectful of the culture. Basically ticks all the racists, Inforwar, challenge faced out on the street its up to us to lift our standards.
Gnangarra12:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle Aren't we talking about cultural extinction? Are you defining extinction as the literal death of all group members without any descendants? That seems like an unorthodox interpretation. The
Susquehannock people are extinct as a tribe, despite having some descendants in the
Seneca-Cayuga Nation. I don't see any contradiction here.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
18:41, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Frustratingly, the term "extinct" seems to be used somewhat inconsistently for both cultural extinction and the death of all group members (at least, from a google search). Is there a better term we could use to distinguish the two?
Category:Extinct ethnic groups is currently a subcategory under
Category:Human extinction which implies the latter, so perhaps it should be renamed and/or categorized differently if most of the members are groups that are only culturally extinct.
Psychastes (
talk)
19:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Seneca-Cayuga Nation is not an Indigenous Country in Australia, you are making comparisons that are not like for like.
Gnangarra09:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Genocide happens. Wishful thinking doesn't change that. "Extinct" is a harsh and ugly word to apply to people; it's natural to recoil in disgust at the idea. It may be very appealing to think that a group "didn't really go extinct" because some of their descendants blended into other groups. But if the group no longer exists as a distinct people with a distinct culture and language, the group really is extinct. Perhaps something like
Category:Former Indigenous peoples would be less noxious to the moral sense of the reader.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
04:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Mitch Ames That leads to two questions. Is there even one example in all of Australian history of an entire group being murdered without any known descendants? Are there any examples of groups who, through genocidal violence and assimilation, ceased to exist as distinct cultural groups? In both cases, there would have to be terminology to describe a group that once was and now is no longer. If not "extinct", there would still have to be some other description.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
10:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Actually, we need to be careful not to conflate "genocide" and "extinction".
Genocide does not require killing all of the people - it is defined as "intentional destruction ... in whole or in part".
Extinction requires that they all die, but doesn't require intent. There may be an overlap, but they are not the same thing, and neither implies the other.
Mitch Ames (
talk)
12:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Gnangarra Since my meaning apparently wasn't clear; there are genocidal acts of violence which lead to the literal or cultural destruction of peoples. What terminology would you use to refer to groups that have been physically annihilated in entirety through genocidal violence, disease, etc? What terminology would you use to refer to historical groups that may have living descendants but that are no longer culturally distinct due to genocidal violence, etc?
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
13:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
This is the issue the assumptions here are made based on the use of past tense language in the article, none of them have any reliable sources to support being included in this category. Given that the category itself should be deleted.
Gnangarra13:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Gnangarra There are a small number of articles. I do not have a strong opinion on the category, whether it should be renamed or deleted. But I reiterate my question; are there any historical Indigenous Australian groups that can be said to have once existed but that no longer do? What terminology should be used to refer to those historical groups?
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
15:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I dont have any reliable sources to answer that question, all I know is the articles in this category dont have reliable sources to even be included in the category. The whole purpose of raising it here is exatcly the category itself not some wider theoretical discussion on meanings or what ifs. I gather I can remove them all from this category for lack of sourcing that clearly supports the claim.
Gnangarra12:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Mitch Ames I'm not conflating genocide and extinction; I myself belong to a group whose history includes the former but not the latter. But I would question why the word extinction has to automatically mean everybody dies. I don't think a term like "cultural extinction" implies that.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
13:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
why the word extinction has to automatically mean everybody dies — Because when we are talking about people, that's what the word means "
Extinction is the termination ... by the death of its last member." Admittedly if we are talking about culture we could say that the group is extinct if nobody belongs to it. (If we all gave up editing and
WMF deleted Wikipedia,
Wikipedians could be said to be "extinct", but most us would still be alive.)
My main point
here is that we should probably not use the word "genocide" in this discussion, because it is neither necessary nor sufficient for "extinction", and is unnecessarily emotive. Yes genocide happened, but that does not determine whether a particular people is extinct or not.
Mitch Ames (
talk)
14:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The term "cultural extinction" is not helpful at all. Even if there is no tangible remainders of a culture you never know how much of customs and oral literature have been exchanged with and integrated in other cultures.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
15:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: having now been through every article not one defines the culture, people, or country as extinct, sadly Tindale works from 1974 is the primary source in every article and the most recent. The issue there their inclusion is based on whoever started the article using a generic type sentence like according to tindale they (some past tense word) from this area in Queensland. Ironically the only article with recent sourcing is about the current issue of domestic violance in Australia which makes no sense as its in this category.
Gnangarra12:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Presumably you could solve the problem by changing "The Xxxx were ..." to "The Xxxx are ..." (other verb tense changes as appropriate), and providing a reliable source to support the statement of their continued existence.
Mitch Ames (
talk)
14:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I could change the wording, but as all the articles are basically say Tindale described these countries on his map as being xxxx, their inclusion in the category isnt based on reliable sources or hints of a reference to Extinct. I suggest the category becomes extinct.
Gnangarra14:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment - for the record I had created this category in response to seeing a universal category being created for Extinct Indigenous groups, including Australian people, it seemed at the time better to identify the Australian component of an apparent claim. Note that by creating the category, I did not necessarily agree with either the category title or its assumptions, which is why I placed in bold comments as to the very specific event/issue raised in articles. I am intrigued by the discussion to date, as it seems either concentrating upon category trees and related subjects, or the issues of how to name groups of people who have been affected by reduction or severe loss of population. As the process in this particular part of wikipedia is relative to categories, there is a problem as to whether the actual subject is best ventured as to the veracity of terminology. It could be for everyones advantage to delete the original parent category, and find somewhere other than this CFD to explore the issues that are raised here. A collaborative approach to the wider wikipedian understanding of how to 'frame' the larger world wide issue of how and when ethnic groups have decimation of population is something well beyond the bounds of this cfd, and to simply arrive at a decision here on one small perspective does the larger project some significant disservice. Definitely not a 'free for all' RFC or similar, it needs a very specific guideline and process that works through the issues raised here, for the larger project. But then this is wikipedia, anything could happen.
JarrahTree02:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Lots of discussion, but no concrete proposals (which is not inherently a bad thing!). What should happen to the category? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
16:13, 9 June 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.
Oppose. The current name strikes an acceptable compromise between person-first or identity first language that neither of proposed renames addresses.
[10][11][12][13] Furthermore, the main article was moved to Autism, which doesn't solve the problem for people on the spectrum.
Mason (
talk)
00:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment, this is really a
WP:COMMONNAME type of discussion. I think "people on the autism spectrum" has become the common name by now but I would welcome if someone would come up with relevant statistics.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose:"on the autism spectrum" is terminology that has significant support amongst autistic people themselves
[14] and is at the very least terminology that few people hate.
[15] The preference for identity-first language is not as uniform as it's made out to be, and "on the autism spectrum" represents a fairly non-controversial compromise. Its only drawback is that it's not as popular. In academic research, I'm assuming it's because they tend to use the full name "autism spectrum disorder". Google Scholar search results of the past 10 years yields this: "people with autism" -> 29.300 results, "autistic people" -> 16.900 results, "people on the autism spectrum" -> 5.590 results, "people with autism spectrum disorder" -> 12.200 results, "people with ASD" -> 17.000 results. On Google Trends, "autistic people" has overtaken "people with autism", and "people on the autism spectrum" ranks far beneath both of them.
[16]
Based on popularity (academic and common) and the fact that there is support among autistic people, I'm not completely opposed to changing it to "autistic people", but said support is far from uniform so I'm hesitant about a hard line stance.
TheZoodles (
talk)
08:34, 31 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:Hospitals in Dharwad
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: These categories are one half of a twin city
Hubli-Dharwad. The cities have a single municipal corporation called Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corporation. (It's like the Twin-Cities Minnesota). Almost all of these categories were made by now blocked sock puppet.
Mason (
talk)
01:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting as this is will impact a lot of categories. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
16:00, 9 June 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:Former Jewish agricultural colonies of Podolia Governorate
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 for now, only one article in the category is not helpful for navigation. No objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
15:26, 9 June 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:United States religion navigational boxes
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.
Honestly, this whole thing video game language category is just a big mess. These categories are tied to three previous Cfd -
here,
here, and
here - where the nominator is behaving oddly. They nominated it but the began to oppose it the moment people voted delete, saying they would withdraw it but never did and instead created more categories. I don't know what is going on. These are the rest of the categories which weren't nominated.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
07:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose and close. But will Rename parent cat to "Single-language video games." These are diffing and categorize video games in a certain way.
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
19:24, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Per nom and others. To QuantumFoam, please familiarize yourself with category policy or it may lead to a block.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
04:02, 20 June 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.
Category:Former atheist critics of atheism
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: Upmerge this narrow intersection. Also, it's unclear from the name if this is supposed to be former critics of atheism or former atheists.
Mason (
talk)
03:21, 9 June 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.
Category:Video games by language
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: The reason why I'm deleting these categories are only for video games supported in a single language, and none of these categories are fully-populated either. More importantly many titles only available in a single language can alternatively be found in
Category:Region-exclusive video gamesQuantumFoam66 (
talk)
01:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment There are several multiregional languages, such as English, French (France, Canada, French Africa, French Polynesia, French Caribbean), Portuguese (Brazil, Portugal, Macao), Spanish (Spain, Latin America, Philippines), Russian (North Asia, Central Asia, Europe), Arabic (North Africa, West Asia, East Africa, Central Asia, Islamic World), Hebrew (Jewish World) --
65.92.244.143 (
talk)
06:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment, this is a container category. Its fate is conditional on what happens with the subcategories, which have also been nominated on this page.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
19:35, 3 June 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:English-language-only video games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: I am deleting this category along with other Video games by language categories, (expect Chinese-language-only video games, which will merge with China-exclusive video games). Reason: Many English-only titles are otherwise located in Category:North-America-exclusive video games
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
01:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Australia is not a multilingual region, indigenously developed games would be in English, same with New Zealand. Both are not in North America. Elon Musk's game Blastar was developed in South Africa in English only. So English isn't a language that is restricted to North America. Many games for the Acorn or the BBC were developed only in English and were mostly released in Britain and Australia --
65.92.244.143 (
talk)
06:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I will tag the category. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
18:12, 8 June 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:Chinese-language-only video games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Some of these titles may be available be it digitally or physically outside of China. But I don't follow that logic. Merge.
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
01:55, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong delete, strong oppose merger You can’t just say “I don’t follow that logic, must be deleted” and expect it to work. But yes delete.
48JCLTALK19:28, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment This merger makes no sense. Taiwan exists. There have been vidoegames that were made for Taiwan or Hong Kong (pre-1997) that were only in Chinese. If this is properly populated, it should not contain just PRC-exclusive games. --
65.92.244.237 (
talk)
06:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep: I suppose I will withdraw my will the delete this category because of that logic. While Japanese, English, get deleted for some other reasons.
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
00:09, 30 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:Billionaires of African 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.
Keep. The intersection isn't trivial there's a long academic interest in economic inequality in the African American community. Billionaires are a good indicator of progress in that regard because it indicates that African Americans have made progress and can break into the elite. If not kept, the categories should be merged, not deleted.
Mason (
talk)
22:09, 19 June 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.
We can clearly discern intent, and it absolutely matters. Intentionally cited retractions have been reviewed by humans as appropriate to cite for the context, e.g.
[18]. Articles with unintentionally cited retracted papers need review and very likely an update of the content based on a retracted paper, e.g.
[19]. Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}03:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
+1 that it absolutely matters. Citing
doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)11096-0 (the infamous
Lancet MMR autism fraud paper) is fine if you are citing it as a primary source (with the usual caveats about citing primary sources), but citing it as a legitimate piece of research absolutely needs to be checked. This is a tracking category; intent is determined by |intentional= parameter. HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
04:52, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - as the botop here that's inconveniently finding stuff to go into this category, it is absolutely important to distinguish which categories have been tagged and which have been checked. I'm not going to guess if the tag I've just applied is intentional or now. Happy with the renaming proposal as long as it's kept consistant with all 3 of the template types, this won't affect the bot as long as it's done in the template correctly.
Mdann52 (
talk)
13:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Mdann52: you wrote "Happy with the renaming proposal" which I think overrides your first word "Keep" – did you just mean "Keep them separate", rather than "Keep current names"? –
FayenaticLondon07:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)wreply
@
Fayenatic london: thanks for checking. Essentially, if this is just nominating one category, we should keep this as is. If we are changing the naming convention of all 3 categories, then I'm happy to support that.
Mdann52 (
talk)
10:10, 23 June 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:Teen Titans Go! (TV series) images
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 female mechanics
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 see any reason to split this by gender. There's only 10 articles in it, so there's no reason based on size. I don't really think being a female really matters with me mechanics. JDDJS (
talk to me •
see what I've done)16:37, 8 June 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:Nepali language movement activists
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on renaming? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
16:03, 8 June 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.
Category:Historical geography of Fars
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: This distinction for people who attended the extension school seems like an arbitrary distinction and is likely not defining for any of the two members in the category
Mason (
talk)
01:24, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. The UCLA Extension is one of the constituent colleges in the UCLA Systems, and one of the oldest at UCLA (it is a separate accredited college and not a designation for off campus students). Several other universities have extension colleges as can be seen
here. These colleges, designed for working people, are becoming more popular, particularly post COVID. There are many links to the main article for people, which likely means the cat can be populated well beyond the 10 already in it (I added a few since the start of this CFD). Also, this cat provides an opportunity for subcategorization of an overpopulated upper level cat. Semper Fi!
FieldMarine (
talk)
02:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge per nom. While you are right that there are other extension schools, this is the only one with a category and there doesn't seem to be a big difference between normal alumni and extension school alumni.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
20:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I would still say merge per my second reasoning. I don't think the Harvard Extension School teaches anything special anymore than UCLA Extension does. @
Smasongarrison, I think you should nominate this category as well, in fact (and any other similar one).
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
23:14, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I've added to nom per @
Omnis Scientia, pinging @
FieldMarine. No one is saying that the extension school isn't notable, but that the distinction isn't defining for alumns. For example, Folks aren't introduced as UCLA Extension alumn, but they are as UCLA law school alumn.
Mason (
talk)
23:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Omnis Scientia: Like at UCLA, the Harvard Extension School is one of the oldest colleges at Harvard University and it is distinct, with its own graduation exercises. With respect to, "Folks aren’t introduced as…", a Google search of, "Graduated from Harvard Extension School" shows people are frequently "introduced" with that distinction. Semper Fi!
FieldMarine (
talk)
11:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, at least Harvard's. HES has separate degrees (ALB, ALM which aren't earned at other schools at Harvard), commencement ceremony, etc. for the extension school like the rest of the schools. There are unique classes at HES, that aren't offered at other schools. If UCLA, LaSalle, and any others are more like Harvard, keep them separate as well.
Patken4 (
talk)
13:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: This is an interesting case. A
WP:OTHERCATSEXIST argument was resolved by adding the other categories to the nomination, which seems to have produced a small
WP:TRAINWRECK. I am going to relist (though I was about to close this as no consensus without prejudice against seperate but simultaneous nominations); comments are welcome, though I suspect that this is heading to a no consensus with
no prejudice against speedy renomination result. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
04:42, 8 June 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:Protesters
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:Convicted participants in the Canada convoy protest
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: Dual merge for now. There's only one person in here, which isn't helpful for navigation.
Mason (
talk)
04:33, 8 June 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:Illeists
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, the characteristic is defining enough to be covered by and discussed in reliable sources (often a multitude of reliable sources, such as for
Zlatan Ibrahimović and
Donald Trump). Besides, there is a body of scientific research on the various contexts and psychological meaning of illeism (see section "In everyday speech" in article
Illeism). --
HPfan4 (
talk)
23:30, 31 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.
Works by year
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.
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:Ming dynasty overseer of rituals
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 characteristic appears to be a highly important ministerial post, overseeing the
Court of Imperial Sacrifices under the
Ministry of Rites. The linked
zh:Category:明朝太常寺卿 (Category: Ming Dynasty Taichang Temple Ministers) and its 3 subcats hold over 200 biographies. However, if
Huang Zicheng is the only one with an English wiki article, the category is not currently useful for navigation, so it can be deleted for now. Can anyone put together a PetScan to check if any more of the Chinese wiki articles have an English counterpart? –
FayenaticLondon17:51, 20 June 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:Crossover characters in television
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 Based on the description, it is likely to be
WP:OCTRIVIA: This category is for characters in television who have made crossover appearances within other shows that are not their own. One appearance of a character does not make a defining trait. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
02:19, 9 June 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.
East Bengal
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, we had discussions about the category
Category:East Bengal. You proposed to merge it into
Category:East Pakistan (see
here) saying they were actually same thing. The consensus was to merge the category. That's why these establishment categories are East Pakistan, not East Bengal. Now saying we have to rename them because it was East Bengal is contradictory because in 2022 you proposed the opposite showing different reason. If you want to rename establishment categories then I propose you to discuss to bring back East Bengal category first.
Mehedi Abedin (
talk)
10:01, 8 June 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.
Comment The attacks seem to be connected to Islamist extremist opposition polio vaccination in Pakistan, although this is not explicitly stated in either of those articles. Maybe the attack articles should be linked to from the main article? Other than that, not very useful for navigation, so I also lean delete.
NLeeuw (
talk)
05:59, 8 June 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.
Category:Manx centenarians
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Delete; only one article which is actually about a woman born on the Isle of Mann to an American citizen and who moved to America soon after.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
23:56, 7 June 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:Guernsey centenarians
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:Philadelphian cricket tours of England
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: Narrow category, do we really need a category for only tours from a single city in the united states?
Mason (
talk)
23:53, 7 June 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:Former Christian creationists
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 no categories for specific song titles nor should there be. Something like this could lead to a glut of overcategorization of other titles that could include a film named after the song, or any album that contains a cover version. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me21:46, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Greetings Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars
I see. Also, I know it does not have to do with this, but why does “Gangnam Style” article has its eponymous category although it’s a single?
"The purpose of categories is navigation between subjects connected by common defining traits"
@
QuietHere Just curious my friend, and I'm not trying to be nosy or sound condescending, but what do you mean by common defining traits? I'm learning. Thanks!
@
Inajd0101 per
CATDEF, "A defining characteristic is one that
reliable sourcescommonly and consistently refer to in describing the topic, such as the nationality of a person or the geographic location of a place. For example, Italian and artist are defining characteristics of
Caravaggio, and so of the article on him, because virtually all reliable sources on the topic mention them."
DEFINING also has more details.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
04:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
QuietHere Fair enough. I understand that by then. Thanks! And just to let you know, AGAIN, I do my best to learn about Wikipedia although not all of them because it's not my lifestyle (although it might not be an excuse to you). And any of my works at Wikipedia is usually based on
Frankie Lymon and his songs, such as "
I'm Not a Juvenile Delinquent" and any articles related to him which I am passionate of learning about it. And @
QuietHere, excuse me for adding categories without asking. I was so eager to see how it works, but I misinterpreted the purpose of categories. I should stick to editing most of my part on Wikipedia. And I wouldn't mind if you don't care about my passion regarding Frankie Lymon and the Teenagers and their songs.
@
Inajd0101 to be clear, nobody is blaming you for this. You made a simple mistake and it's being taken care of. I think I can speak on behalf of any editor when I say I'm glad that you're willing to learn, even if there are bumps in the road. Heck, any other editor could tell you about plenty of bumps in the road they dealt with. I know I certainly had my fair share (some more recent than I'd like to admit).
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
04:39, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh and plus, I wouldn't mind if you wouldn't care about Frankie Lymon and the Teenagers and their songs, especially of how I'm passionate about them. You and @
Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars are just probably paid to do the job and nothing else. Anyways, thanks!
All right, fair enough. Not paid. I would assume the majority of people here are passionate about Wikipedia, or journalism, and nothing else, especially when it has to do with me being passionate about Frankie Lymon and his songs, especially “I’m Not a Juvenile Delinquent,” et cetera. But thanks!
Delete per nomination: I misunderstood the purpose of categories. And now I know why QuietHere explained to me earlier. Also, excuse me for the inconvenience I made. Inajd
Inajd0101 (
talk)
22:14, 7 June 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:Why Do Fools Fall in Love (film)
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.
Rename per nomination: I misunderstood the purpose of categories. And now I know why QuietHere explained to me earlier. Also, excuse me for the inconvenience I made. I did my best although not much of a Wikipedia (which I use it for the research I am willing to make regarding Frankie Lymon and The Teenagers). Inajd
Inajd0101 (
talk)
22:16, 7 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: merge, they are almost all single-article categories, which is not helpful for navigation. Besides there are a number of establishments articles in this tree which do not belong directly in a year category, and they are already in an Establishments in Thailand category. So part of the nomination is merging, another part (the establishments bit) is deletion.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
16:10, 7 June 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:Rugrats and All Grown Up! books
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:American people 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.
Category:1996 Windows-only freeware games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Narrow intersection of year and type of software and obvious overcategorization. Should be merged back to where it formerly was.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
05:40, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
This is not overcategorization - every yeas had around 30 games - we will have toooo many items in one page. I did not add all games to all years yet.
Vitaly Zdanevich (
talk)
11:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Hundreds of items is still a normal amount for a category - some have thousands of items. Wikipedia won't crumble under the weight of a few hundred items being in a category. But if these year categorizations are kept, they should be by decade per
WP:OCYEAR. Things should only be sorted by exact year when absolutely necessary.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
18:38, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge Only one of the three possible two-way intersections between "[released in] 2005", "Windows-only", and "
freeware" actually exists. There are only 29 articles in the tree. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
18:37, 7 June 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:Alpha male chimpanzees
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:Music memes
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: Was
previously deleted in 2022 for being non-defining to most entries, and it appears this is the case again now. In that prior discussion, Bibliomaniac15 suggested that this information was better presented in lists rather than a category, and I'm inclined to agree.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
02:58, 7 June 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:Cultural policy by country
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: Upmerge for now. There's only one country in this category. At most there's two if you want to argue that East Germany isn't nested within Germany.
Mason (
talk)
02:10, 7 June 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.
Delete: Neither entry makes mention of
relational art as a subject, and the relational art article doesn't mention either entry nor their targets, leaving it entirely unclear why they are being included in the first place.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
08:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Now contains 2 articles and 3 redirects. I have also added the main article,
Relational art. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
00:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
New additions have the same issue of not mentioning the subject as the existing ones. Perhaps that just a matter of language and these articles all just need a rewrite to clarify their relevance, or maybe even new sources that do so, but as is there's no room for inclusion. Potential OR like Marcocapelle said. My vote remains the same.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
22:19, 7 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: This category is fundamentally subjective and vaguely-defined. It gives me the impression of promoting a particular obscure philosophy. I'm pretty familiar with environmentalism as a movement and I've never heard of "bright green environmentalism" except through this category.
Clayoquot (
talk |
contribs)
23:04, 25 June 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.
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:Football teams in Africa
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: Doesn't follow the pattern in the category tree of
Category:Association football teams (all articles previously categorized here were association football teams, not other football). And no other categories by continent in this category tree. P 1 9 9✉18:38, 25 June 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:National football teams in Africa
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:Argentine commanders in the Falklands War
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
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:Numismatic history of Ecuador
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:Blind cricket administration
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:Cities in Sevastopol
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.
That's my understanding too. I think my "delete all four" opinion should have mentioned Kacha as well as Inkerman. Sorry about that.
PearlyGigs (
talk)
05:16, 3 July 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:Irish provincial cricket unions
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:Lebanese Protestant hymnwriters
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:New Zealand men by occupation and 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.
Comment. I agree with upmerging "for now" given the obvious duplication here, but I think the whole question of men by occupation versus women by occupation will require some serious discussion. Outside of things like sport, men and women work together.
PearlyGigs (
talk)
22:38, 27 June 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:Male wartime nurses
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: Upmerge for now. This category has only one page in it, who is already in a more specific Wartime nurses category
Mason (
talk)
01:57, 25 June 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.
June 24
Category:Cabinets of Canadian provinces and territories navigational boxes
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:John Marshall Law School (Chicago) faculty
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 children by occupation
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: Nominating this again, this time for merge. Right now it is a
WP:NARROWCAT with only two subcategories. It might need to be dual merged, but either way it is clearly unnecessary with so few subcategories
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
13:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
There is no need to be rude and hostile, and most of the subcategories were removed for being blatantly incorrect so it's a different situation than last time.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
20:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge, redundant category layers with only two subcategories. I am discounting the two subcategories that were purged after the previous discussion as they do not belong here.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
23:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge as proposed. I can't see any real scope for expansion beyond, say, Victorian children who were forced to work in mines or as chimney sweeps. Even so, I doubt if there would ever be enough subjects in each "occupation" to create anything more than a small category.
PearlyGigs (
talk)
08:25, 26 June 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:Kenyon Owls
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:Mansas of Mali
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Alt rename or as per nom? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk17:07, 24 June 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.
Template:CartoonNetwork-stub
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: Template no longer needed. After the discussion at
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 1#Category:Cartoon Network stubs resulted in its dedicated category being deleted as underpopulated, the uses of this template were purged for whether they needed to be filed directly in
Category:Animation stubs or not, and it turned out that every article with this on it either didn't belong in that category at all or was simply redundant to the page already being in the
Category:Animated television series stubs subcategory, meaning it's now been completely stripped from articlespace and is now in use only on a single ten-year-old user sandbox page that's still completely unreferenced for the purposes of becoming salvageable as an article. Essentially, without a dedicated category this is just redundant to other templates, because any possible use of it would now just result in duplicate categorization of the page in both
Category:Animation stubs and one of its subcategories at the same time.
Bearcat (
talk)
13:21, 24 June 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:Northwest Community College Conference football standings templates
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:Defunct off-price department stores of the United 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.
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:History of Great Britain
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:Option A: remove header and a remove a number of parent categories. Option B: nominate subcategories for merger. In any case, the current content of the category is completely out of sync with how the category creator(s) intended.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle, Ah I see that now. Well I would go with Option B, removing any subcategories which aren't related to the period between 1707 and 1801. And also the removal of any article that does not fall between 1707 and 1801. We should try to bring it back into sync with the original purpose it was created for.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
09:06, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Just Delete & re-home articles as necessary. The period of the
Kingdom of Great Britain - from 1707 to 1800, is not really used by historians or the public. If kept it should be more clearly named to avoid confusion with the (main) geographical meaning of
Great Britain, which has clearly been taken by some adders as the intended meaning. In fact such a category might make more sense, at the top of trees with UK, English, Scottish & Welsh sub-cats.
Johnbod (
talk)
01:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him)
02:58, 3 June 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.
Category:Suicides by year
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.
Basically that its
WP:OVERCAT. If a person dies by suicide, they should be categorized in the year they died and the way they died and there is no need for a seperate "by year" category for a specific way of dying. I've only nominated a decade for now to see how this Cfd goes. Then, if it goes through, I will nominate the rest.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
20:55, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Lean oppose, there are a lot of suicides, so having them diffused by year is pretty helpful. Also either way, I think we should keep suicides in YEAR to be non-diffusing, so that everyone, regardless of cause of death can be found in the death by year category.
Mason (
talk)
22:34, 24 June 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.
Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as having been created by blocked or banned users
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: Based on the outcome of
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Enforcing ECR for article creatorsWP:CSD#G5 is no longer restricted to pages created by blocked or banned users but now also applies to pages created in violation of general sanctions (regardless of any attribute of the editor, to the faith in which they created the page, or even if they knew such sanctions existed, an action I continue to think is harmful to the project but alas the consensus was not with me) and so the category name needs to be updated and this unwieldy new title is the shortest one I can craft that is accurate. Splitting the category would be sensible but also contrary to the RfC outcome which explicitly rejected creating a new criterion, so I'm not proposing that. Speedy deletion categories are usually populated by templates, but as there are multiple of them and the templates do not need to be renamed I guess CfD is the appropriate venue, but feel free to move to this to TfD if I'm wrong on that. I'm not sure if I need to individually notify editors who participated in the RFC, but I will leave a message on the RFC talk page.
Thryduulf (
talk)
17:15, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Actually, since both of these categories already exist (I assumed the second one didn't when I wrote my !vote), there is nothing to do here unless nom wants to merge the two categories under the new name.
Nickps (
talk)
20:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That all the relevant templates put articles into the same category was the (it turns out incorrect) impression I got from the wording on the CSD page at the time which I didn't think to check. I'm OK with either a one or two category setup as long as the title of all the categories unambiguously match their scope. However, I oppose speedily closing this discussion as
Pppery has made a good-faith suggestion for an alternative renaming. I weakly oppose that suggestion for the same reasons as you (Nickps) but I see no reason to close the discussion while it remains on the table.
Thryduulf (
talk)
01:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Feel free to close this as withdrawn - my rename suggestion was just an attempt to produce a less clunky version of your rename under the same incorrect assumptions as you.
* Pppery *it has begun...01:25, 24 June 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:Crater Lake
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: Ambiguity problem. This category is for one specific lake-slash-national-park in the United States whose name is
Crater Lake, but I just had to clean it up for the misfiling of several generic
crater lakes in Uganda. As always, the mere presence of a usage note on the category itself is not necessarily sufficient to control the problem, as people frequently file things in categories that sound right and then walk away without checking the category to see if they're doing it wrong -- so the category itself should be named as precisely as possible to quash any ambiguity.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:30, 23 June 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:Films set in Velankanni
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: "Films set in [Place]" category for a small town, without enough films filed in it to need a dedicated category. As always, every town that exists does not automatically get one of these the moment a couple of films have been set there -- it would be fine if there were five or ten films to file here, but if there are less than five then the state level is sufficient.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:19, 23 June 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:Albert Henry Krehbiel
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Eponymous category for a person, without the volume of spinoff content needed to justify an eponymous category. Other than the eponymous biography itself, the only other things filed here are an alternate version of his name that elides the middle "Henry", and the title of a book about him, both of which are just redirects to the eponymous biography rather than separate articles. I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody can actually find evidence that there are enough other related articles that could be filed here, but we do not need a category just to hold three different ways of getting to the same place.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:15, 23 June 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:Television series about microbes
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: "[Form of media] about X" category with only one thing in it and little prospect of expansion since microbes are not a common subject of television series — and the television series here was a cartoon, so its being "about" microbes falls short of being a defining characteristic. As always, we do not automatically need an "about" category for every single possible thing that one television series has been "about" -- this would need to be common enough of a subject for television series to have at least five entries in it before it was justifiable.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:09, 23 June 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:Luarsab Sharashidze
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Eponymous category for a person, with no content in it besides the eponym himself. I'm not knowledgeable enough about the subject to know whether there are other things that could be filed here to populate it, so I'm not prepared to just speedy-delete it as a categorization error myself without discussion and am willing to withdraw this if enough other content can be found, but people do not automatically get categories at their own names just to hold their own main biographies.
Bearcat (
talk)
15:59, 23 June 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:Digital-only stations on the AM band
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: Wikipedia does not categorize radio stations for the matter of whether they're on the AM or FM bands, so we don't need to intersect digital-only status with a criterion that we don't otherwise categorize for.
Bearcat (
talk)
15:50, 23 June 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:Former Philippine Basketball League teams
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 female entertainers
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
I'm not sure. I suppose I'll change my !vote to Weak keep as I don't feel too strongly about it. No big deal if the proposal is accepted.
NLeeuw (
talk)
14:17, 2 July 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.
I would suggest to take out “I’m Not a Juvenile Delinquent” and “You Can’t Catch Me,” then just leave that category as it is. However, I guess deletion might be a solution for Wikipedia I guess. So fair enough. Inajd
Inajd0101 (
talk)
21:58, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
KeepWP:SMALLCAT has been deprecated, so opportunity for future growth is no longer an accepted argument. The two songs were written for the movie, so they appear to be intrinsically related.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
22:19, 7 June 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:Doki Doki Literature Club! characters
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 as creator. Admittedly entirely forgot about the parent category when creating the category, so I agree with the redundancy issue. Though I agree, I still would have appreciated it if we could have finished discussing this before nominating it for deletion.
Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (
talk)
14:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Small cat might not apply, but neither does saying that we should keep a category just because it's "established".
Mason (
talk)
23:54, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That is not what I am saying. I am saying that the practice of grouping characters by game is a well-established one. This falls under that scheme and there is no reason to remove it.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
04:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
It's not redundant when it's a valid subcategory. Categories don't have to have things directly in them to count as a full category. Having a fully populated subcategory still counts.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
11:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
NOTE: If we are going to keep this, I would support keeping both and oppose a merge. I think this category is redundant, but I think it makes sense to have the other category even if this one exists.
QuicoleJR (
talk)
16:52, 15 June 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:British women Marxists
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:no consensus. I don't see affirmative consensus to populate, but I also don't see consensus that this should not be populated. However, if a category is to exist, you don't need to get consensus to populate the category with pages that belong in it. Therefore, I see this result as implicitly endorsing the category being populated, and will ping
Nederlandse Leeuw in case they wish to do so. HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
00:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need to diffuse this category by nationality? Frankly, I have my doubts that the intersection of gender and Marxism is defining.
Mason (
talk)
00:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, but Populate with other women from
Category:British Marxists. If you have my doubts that the intersection of gender and Marxism is defining, why do you propose to take nationality out of the equation? If anything, you should propose to upmerge to
Category:British Marxists instead. Anyway, quick scan suggests the following members to diffuse from parent
Category:British Marxists:
More than enough to populate this category. I might add that a lot of subcategories in this tree do not feature a single woman. Women are underrepresented as part of biographies on British Marxists, and I don't think upmerging this category is going to help address that gender gap at all.
NLeeuw (
talk)
18:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on populating? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
00:54, 15 June 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:no consensus. The nominator and some other participants felt that the categories in question were overly specific; a few others claimed that the centuries were informative for the type of articles the categories contain. There was no agreement on whether the categories contained too few articles to be of navigational utility. Neither the nomination nor the alternative proposal reached a consensus, so at the status quo we stay.
(non-admin closure)—
TechnoSquirrel69 (
sigh)
23:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: 3x merge there are at most 6 people in this poet tree, without a real need to diffuse by century. I made a potential merge target category because
Category:Wallachian poets didn't exist as a category.
Mason (
talk)
21:16, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: I'm guessing I should create an indefinite number of articles for the Wallachian poets that are currently missing, because there being currently 6 articles is not enough (unlike the three articles in
Category:Emperors of Thessalonica and the four articles in
Category:Aqua (band) members, both of which are just right). I mean, what else are we to do with our time on wikipedia than to satisfy this type of requests?
Dahn (
talk)
21:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
It is significantly less of a chore to create small intersectional and valid categories than huge category trees, which can be created at any ulterior time for reuniting the smaller categories and any articles that remain loose. I would rather create "18th-century Wallachian poets" instead of "Wallachian poets" (or rather "Category:Poets from the Principality of Wallachia" -- the two nomenclatures currently compete), if the latter option has me tagging all the articles on Wallachian poets, then sorting them by retagging the same articles with the respective narrower category! It reduces my workload and it is sheer common sense. Note how, in the "military personnel" tree, you had them all fitted nicely for you to just unify the categories; but of course you didn't realize that a lot of articles on Wallachian soldiers from other centuries (say: the 15th) are now not in the category you created, and of course you didn't go searching for such examples to include in the larger category you created (you also didn't realize that the category level you created should now include other trans-chronological articles, such as
Category:Spatharii of Wallachia, all of whom were a sort of military personnel). You see: that would be the sort of work required for the part of the category tree that I hadn't bothered created, and the sort of workload you're now externalizing for others. (My contributions focus mainly on content creation, with all the intricate research this requires. I find category creation necessary, but boring -- implying that I should spend my time here on creating potentially immense categories, or hunting down articles to fill out the immense categories that others create, is a bit presumptuous. Just like other requests of that nature, for instance that I should fill out more redlinks to demonstrate to my colleagues here that a category is sufficiently valid -- that "18th-century Wallachian poets" is at least as valid a category as "Aqua members".)
Dahn (
talk)
02:25, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Also:
Category:Moldavian and Wallachian poets is rather pointless. I had created
Category:Moldavian and Wallachian chroniclers back when we didn't have a category tree for both former countries, and to address the fact that chroniclers, a sort of occupation that is entirely in the past (for a genre that ended in the early 19th-century), had a trans-border shared tradition of history-writing (and a limited number of articles to fit in there). While this shared tradition can also be argued for poets: if we already have poets in the Wallachian category, what is the exact point of creating a category (other than the already existing larger Romanian one) for "Wallachian and Moldavian poets"?
Dahn (
talk)
02:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
And I have to say I do not understand the logic whereby we "only" have a category for "foo fooians" if it is demonstrated that there are "enough" (a never-defined "enough") articles to populate it. Sure it would be absurd to have a category for just two articles (though, again, three is apparently enough
in other cases). But a category exists not just to neatly group the articles in a shelf; it exists to facilitate navigation, to quickly allow our readers, through this unique instrument offered by our platform, to see all the connections between a set of articles. The evidently absurd example you provide with
Category:20th-century Aqua (band) members (I do understand
the rhetorical point, but still) shows that you simply do not regard this as an important feature, that you do not conceive of any practical situation in which a reader may need a quick navigational tool for seeing what and how many were the Wallachian poets in the 18th century (including all the utterly mediocre ones that would not be mentioned in a properly developed
Literature of Romania), and that you do not see it fit to ask why me as an editor would conceive of a tool to assist such a reader. I find that a bit arresting.
Dahn (
talk)
02:56, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak support 6 is not a lot for a category, but although there is no consensus on the mininum amount of items per category at any given time,
WP:MFN (the work-in-progress guideline) recommends to merge for now if a category has fewer than 5 items. I don't feel too strongly about the need to merge these categories, but it's fine with me to do so.
NLeeuw (
talk)
18:07, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Merge target? (see Marcocapelle's alt proposal) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk12:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose century categories are useful and standard for poets, and the rationale invoked is vague — there is no clear consensus about how small is too small. —
BiruitorulTalk18:50, 15 June 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:Women who experienced pregnancy loss
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. Overall I find the delete !votes are more convincing. This is not going to be defining for the majority of articles that it fits, so this content is better suited for a list (if at all).
(non-admin closure)Qwerfjkltalk19:14, 10 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Delete; the idea for this category clearly came from a good faith place but I don't see how helpful it is. Losing a pregnancy is a lot more common than people think, and the further back you go in history the more common it was. Its not a defining characteristic of any of these women even though it was likely a defining moment (or moments) in their lives.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
20:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. and agree with the assessment that its creation was in good faith. There might be a handful, like Catherine of Aragon, where you could make a case that it was defining, but it's a stretch. (And if anything henry the 8th's experience with pregnancy loss would probably be more defining...)
Mason (
talk)
21:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Procedural oppose I do not see any arguments being advanced why the
earlier discussion (less than a year ago) should be disregarded, or how all the opposing arguments presented then should be ignored, or why those arguments have somehow been undermined or overturned. If you're just here to redo a discussion without bringing new policy and guideline-based reasons to do so, that is not helpful for the process.
NLeeuw (
talk)
18:01, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Nederlandse Leeuw, I wasn't aware of the previous discussion until Marco added a link to this. But I can give you a more detailed reasoning. You can say this category can also come under
WP:TRIVIALCAT since, as painful it is, it is trivial that a famous woman lost a pregnancy. It may even be
WP:SUBJECTIVECAT since even an abortion can be considered pregnancy loss to some and not to others and also, to some people, giving birth to a child who died soon after birth can be too.
What does
WP:TRIVIALCAT say? In general, if something could be easily left out of a biography, it is likely that it is a trivial characteristic. I think that depends. I know women to whom a miscarriage was traumatising and life-changing, but I also know women to whom a miscarriage was kind of okay since the pregnancy was unplanned anyway. Furthermore, I know women who consciously opted to abort their pregnancy when the circumstances were not right to complete the pregnancy, and to some of them, it wasn't a big deal, while to others it was (even though they didn't regret it, as it was the best choice in the situation). Nevertheless, pretty much all these women only disclosed their experiences to me in a private setting, with a clear understanding that I should keep it a secret from others; they wish to control which people are allowed to know it, as they consider it a private and sensitive matter, even if in the end it wasn't a big deal to some of them. I think this wish should be respected.
For our purposes here, I think this would call for a case-by-case assessment of what impact the person in question says in
WP:RS that the pregnancy loss has had on their life. We shouldn't be labelling people to whom it wasn't that important, as this could needlessly stigmatise them. Especially in
WP:BLPs, as pointed out in the previous discussion, we should be very careful not to categorise such people unless they come forward with their stories and explain it was very important in their lives.
I agree with you that the current catdesc is vague about whether it includes intentional abortions. The linked article
pregnancy loss suggests it includes both intentional and unintentional cases. If that is the objection, though, the logical solution would be a split of the category rather than a deletion, wouldn't you agree?
I agree that non-binary people can get pregnant and experience pregnancy loss as well. If that is the objection, though, the logical solution would be a renaming of the category rather than a deletion, wouldn't you agree?
@
Nederlandse Leeuw, respectfully I wouldn't agree with any split or rename because I also think this category is
WP:NONDEF in addition to being trivial and subjective. If its worth adding, the information about pregnancy loss should be added - which is to say written into - to the article of the person. Indeed, in most cases it matters, it is gone into detail.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
11:35, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Nederlandse Leeuw, where did I suggest I no longer support deletion? I very much do. I merely stated that if a person has lost a pregnancy and it is important to their lives, that information should be incorportated into their article.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
12:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ah sorry, then I misunderstood what you said. I guess I can understand that argument. I'll wait to see what others have to say for now. Thanks for your clarifications so far.
NLeeuw (
talk)
12:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, the above, and last time. Simply not defining, plus except for a few high profile women, we usually just don't know about this aspect of lives. To judge by the category as it is, this virtually only seems to happen to European royalty and American actresses.
Johnbod (
talk)
15:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The current contents might, of course, not be representative of humanity at all. But it is a good question who should and shouldn't be in here, if we are to have this category.
NLeeuw (
talk)
15:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The question is, and would be, who we have RS information for. That will only be a very small minority of our population of 397,000 women with biographies, reinforcing how non-defining it is.
Johnbod (
talk)
15:56, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure I follow why a very small number of biographies falling into the category reinforces the argument that it is non-defining? That's true for many non-controversial categories.
Chocmilk03 (
talk)
04:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Because this is extremely common, and if it was defining we would have far more entries, even given the frequent lack of information.
Johnbod (
talk)
12:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Chocmilk03,
WP:DEFINING means characteristics that person is notable for. I think you would agree that, while these women may have lost a pregnancy, they aren't defined by them nor are their lives characterised by losing pregnancies. The only serious exception is royalty for obvious reasons.
@
Chocmilk03, well you can make that argument but, at the same time, not everything is categorized. Not every medical condition is categorized, not every disability. Its why "People with infertility issues" (or something similar) is not categorized and why I feel this category should not be either. I've given my reasons for why above, not least of which is that losing pregnancy is something very common and, going back further, was a lot more common.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
21:27, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I would also not go with the old Cfd's arguments. It really turned into a huge row which was not about debating whether the category was
WP:OVERCAT or not (I think it is in many ways) but rather about people saying "what about this" and so on. I hope this Cfd will be more on actual policy than the previous one.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
21:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Omnis Scientia: My views are based on my own reading of the policies including
WP:CATDEF,
WP:TRIVIALCAT,
WP:COPDEF etc, not the previous CFD arguments. In my view, this category does meet the criteria of defining for some people (even though it is unlikely to be the sole reason for notability). "A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to in describing the topic"; pregnancy loss meets this criteria for some people.
I wasn't arguing that "other stuff exists"; those categories were simply examples to illustrate my point, in the same way you've used "People with infertility issues" as an example of why you feel this category should not exist.
I've read your arguments (and those of others above) and respectfully disagree, hence my vote for 'keep'. I don't seek to persuade you of the correctness of my views, and understand you take a different view.
Chocmilk03 (
talk)
22:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. I've read through the arguments in the previous discussion and what else has been written here. Fundamentally, something is defining if it's often (or could reasonably be) mentioned in the lead. For 99% of these pages, its not defining. I still think that the category should be deleted as it isn't defining. For the very few who it could be defining, they can be added to a list. At the very very very least, this category needs to be purged.
Mason (
talk)
22:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
OK, thanks for that clarification. Note to closer: Mason already !voted Support per nom above, so the word deleted in this comment shouldn't be counted.
NLeeuw (
talk)
13:16, 16 June 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:Hinglaj Mata
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:Battles of the American Revolutionary War by state
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.
do not merge this is simply another step in the path of destroying useful category information at the US state level. US state boundaries are in no way akin to the boundary problems found in some European countries, which was misused used as a precedent by this editor to destroy the state categorization of the Battles of the War of 1812. State boundaries have not generally changed since their formation, unlike the shifting boundaries of European geographic entities.
Hmains (
talk)
20:02, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I would respectfully request that you
WP:assume good faith, and base your opposition to the proposal on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, rather than a personal POV of how things supposedly were in the past in North America compared to Europe so that
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN conveniently does not apply to categories you created. I am simply applying our polices and guidelines, confirmed by consensus established in precedents, and I would urge you to do the same. Have a good day.
NLeeuw (
talk)
22:01, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
There is nothing about 'the past' involving the boundaries of the federal states of the United States. Unlike Europe of the past, the boundaries of these states are generally the same as when they were created over of last 200+ years. That means a battle that took place in a populated place of state x is still correctly stated as having been a battle in state x. I am not doing things in WP for my own convenience, whatever that may be. I am stating the facts. You have requested deletion of all these categories so I assume that is your intent--this does not involve 'faith' of any kind. Thanks
Hmains (
talk)
23:07, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Don't worry, no offence taken. I only took issue with the passage ...which was misused used as a precedent by this editor to destroy the state categorization.... This way of saying things implies that I am deliberately doing something wrong, and that what I am doing is harmful. The first bit is conduct that users should avoid:
WP:Assume good faith means that we always assume that fellow editors are trying to do the right thing, even if they make mistakes. (And I do make plenty of mistakes, and I'll happily be corrected if you can point out what I should have done instead). The last bit may be your opinion, but it is rather strongly worded; it's better not to use words such as "destruction" when it comes to reorganising category trees in a way you don't like. Hopefully that clears things up?
My intention is to upmerge rather than outright delete these categories. Even though deletion is the result, the contents of the former categories will be preserved in their parent categories, and the logbooks will note which categories were merged into which. E.g. battles in New York state will still be in
Category:Military history of New York (state), where readers and editors alike can still find them. This upmerging is based on
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN, a guideline which has existed since about 2007. If you think there is something wrong with that guideline, you are free to raise the issue at
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Military history. Making arguments here at CFD for why this guideline should not apply to the United States, however, is not very helpful.
I should explain that I have only noted how many P and C there are in each of them as a secondary argument, but according to
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN (the primary argument), it doesn't matter what size the category is, as all such "battles in X" categories are considered inappropriate. (Even if we were to keep the "large" ones, which categories would you consider "large" and which ones "small"?)
My remark that the list already mentions the locations anyway is intended to address the concern of Hmains, the creator of these categories, that valuable information or overview might be lost if the proposal receives approval, because the list covers it. Personally, I'm not sure if it is necessary to mention the locations in any list or category, but keeping them in the list while upmering the categories seems an acceptable compromise to me.
The problem that
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN attempts to address—issues arising when modern and historical names differ—is largely irrelevant here. The boundaries of South Carolina, for instance, are the same now as they were during this conflict. You're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. -
Eureka Lott14:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Lots of states, provinces and especially territories didn't have their modern boundaries yet. More importantly,
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN doesn't say anywhere that it doesn't apply in some places, but not in others. It's a universal rule, it should be applied everywhere. If someone thinks there should be exceptions to the rule, they're free to start the process of seeking to amend it. But until it is amended, we should apply the guideline as it is, and not engage in
special pleading.
Given the many recent precedents in both the category space and the article space, there is a running consensus to phase out "battles in Fooland" categories and articles.
NLeeuw (
talk)
17:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia and Maine did not exist as defined areas during this war let alone separate colonies which is exactly the problem that
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN is trying to avoid. I don't think placing these in the contemporary colony would make sense since the undefined western boundaries were still Native American controlled, regardless of what European maps claimed. And good luck sorting out the as-of-then
unresolved competing claims on Vermont! -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
19:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: Will you please stop accusing me of "destroying" things?! Said categories were upmerged by community consensus.
NLeeuw (
talk)
18:15, 4 July 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:Substitution tracking templates
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: Unclear if this is used anymore by any template as it isn't found in an "insource" search. If still used the category description should be updated with where this is used from.
Gonnym (
talk)
10:08, 23 June 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.
Nominator's rationale:merge, the category only contains the eponymous article and a subcategory. That is not helpful for navigation.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
09:34, 23 June 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:Historic buildings and structures in the United 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.
Notes: Not many full merges are necessary because I went through all the individual articles to make sure none of them would be orphaned; however, a number of subcategories would need to be selectively reparented to stay in their category tree. If this nomination passes I'll have a follow up one for the sibling categories which have different heritage register situations. An
earlier nomination in 2018 ended in "no consensus" with the following participants: @
Marcocapelle,
SportingFlyer,
Thincat,
Black Falcon, and
Good Olfactory:. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
03:07, 23 June 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.
Ambassadors of the Republic of Venice 2
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: No other WikiProject has a comprehensive list of members. It is also tagged as NA-Class, which does not match the intended purpose. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
21:50, 22 June 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:Television series based on novels
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: Categories without a clear point of distinction from their parents. In theory, a distinction could be drawn between television series and television films, but the parent category isn't actually doing that: there's no
Category:Television films based on novels at all, and instead virtually everything in
Category:Television shows based on novels or its "Television shows based on [Country] novels" subcategories is a series (sometimes even with this and one or more of those both sitting alongside each other), so in actual practice this undergrown sapling is just duplicating the parent tree unnecessarily. And even populating it more fully would just entail moving virtually everything out of the parents anyway, so they'd still just be fundamentally redundant to each other. I'm willing to withdraw this if there's any kind of editorial will to start creating and populating "Television films based on novels" categories to sister this, but as things currently stand this isn't offering a clear differentiation from its parent.
Bearcat (
talk)
21:36, 22 June 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:B-Class vital articles in Games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
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.
X in the Republic of Artsakh
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:Populated places in the Republic of Artsakh
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. Artsakh is history, and Artsakh content should be in history categories, not geography categories. If we categorize every place on Earth by every former administrative division they were in at one point, there will be no end to that. It's perfectly fine to have articles about the defunct provinces and other subdivisions of Artsakh though.
Place Clichy (
talk)
19:04, 25 June 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.
Submerged settlements in X
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:Settlements demolished to make room for airports
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:Polish social activists of the Prussian partition
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: This category should either be merged or renamed to make it clearer how this is defining.
Mason (
talk)
01:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
In short: we'll need to choose whether we mean "Polish" as an ethnicity (as Marcocapelle suggested), or as a nationality (as Mason is indirectly suggesting, since
Category:Polish activists is in the
Category:Activists by nationality tree). Ethnicity is always a difficult one to establish and results in lots of sourcing problems, and it means we can't put these people in the
Category:Polish people tree (because it is part of the
Category:People by nationality tree). So nationality seems the best approach. For our purposes here, the Prussian partition is best understood as the
Grand Duchy of Posen, though it is a little more complicated than that (I'll get back to that).
But how do we grant a Polish "nationality" in a time when they did not have a state? My proposal was to recognise certain historic non-sovereign entities as "Polish":
Should we categorise all inhabitants of these polities as having "Polish nationality", or not? Currently, only inhabitants of Congress Poland and the preceding
Duchy of Warsaw are deliberately categorised as
Category:Polish people.
Perhaps others? Prior to 1815 and after 1848, there was no
Grand Duchy of Posen which at least nominally granted autonomy to the mostly-Polish population. But from 1792 to 1807, the four Prussian provinces
New East Prussia,
South Prussia,
West Prussia and
Netze District had no autonomy at all, and the post-1848
Province of Posen didn't either. It may be too much of a stretch to grand all inhabitants of these Prussian provinces (which we might understand as the Prussian partition) a "Polish nationality" just so that we can put them in the
Category:Polish people (by nationality) tree.
Until we resolve that question, it's probably difficult to do anything with these Polish Partition categories. We do not want to erase Polish history, but it's really challenging to categorise it either.
NLeeuw (
talk)
07:01, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That seems a good idea! Most of them were even born or died in the city of Posen / Poznan itself. Only the first one,
Florian Ceynowa the Kashubian, seems to have spent his whole life in Eastern Pomerania, not Posen / Greater Poland.
NLeeuw (
talk)
21:46, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: For the second time, thoughts on the (new) alt rename target
Smasongarrison? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk20:26, 22 June 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:Jewish Palestine Liberation Organization members
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 Defining characteristic
WP:COPDEF, not some random members of the PLO who happen to be Jewish. No, their significance is in being Jewish members of the PLO. --
Yabroq (
talk)
21:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation between related articles. No objection to recreate the category when some more articles can be added.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:24, 23 June 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:Drake & Josh video games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
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:Roman generals
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: Uphelpful bundling of Roman people. This category contains Ancient Romans and Byzantine people.
Mason (
talk)
03:03, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge It doesn't matter if Byzantine people are Romans if there is no navigational benefit in having an intermediate layer that, by its very nature, completely overlaps with two subcategories. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
19:15, 21 June 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:Battles of the War of 1812 in Canada
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.
do not merge There is nothing stated in
WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN that requires the deletion of geographic sub-categories within a 'battles of xx war' category. And doing so will harm the reader's navigation to desired articles, forcing them to mentally merge several requests together and open and read multiple articles together to obtain information such as 'what are the battles of the War of 1812 in Canada?' or 'what are the battles of the war of 1812 in Ontario?' WP information consists not only of article content but also the category structure. This is destroying content. Thanks
Hmains (
talk)
00:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I concur. Hmains (who created these categories) tried to use the same argument last time, and it was not accepted then either.
NLeeuw (
talk)
18:10, 23 June 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.
Nominator's rationale:merge/delete for now, currently only 1-2 articles in each category, this is not helpful for navigation. No objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:26, 14 June 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.
Why though? The name of the category clearly indicates that it should include individual people (Jews) as well as Jewish institutions. Unless there is a mass rename, that doesn't make sense. Jewish elected officials (for example) are obviously defined by their connection to the city.--
User:Namiba12:53, 26 June 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.
June 21
Category:Major League Baseball Triple Crown winners
Category:Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador alumni
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: These battles concern a specific subgroup of Qarmatians, namely those of the Qarmatian 'republic' of Bahrayn under the al-Jannabi family. This was the main Qarmatian group, but by no means the only one, and at any rate it should be distinguished. Other "Qarmatian" battles, like the
Battle of Hama (even though the Qarmatian label is debatable here), are not included.
Constantine ✍ 07:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Because that is the most common transliteration in the literature. It also does not refer to the modern state of Bahrain, but the whole region of
Eastern Arabia (historical Bahrayn/Bahrain).
Constantine ✍ 14:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Nom has actually worked on this topic and may be suggesting this move because of this knowledge, not just because of a flight of fancy. Qarmatianism is a broader phenomenon than the Qarmatian state of Bahrayn, hence the two should be kept separate, with the Qarmatians remaining as the overarching parent category/article. There ideally should be a different, dedicated parent article for the state, like
ru:Карматское государство, but one thing at a time.
Constantine ✍ 07:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Are there "Battles involving the Qarmatians" that DON'T involve Bahrayn? Because if there aren't, I'm not sure this change is necessary. LizRead!Talk!17:49, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Good point. Main article
Qarmatians has an Infobox former country and an Infobox war faction, both of which provide exactly the same beginning and end dates of 899–1077.
It also claims that it all started with Bahrain and ended with Bahrain (or Bahrayn if you will):
Start: Eventually, from Qatar, he captured Bahrain's capital Hajr and
al-Hasa in 899, which he made the capital of his state...
End: According to the maritime historian
Dionisius A. Agius, the Qarmatians finally disappeared in 1067, after they lost their fleet at
Bahrain Island and were expelled from
Hasa near the Arabian coast by the chief of Banu, Murra ibn Amir.
1067 may be a typo, as the rest of the article insists on 1077, referring to
Overthrow of the Qarmatians, which is dated to 1058–1077.
Finally, the example of
Battle of Hama is so ambiguous as to what the "Qarmatians" have to do with it (which is discussed at length in the article itself, with good sources), that it cannot count as evidence for non-Bahraini "Qarmatians".
But the Battle of Hama is counted as a Qarmatian battle by primary sources, and will be found as such even in some modern literature. And no, the Qarmatians != Bahrayn, no matter what the article currently claims. Bahrayn was the only successful Qarmatian state, but Qarmatianism is broader than that, with adherents across the Middle East, of lesser prominence due to the lack of state power, but still following their own doctrines and with their own histories.
Constantine ✍ 16:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)reply
As said, the Battle of Hama is questionable, as other primary sources contradict it, and many modern scholars do not think it involved Qarmatians (read
Battle of Hama#Background). Have you got examples of battles other than Hama that supposedly involved non-Bahraini Qarmatians?
NLeeuw (
talk)
11:59, 19 June 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:Wesean National Leaders
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: This counts as a
WP:HOAX. Nothing called "Wesea" actually exists. It is an aspiration for certain separatist political movements.
Kautilya3 (
talk)
18:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment It was emptied by the nominator. There are scripts that can show you who has added or removed articles or categories from a category. LizRead!Talk!20:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes, indeed. That is why I didn't use
WP:G3 as my rationale. The issue is deeper than just being an empty category. But even G3 should be good enough, for now. --
Kautilya3 (
talk)
22:16, 21 June 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:Legendary creatures
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Merge per nom. "Legendary" supposes that there might be some truth to it, but all contents here seem to fall outside of the realm of serious modern biology.
NLeeuw (
talk)
21:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep At the moment, "Legendary" sits above "Folklore" and "Mythological creatures" - rather a lot of the contents of the first two should probably be moved to the last. As a matter of English meaning, I don't think "Legendary" supposes that there might be some truth to it" is at all true. "legendary" suggests to me a literary source(s) somewhere quite early on, & I think there is a distinction, if a rather vague one.
Johnbod (
talk)
21:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
At the moment "legendary" sits above, but the hierarchy could just as well be reversed because there isn't a clear distinction. The fact that the above two editors disagree on what Legendary means illustrates the confusion.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
While I'm not necessarily opposed to merging related folklore/legend/mythology categories together, I don't know which goes where.
AHI-3000 (
talk)
01:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I assume a redirect would be needed after merging. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk16:02, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
A redirect certainly seems helpful, especially if we agree a merger is a good idea, but are in doubt about the best target. One way or the other, readers and editors will thus find their way.
NLeeuw (
talk)
17:23, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Reverse merge Per nom so that the original single category for this is restored, for the most part the contents of the category have nothing to do with being from folklore, and it's an
WP:OVERLAPCAT anyway with folklore falling under the purview of legends. The article itself is
Legendary creature.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
01:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Either Keep, or do the following: RenameCategory:Mythological creatures to
Category:Creatures in myth and legend, and RenameCategory:Folklore creatures to
Category:Creatures in folklore. Then selectively SplitCategory:Legendary creatures to each of those renamed categories. I think I said this in a previous discussion on CfD, but the Myth/Legend/Folklore distinction is a bit fluid in the sources. I think for our purposes, if we use Folklore as the overall term, and then have a separate "in myth and legend" (or "in myths and legends", if preferred), then I think that should resolve most things, and help a bit more to guide editors away from applying
WP:OR. But we need to be careful about Myth, especially in regards to people and creatures, because belief and religion can be involved there. - jc3720:16, 22 June 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:Romans from Africa
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.
Fair point. I was worried about that already. This presumably isn't a problem for
Category:Arabs in the Roman Empire then? The
Nabataean Kingdom and
Roman Judea were annexed after 27 BCE, but I'm not sure about the demographics of
Coele-Syria (Roman province) (annexed in 64 BCE). Perhaps other scholars could correct me on this, but by my knowledge, Coele-Syria in the 1st century BCE was populated by a mixture of Greeks and Hellenised Aramaeans, Syriacs, and Jews / Samaritans, and Romans. I'm not sure there was a substantial population of "Arabs" there at a time (though no doubt the occasional Arabian merchant would pass through the region). If Arabs didn't form a significant population within the Roman Republic, perhaps this category doesn't have the same scope issues as our Roman-era Africans.
NLeeuw (
talk)
06:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Some more explicit support/opposition to various potential names for the categories would be appreciated :) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
01:42, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose the first, lean oppose the second: the
Constitutio Antoniniana of AD 212 granted citizenship to all free residents of the Roman empire, and while there were non-free inhabitants (slaves, prisoners), we would probably consider them Romans irrespective of their legal status. So in theory the only non-Romans from that point onward would be travelers passing through—and they probably do not represent a significant proportion of these categories. Even before this, most of the inhabitants of areas under direct Roman governance are people we would consider "Romans" in the broadest sense.
The first proposed category could theoretically include people of any origin living anywhere on the continent of Africa between the eighth century BC and the sixth century AD—possibly later, depending on whether you include the Byzantine Empire under "Roman era". In theory this would include the Carthaginians, Numidians, Egyptians, and various other Phoenician and Greek colonists, as well as native peoples, even before they had contact with, much less governance by Rome. But the clear intent of the category under its current title is to include inhabitants of Roman Africa, not other areas, and this also limits the time period—there was no Roman era in Africa until the latter half of the second century BC, and other areas only gradually came under Roman control (for instance, Numidia, Tripolitania, Egypt). Renaming the category as proposed would dramatically increase the nominal scope in a way that is not intended.
"Roman-era people by province" is not quite as bad, since its geographic scope would be limited to people within the borders of Roman territories, but again it would include relatively few non-Romans, since once a place became a Roman province, its free inhabitants typically became citizens, or in the case of non-free inhabitants who were owned by citizens, or natives under direct Roman governance, we would still typically call them Roman: although there must have been many non-citizens at various early stages, but there will be very few articles about them, and since the category name does not explicitly refer to citizenship, they could still be included under a broad reading of "Romans". The only people who would definitely not be included, again, would be travelers from foreign lands, and there cannot be a significant number of articles about foreign travelers in the Roman Empire—and they would not be "from" the provinces named, so it's not clear they would be included even under the proposed title.
In all, "Roman-era African people" is a really bad choice, as its title gives it a potentially unlimited scope, unconnected with either Romans or Roman territory; "Roman-era people by province" would be misleading, since it implies a broader scope than that which is evidently intended, even though there would hardly be any non-Romans in it (possibly various Huns, Goths, Franks, or Vandals toward the end of the Western Empire, though some of these became nominally Roman).
P Aculeius (
talk)
12:02, 26 June 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:Violence in the Palestinian territories
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, all four articles in the category are about events after the establishment of the State of Palestine.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That's a good point. The State of Palestine didn't exist until 1988, while Palestinian territories have existed since 1967 (or 1949), depending on definition.VR(Please
ping on reply)09:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ping me when you found some articles because then we do not need to merge. Until that happens the merge can go ahead, we do not keep empty categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
21:35, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
It's a good question. I had always assumed that whatever area of the former British mandate of Palestine was not incorporated into the State of Israel after the war of 1948 was known as "Palestinian territories", but I would have to consult the historiography on this.
NLeeuw (
talk)
06:51, 11 June 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:Mayoralties of municipalities in the United 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: Category whose name is a bit confusing and not accurately descriptive of its contents. The contents here are subpages where a political figure (usually a person who went on from the mayoralty to hold much more prominent national offices, and thus has a very, very long biographical article that needed to have stuff chunked out from it for size management) has had a "Mayoralty of [Person]" article created as a spinoff from their base biography -- but that means that the defining characteristic here is "mayoralties of individual people", not "mayoralties of municipalities" (which could be too easily confused with a redundant duplication of
Category:Mayors of places in the United States, and thus potentially have stuff misfiled in it by editors who weren't paying attention to the actual contents of the categories.) So it should likely be renamed to make its intentions clearer.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:42, 21 June 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.
Category:Saadi Shirazi
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. Only the writer and work of theirs in the category. Unhelpful for navigation when there are only two pages like this
Mason (
talk)
13:38, 21 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: I haven't listed all of the child categories of this, but the problem is not the parent category. The problem is that the parent category contains a massive 39 largely-overlapping categories for just 24 actual articles. I suggest that every child of this category should be merged back to the parent.
PepperBeast(talk)02:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Hie, Creator of many of the Categories here. To explain why so many categories were created. I actually created all the "in Meitei mythology" to basically UNCLOUT other categories. Apparently ALL the deities of Meitei mythology are Deities of Everything-and-Its-Neighbour and one of the creator of pages put each and every one (or close to it) in dozens of categories for basically almost every god and goddess. I don't know anything about Meitei Mythology, so I can't tell which god really belong in a category or not (apparently basically all goddesses or close to it are Goddess of Abundance, Beauty, Arts, Fertility, Love and lust, Peace, Magic, among other things...) Though some divinities in each Pantheon can have lots of domains (like
Apollo in greek mythology,
Sucellos in the celt one), and I can't tell which really belong in each category or not. Still, I note that most don't have anything in the description or a reference that would justify many of the various categories listed (I think one of the rational seems to be that if a goddess is beautiful then she's deemed a goddess of Beauty, Fertility as well as Love and lust, any divinity that is not a warrior is automatically pushed into God/Goddess of Peace and basically all divinities are Fortune ones just by existing, unless linked to something unfortunate...) This caused a bit of a strange situation in the various categories, as for exemple if you went to
Category:Abundance goddesses to have a look at the goddesses of this domain, half the goddesses (17 out of 34) were the Meitei Goddesses alone, the other half for ALL the other Pantheons in the world put together... Same with the other categories, 20 out of the 44 pages in
Category:Beauty goddesses were the Meitei goddesses, 19 out of the 47 pages of
Category:Fortune goddesses, etc. Though when so many categories in a pagebelongs to just one other pantheon, usually creating a child page is preferable. --
Zeynel (
talk)
07:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Many of these categories have been prematurely emptied by the nominator, Pepperbeast. I'm not sure why they couldn't wait until this had a formal closure before taking action. That's a task for the closer, not the nominator. LizRead!Talk!20:30, 14 June 2024 (UTC)reply
You emptied multiple categories that are currently up for discussion! Why did this action happen now, during this discussion period? It upends any decision made here by the participants and renders this discussion moot. Couldn't you have done this emptying before or after the nomination? LizRead!Talk!23:18, 14 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Category contents were changed without clear explanation. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
13:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't know if it matters but the categories that were emptied after this CFD discussion was opened are:
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: Most of these categories were speedily renamed to their current names from the proposed names in May 2023. Discussions at
the Formula One WikiProject and
the Motorsport WikiProject resolved that these speedy renames should be reversed because, unlike many other sporting teams, auto racing teams may compete all over the world and their national identity is defined by their racing licence and is not necessarily related to the location of their base of operations. Consider the current Formula One World Champions:
Red Bull Racing - they are universally recognised as an Austrian team (they use an Austrian racing licence and when they win a race, the Austrian national anthem is played) but their base of operations is in England. The category rename in May 2023 moved the article from the accurate
Category:Austrian auto racing teams to the inaccurate
Category:Auto racing teams in Austria.
DH85868993 (
talk)
11:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: because I don't want to close a 44-category CfD as "unopposed". Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Queen of Heartstalk04:56, 21 June 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.
For the record, my request was to get feedback on whether universalism should be parented by denomination or placed in the main category as a philosophy/theory. I never said that the revision from 2016 was inappropriate, I said that was a stable edit. I don't have a strong opinion, on the parent category, but I did want others to weigh in about how it should be categorized.
Mason (
talk)
04:42, 21 June 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.
Sixteen Kingdoms Buddhist monks
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, the
Sixteen Kingdoms contains partially parallel and mostly very short-living kingdoms, typically a few decades. No need to categorize Buddhist monks by each of them separately.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
04:33, 21 June 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:Scottish women embroiderers
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: Dual upmerge. This is a non-defining intersection between the type of textile artist and gender.
Mason (
talk)
03:18, 21 June 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:Pretenders to the Mexican throne
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.
Some deceased people in this category also appear to be inappropriately labelled pretenders:
Agustín de Iturbide y Green: When he came of age, Iturbide, who had graduated from
Georgetown University, renounced his claim to the throne and title and returned to Mexico. So as soon as he was legally capable, he renounced his claim.
María Josepha Sophia de Iturbide: [She inhered] the Habsburg claim on the throne. Maria Josepha was a very traditional Lady, and a devout Roman Catholic, and stayed as far away from politics as she could. Doesn't seem to have actively pursued her claim either; seems more like other people expect(ed) her to pursue it for purely genealogical reasons (but
WP:NOTGENEALOGY).
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Associated TfD was closed as delete. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
01:22, 21 June 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:Defunct Catholic schools in Louisville, Kentucky
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: Dual merge. There's only one page in here, and no other city (or state) level categories in Defunct Catholic schools in the United States
Mason (
talk)
01:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That's probably what happened. There's definitely been changes to how notability for schools should be handled, so its totally reasonable that it made sense at the time.
Mason (
talk)
04:44, 21 June 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.
Category:High Peak
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:Tamil Nadu MLAs 1967–1972
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:Game of Thrones templates
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: Category for a single template. Unnecessary level. Add the template to the parent category.
Gonnym (
talk)
05:41, 20 June 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:The Taste contestants
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: Upmerge for now. There is only one person in this category for a tv show that ran for 3 seasons
Mason (
talk)
04:18, 20 June 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.
Buildings and structures completed by year, before 1000
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 long list of
WP:OCYEAR categories — 504 in total — that all contain 3 or fewer unique articles each, overwhelmingly about religious buildings. However, almost all of these years have enough categories to justify a decade category. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
01:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Dual merge per Marcocapelle. By the way, there are probably several articles about buildings from this era which were never categorized in an establishment category.
Dimadick (
talk)
07:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Some of these categories are being deleted by the CFD bot as if this discussion had been closed (which it hasn't) and other categories are being emptied. This is a huge group of categories and shouldn't be handled piecemeal. LizRead!Talk!02:11, 28 June 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.
June 19
Category:Moomin locations
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 is only one article in this category, with low chances that it will ever be a meaningful size.
Jontesta (
talk)
23:25, 19 June 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.
Category: Philosophy majors
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:Australian-themed retailers
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: The only category of its kind that I can find with the name of a nation and themed retailers on Wikipedia. This category does not make any sense as these are companies with operations in Australia, but are not Australian-themed. Themed would imply something implicit about Australian culture or history. This can be considered to be OR as the majority of articles don't make mention that they are based on the concept of Australian culture.
They would include Bloomin' Brands, Deliveroo, Gillyhicks, Kangaroo (video on demand), KangaRoos, and Kangol. Australia Dairy Company has little to do with it other than materials imported from the country. Australian Homemade is just the name of a sweets company. Bloomin' Brands is just a holding company that owns several restaurant chains.
Outback Steakhouse and Walkabout (pub chain) are the only two businesses with a theme based on Australia, but even then two articles would be too small for a category like this.
The categories that this is under Retailers by type of merchandise sold, Works about Australia, and Retailing in Australia have no relevance as these are not works in terms of literature, films, music, etc. usually considered in the line of popular culture. No evidence they sell Australian-type merchandise if that is even a thing.
And while Retailing in Australia would be considered since a couple of them do business in Australia, they should be in the Retailing category than this one if it applies. Australian Homemade is under Category:Restaurant chains in Australia, under a subcat of Australian brands, which is a subcat of the main Retailing in Australia category.
WikiCleanerMan (
talk)
13:46, 19 June 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:Albanian basketball players by populated place
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:Children of two peers and peeresses created life peers
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:Kryvyi Rih National University, General Faculty alumni
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: Upmerge. Kryvyi Rih National University, General Faculty is a redundant category layer, and the alumni category only has 1 person in it.
Mason (
talk)
01:58, 19 June 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.
Athletes by religion
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:OCTRIVIAL, there is a long-standing consensus against intertwining sports and religion on Wikipedia (see
here for example), and I struggle to see how these categories are any different. Because the article entries appear to be only from the United States, perhaps there could be a move discussion to something like
Category:American Muslim athletes or
Category:American athletes by religion as that may have been the creator's intention, but that still would seem to fail the site's category guidelines.
Inter&anthro (
talk)
20:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Please note that this differs from Jewish athletes since Judaism is both an ethnicity and a religion (an
ethnoreligion) and most Jewish athletes identity as Jewish by virtue of being born Jewish and very few (VERY few) actually convert.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
23:36, 19 June 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.
29 to 35 days old
June 18
Category:Usain Bolt
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:Refugees ennobled in 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: Delete. A cross-section between refugees and nobles. While defining seperately, they aren't defining together. Also, one of them was not ennobled but rather married into the British royal family.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
19:49, 18 June 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.
Fooian Barons
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 would have speedied this but will go through Cfd first then the rest can be speedied. Rename; the name can be misleading and I think the correct form should be "Fooian barons", like it is "Fooian baronesses" and so.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
19:36, 18 June 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:Barons from the Austrian Empire
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:Japanese films by 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.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:merge/keep/delete respectively.
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:Companies in the MSCI KLD 400 Social Index
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: Not a defining category -- one of many indices that these companies would be on. Index's own article doesn't demonstrate notability.
Nat Gertler (
talk)
19:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - MSCI literally publishes the inclusion criteria/methodology. A company wouldn't "just be on" a list like this (ie Apple isn't). It's exclusive enough (only about 10% of companies in the US). Only reason article doesn't list them all is because there's 400 of them. And that's what a category is for. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
213.78.190.234 (
talk)
20:24, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. For this to be a useful category, when independent reliable sources (probably in the business press) are writing articles about companies that are in the index, those sources would have to mention that, for example, "Company X, a member of the MSCI KLD 400 Social Index, etc." or write articles noting that a company was added to or removed from the Index. Those sorts of mentions would have to be made in reliable sources of a company's inclusion in the Index in order to add a sentence to the article asserting as an important fact about the company that it is in the Index. Then enough such sentences in enough such articles would have to exist before it would make sense to have a category like this. This category in recent days has been added to dozens of articles and although I haven't looked at all of them, the articles I have looked at don't even mention in the body of the article that the company belongs to the Index. This means that the many editors who have worked on these many articles have hitherto not felt that being in the Index was a notable or important fact about the companies they were writing about which might be because reliable news sources don't mention it either, with respect to the companies that belong to the Index.
Novellasyes (
talk)
09:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
In the interest of clarity, I should note that the IP user who responded "Keep" above actually did add text mentioning the Index listing to dozens of articles about companies on the Index (in the wake of the category being deleted from a company's page because it was not mentioned in the text.) However, the source they were using was a promotional page for an Index-based fund on Blackrock, which is not only selling a fund based on the index but is one of the companies in the Index. As such, it is not truly an independent source... and even if it were, it's not a source for the listing of a company on the source being significant to that company. I reverted those additions, as so many links to a sales page add up to the strong scent of spam. --
Nat Gertler (
talk)
17:03, 19 June 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.
Category:Rugby league players by city or town in Namibia
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:White Southerners (United 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: Non-defining category. Half of Americans could conceivably belong to this group. First two applications of this cat (
Confederados,
Jefferson Davis) demonstrate the user's intention. This new category is associated with category creator's reverted new versions of
White Southerners article.
BusterD (
talk)
13:45, 17 June 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:Lists of Emmerdale characters
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: Selective merge/major purge. Only two of the pages actually fit in this category; the rest are medical professionals who treated the plague.
Mason (
talk)
01:48, 17 June 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.
June 16
Category:Mexican baseball players by populated place
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.
Weak keep. There's only one subcat because one or two American baseball fans decided that baseball shouldn't be split by city (unlike every other sport). A fewcouple of Mexican city categories (such as Monterrey) were deleted at that time. I've added one that didn't exist before, so there are now two in the proposed category, but if that's seen as unnecessary, you have my permission (as sole author) to delete it too.
Grutness...wha?03:11, 17 June 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:Cheerleader video games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: All other activity-related video game categories follow the format of referring to the name of the activity rather than an individual participant in it. For instance, "Cooking Video Games" rather than "Chef Video Games" and "Association Football Video Games" rather than "Footballer Video Games". The category should therefore follow this naming convention.
SummerPocket (
talk)
20:49, 16 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I am going to procedurally close this and nominate it for speedy renaming instead, as it is an uncontroversial rename based on the parent category.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
03:37, 20 June 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.
Works by year and decade, 500-1000
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 The date of creation of most works from this era is not percisely known. Most of the lower-level categories are also overly small. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
01:18, 20 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: We don't need to distinguish that the shooting was terrorist related. And this is really giving off the same vibes
Mason (
talk)
18:47, 16 June 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:Bombings
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: Empty pile of categories by a new editor who's category creation behavior is reminiscent of @
Brudelman:. I'm nomiating the cats to just get them all out of the way in one go.
Mason (
talk)
18:38, 16 June 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:Com Truise
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: With only subcategories for albums (and their covers, which are only image files) along with a discography page, this is overcategorization per
WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me16:55, 16 June 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:Basshunter instrumentals
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:Knights of Boufflers
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: Dual upmerge. The only person is each of these category doesn't mention this knighthood.
Mason (
talk)
14:27, 16 June 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:Defunct off-price department stores of the United States
Category:Expulsions of Jews in 19th-century Europe
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.
Purge and merge, many articles aren't about an expulsion at all. Too few really are about an expulsion so we do not need this diffusion.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
14:39, 16 June 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:Philippine Military Academy Class of 1986
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:Primary sources on Philippine history in the 16th 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. Is a non-defining 3x intersection category, and several of the documents in 16th century aren't actually from the 16th century
Mason (
talk)
12:54, 16 June 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:Authors of Spanish ethnographic accounts of the Philippines in the 16th 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: Multiple merge this Narrow category. If not merged, it should be renamed to Spanish ethnographers of the colonial Philippines or something to that effect
Mason (
talk)
12:47, 16 June 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:21st-century Somali-Canadian women engineers
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: Extremely narrow intersection, made by a user who hasn't really learned how categories work
Mason (
talk)
04:14, 16 June 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:African women mathematicians
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.
Just delete, articles are already in a mathematicians by nationality category. It is odd to have biographies directly in a continent category.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:06, 16 June 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:African women in engineering
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's no African engineers category parent category. Delete per EGRS. I'm working on adding each person to the proper parent categories.
Mason (
talk)
03:44, 16 June 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.
June 15
X 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.
Category:20th century rump 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: Upmerge this isolated category. If not merged, it should be renamed to 20th-century rump states
Mason (
talk)
21:59, 15 June 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:21st century in Malé
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:Battles of the American Revolutionary War by state
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
I see that I previously defended this category, but some former members may have been merged, leaving less content to make these two categories worthwhile. I now support the proposed merge. –
FayenaticLondon15:12, 18 June 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:Antagonists by role
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:United Hospitals
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:Hotel Transylvania television series
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:People with substance use disorder
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.
Comment Shouldn't this be something like List of foods/dishes by cuisine? All child categories are named Fooian cuisine-related lists, while almost all articles are named List of Barian dishes/foods/drinks/desserts/ingredients. It seems like Barian is explicitly meant to include diaspora communities of Barian emigrants around the world, who have taken their Barian cuisine dishes and stuff with them. If we rename to "by country", we could be excluding diaspora communities, while "nationality" (though problematic) at least includes first-generation emigrants from Bar. I'm not sure what a better alternative would be, though. Thoughts?
NLeeuw (
talk)
14:55, 8 June 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.
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:Cultural policy of East Germany
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:delete, overall poorly fitting content. One article is about a festival, the other article is about general duties of citizens.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:01, 15 June 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:18th-century German Jewish theologians
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:Ambassadors of Australia to Kosovo
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.
Film posters by country
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: The current category names are ambiguous as to whether they're, for example, posters of Swedish films or film posters from Sweden. I'd recommend renaming to "Film posters of Sweden" like the
Commons categories.
hinnk (
talk)
21:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Question I hate to be pedantic, but do you mean:
Film posters made in Sweden?
Film posters hung in Sweden?
Posters of films made in Sweden?
Posters of films made by Swedish crew members or crew members from Sweden?
Film posters that show "Sweden" (e.g. its landscapes or symbols associated with Sweden)?
Film posters made or owned by the government of Sweden?
Poster of films made by the government of Sweden?
Etc.
All of these are more or less reasonable interpretations of Film posters of Sweden. I'm glad you're trying to clarify the catnames, but I don't see it getting much clearer.
NLeeuw (
talk)
22:11, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment, regardless of renaming I do not think this is very ambiguous. Posters of Swedish films (i.e. in other countries than Sweden) would be a rather odd reading.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:06, 30 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.
Keep. 9 pages now that I have put the communes into the category. 14 when articles are started for the capitals of the communes. And a region with over 600,000 people surely has many more settlements that deserve an article.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
21:44, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
According to the wikipedia articles, each of the seven communes in
Kirundo Province has a capital with the same name. The capital of the
Commune of Bugabira is
Bugabira. The capital of the
Commune of Busoni is
Busoni, and so on. Kirundo Province had a population of 628,256 as of the 2008 census. The 2018 population was estimated as 927,761, or about 130,000 per commune. Our coverage of this region is atrocious. Let's not make it even harder for editors to improve it.
This source describes Bugabira as a small town with colonial-era architecture. Bugabira commune is divided into the collines of Kiri, Kiyonza, Gaturanda, Rubuga, Kigina, Nyakarama, Nyamabuye, Nyabikenke, Rugasa, Gitwe and Kigoma.
[2] Google maps shows Gaturanda as a region south of an arm of
Lake Cyohoha South with labelled villages named Gaturanda, Rugondo and Rubuga. Gaturanda village looks substantial.
[3] In 2012 the Global Water Partnership Eastern Africa gathered data related to drought in Rubuga, Kigina, and Gaturanda in Bugabira commune.
[4] In August 2014 six houses were burned in Bugabira commune, including five in Gaturanda and one in Kigoma.
[5] In April 2016
Gaston Sindimwo, President of Burundi, visited Gaturanda, which lies on the border with
Rwanda, to ask the people not to stir up problems over refugees.
[6] In 2023 Bugabira municipality issued a call for tenders for extension of the Gaturanda health center.
[7].
Clearly these is enough information online to piece together sketches of the many populated places in Kirundo Province. The category structure should be ready for them.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
13:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Aymatth2: "Five" is often mentioned at CFD as some editors' opinion of a sensible minimum. Personally, I would create a category for four. In a case like this, where additional stubs could easily be created, I would not bother nominating a category that had three members – but I would still not encourage you to create it for less than four. –
FayenaticLondon08:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I have often included Commune and town in the same article for African countries. Makes sense for places in the developing world where there may not be an abundance of sources. Though I don't think we should really have the commune and town in the same article for places which cover an area of 235 square kilometres like Bugabira. Either way, it would be silly to delete a category simply because the region is underdeveloped. ♦
Dr. Blofeld14:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
As Aymatth2 admits, even the other 5 capitals of communes in Kirundo Province do not have articles yet. For some reason a
famous cat-stroking Wikipedian created 50 stubs for
Populated places in Bubanza Province 16 years ago, mostly villages, then apparently petered out part-way into Buriri Province. As and when articles are created for more settlements in this province, the category may then be re-created when it becomes justifiable, but
Template:Kirundo Province is sufficient and appropriate for navigational needs at the moment; I have added
Vumbi into it. –
FayenaticLondon12:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Kirundo Province has more people than Alaska, which has at least
148 populated places. If
Category:Populated places in Kirundo Province is deleted, and then a new editor decides to create articles for some of the places in the province, they will likely try to recreate the category. They will see a big red warning saying the Wikipedia community has decided there should not be such a category. I would just go ahead and recreate it anyway, but a newbie may be discouraged. That is the last thing we want to happen for an area which is so poorly covered.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
13:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Seven articles as of relisting. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
00:48, 15 June 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:Women's Premier League (cricket) franchise owners
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: It should be franchise owners, as the member pagers are franchise owners rather than team owners. Vestrian24Bio (
TALK)
14:13, 14 June 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.
Category:War of 1812 on the National Register of Historic Places
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:Washington, D.C., in the War of 1812
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:Holidays related to the War of 1812
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:Presidents General of the General Society of the War of 1812
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.
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:Mexican engineer stubs
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub category with no evidence of approval by
Category:WikiProject Stub sorting. As always, stub categories are not free for just anybody to create on a whim, and require a minimum of 60 articles for entry -- but even after deep-scanning the
Category:Mexican people stubs parent for any missed engineers, this still only has 17 articles in it. The stub template is fine, since it can always just sort articles into the target categories, but there would have to be at least 43 more articles before a dedicated category was warranted.
Bearcat (
talk)
19:54, 13 June 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.
Muwahhidism
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 propose the deletion of these categories because they make no sense. Muwahiddism isn't a separate branch (like Sunni, Shia, Ibadi, Ahmadi, Quranism), it's not a fiqh school (like Hanafi/Shafii/Maliki/Hanbali divide among Sunnis), it's not an aqeeda school (like Athari/Maturidi/Ashari divide among Sunnis or Usuli/Akhbari divide among Twelver Shia) or anything.
Anyone who considers himself a Muslim (no matter what school he follows) considers himself a muwahhid (موحِّد) which means "a monotheist" in Arabic, literally a follower of tawhid (توحيد), monotheism, the central concept of Islam. It's just a term which is more often used as a self-description by Sunni Salafis to highlight their purism in contrast to anyone else (for example, Sufis have a practice of visiting graves of their sheikhs, Salafis see this act as a departure from the concept of tawhid in Islam. Although Sufis don't consider it as a violation of tawhid, they still see themselves as muwahhideen (monotheists). But anyone who claims to follow Islam, he by definition considers himself a muwahhid regardless). That's it. It's not a separate branch of Islam. It's just a "label" or a "trademark", so to speak. These categories are excessive and absolutely uncalled for. Sorry for bad formatting, by the way (I'm editing off my phone).
Fixmaster (
talk)
19:24, 13 June 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:Socialist film directors
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.
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 event managers
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'm on the fence about speedying this category, however, I'm not 100% sure that I've correctly mapped this category to the right parent of event planning.
Mason (
talk)
02:50, 13 June 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:Australian metal workers
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 three ways this category can be handled. Either rename this to match the parent category of Metalworkers, merge to Australian metalsmiths or rename to reflect that the intent of this category Metal manufacturing companies of Australia.
Mason (
talk)
02:48, 13 June 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:Artesian 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 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.
June 12
Category:Live at the Fillmore East albums
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:Croat Roman Catholic clergy from Bosnia and Herzegovina
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: Ethnicization of entire tree of Category:Catholic clergy of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It's a one editor's attempt to squeeze ethnic labels onto categories regarding one of the religious communities of the country. It should be checked if this issue was already dealt with once before. Note that other two communities (Orthodox and Islamic) are categorized only with their respective denomination labels not with their eventual ethnicities.
౪ Santa ౪99°16:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I find it unhelpful that you have removed the parent categories. Now I can't easily see what the creator was trying to do, and whether it might be better to upmerge instead of delete.
NLeeuw (
talk)
17:21, 12 June 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:Croat Christian clergy from Bosnia and Herzegovina
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: Ethnicization of entire tree of Category:Catholic clergy of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It's a one editor's attempt to squeeze ethnic labels onto categories regarding one of the religious communities of the country. It should be checked if this issue was already dealt with once before. Note that other two communities (Orthodox and Islamic) are categorized only with their respective denomination labels not with their eventual ethnicities.
౪ Santa ౪99°16:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I find it unhelpful that you have removed the parent categories. Now I can't easily see what the creator was trying to do, and whether it might be better to upmerge instead of delete.
NLeeuw (
talk)
17:21, 12 June 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:Croat Greek Catholic clergy from Bosnia and Herzegovina
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: Ethnicization of entire tree of Category:Catholic clergy of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It's a one editor's attempt to squeeze ethnic labels onto categories regarding one of the religious communities of the country. It should be checked if this issue was already delt with once before. Note that other two communities (Orthodox and Islamic) are categorized only with their respective denomination labels not with their eventual ethnicities.
౪ Santa ౪99°16:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I find it unhelpful that you have removed the parent categories. Now I can't easily see what the creator was trying to do, and whether it might be better to upmerge instead of delete.
NLeeuw (
talk)
17:21, 12 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: I'm not really sure what to do with this category name, because it isn't particularly helpful/descriptive. Is this painters from after 1948 who painted the "holy land" or is it painters of what the "holy land" looked like after 1948.
Mason (
talk)
13:12, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion/merging? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him)
15:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep' The nomination seems confused, perhaps fatally - the category is "PRE-1948" so it is not for "painters from after 1948 who painted the "holy land" or is it painters of what the "holy land" looked like after 1948." In the 19th-century context "
Holy Land" is certainly the term that would have been used by the artists and their publics, & I don't think it is POV. If people want to delete it on those grounds they should think of alternatives, as it seems a valid category. Rather than being "an extremely narrow theme", it saw a big boom in the 19th century, partly as a branch of
Orientalist painting. The category misses the most famous people, at least in the Anglosphere - where are
William Holman Hunt,
Edward Lear,
James Tissot and many others?
Johnbod (
talk)
15:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I see only one of the 5 described as "Orientalist" (and Marcocapelle just categorised then as such). James Tissot is indeed a name I recognise as painting events from the Hebrew Bible, though not necessarily "the Holy Land". E.g.
File:Tissot The Women of Midian Led Captive by the Hebrews.jpg supposedly took place in southern Transjordan in what is now Saudi Arabia.
Moreover, a lot of them were apparently Jewish, while "Holy Land" is a Christian term. It's really difficult to shape a category around such a vague concept with the people currently and proposed to be in there.
I should add that "Holy Land" can be an appropriate term if the subject in question is entirely Christian, for, by and about Christians, e.g.
Recovery of the Holy Land. No other phrase will describe that late medieval Christian literary genre that aptly. But for these painters...? I'm not convinced.
NLeeuw (
talk)
21:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
It's highly unclear where the events of
Numbers 31 took place (if anwhere), but it seems more likely to be in modern Israel or Jordan than Saudi. In any case, Tissot spent time in Palestine to get his settings right, without I think getting as far as modern Saudi. I don't think that a century ago "Holy Land" was exclusively a Christian term - it would be rather ironic if it was.
Johnbod (
talk)
21:57, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, Arabic Wikipedia
ar:الأراضي المقدسة says: The Holy Land is a term used in the Christian and Jewish religions to refer to the holy places in Palestine, especially Jerusalem , Bethlehem, and Nazareth...
Hebrew Wikipedia
he:ארץ הקודש says: Jews usually refer to the Land of Israel as the "Holy Land".[Source needed] However, the Bible refers to it explicitly as "holy land" in only one passage, the book of Zechariah, chapter 2, verse 16.
It doesn't seem like it is very common (at least not in the arguably main languages used by the most relevant religions and populations) to use the term "Holy Land" in Judaism or Islam. They may regard the land as sacred in some way, but calling it "Holy Land", capital H capital L, seems very much a Christian practice.
At any rate, if 19th-century and early 20th-century Orientalist is our scope, why not use the term
Levant instead? It fits the period well, is broader than just Palesrael, and is not as politically and religiously charged.
NLeeuw (
talk)
01:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
A fine piece of OR, & reliance on primary sources! You contradict your own research superbly there! "Jews usually refer to the Land of Israel as the "Holy Land"" and you conclude "It doesn't seem like it is very common (at least not in the arguably main languages used by the most relevant religions and populations) to use the term "Holy Land" in Judaism or Islam. They may regard the land as sacred in some way, but calling it "Holy Land", capital H capital L, seems very much a Christian practice." Wonderful! "Palestine" (much less controversial in this period, & the official name for some of it) would be better than "Levant". I don't mind splitting off the 2-3 proto-Israeli figures, who I agree are rather different.
Johnbod (
talk)
02:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Well no, I'm not claiming this is in-depth research lol. Let's try something a bit more empirical:
Google Books search: landscape "orientalist paintings" "holy land": 2.110 results
Google Books search: landscape "orientalist paintings" "levant": 1.950 results
Google Scholar search: landscape "orientalist paintings" "holy land": 207 results
Google Scholar search: landscape "orientalist paintings" "levant": 223 results
Neither "holy land" or "levant" is particularly likely to be part of the title. Painting the Holy Land in the Nineteenth Century (1997) and Visions of the East: Influence of the Levant on the Italian Renaissance (2015) are two rare exceptions to this rule.
David Roberts is often mentioned, but more frequently with "Palestine" than with "Holy Land". His bio
David Roberts (painter) uses the term "Holy Land" no fewer than 12 times, though usually in conjuction with other 'countries' around it: his travelogue The Holy Land, Syria, Idumea, Arabia, Egypt, and Nubia comprises about half of those mentions.
Gustav Bauernfeind (not yet in this category) is more usually associated with "Levant"; in fact, his bio has
Gustav Bauernfeind#Painting the Levant, mentioning 'the Levant, the Orient, Ottoman Palestine, Jerusalem, Lebanon, Syria, the Holy Land'. Seems to me that Levant is the broadest, most encompassing and inclusive term of the two (or three if we count 'Palestine'). As it is broader, it could also include paintings of certain biblical narratives that are set in Transjordan (such as the one of Tissot referenced above), which may or may not be included under the term "Holy Land". It might be a good idea to add a catdesc that gives a description of what we mean by 'Levant', and the term 'Holy Land' does seem fitting there (amongst the other regions/countries I mention in this comment) instead of in the catname itself. Maybe that's an acceptable compromise?
NLeeuw (
talk)
13:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
PS: Something like catname: Category:Orientalist painters of the Levant
It might (moving out the proto-Israelis), but I don't understand why people keep talking about "landscape" painters/paintings. Some, like Lear and Roberts, mostly were, but others, like Hunt and Tissot, concentrated on
history paintings of Biblical narrative subjects, obviously many with landscape backgrounds. I'd still prefer Palestine to Levant. But I think it is important that we explicitly restrict the category to those who had actually spent time in the area, rather than working things up in Europe.
Johnbod (
talk)
17:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
"Palestine" could work as an alternative, certainly for the British mandate period. Johnbod also preferred Palestine over Levant. For me Rename to
Category:Painters of pre-1948 Palestine is a second choice (my primary choice remains Upmerging, see above). This could work as a compromise.
NLeeuw (
talk)
23:11, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment - I am still not sure if this is about painters from "Holly Land" or painters of the "Holly Land", where the "Holly Land" is the label for a theme not a country or state, and I am reading through this discussion for the second time?--
౪ Santa ౪99°14:32, 16 June 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:Polish social activists of the Prussian partition
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.
Also I'm not too sure about it but maybe rename to "Pro-Palestinian activists". Any other suggestion would be helpful; this one seems rather vague.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
14:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support rename to "Pro-Palestinian activists", if only because that new name would be shorter and simpler, yet also straight to the point.
AHI-3000 (
talk)
15:30, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I'll wait for some consensus here before I proceed with the subcategories. Honestly, going through them, I don't think any of these people in any of these categories were checked to see if they actually were activists for Palestinian solidarity, particularly given a number of these aren't pro-Palestinian but rather anti-Israeli.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
14:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I would prefer keeping this category, I should add, since there is a big Palestinian movement and activists who are pro-Palestinian. I just think we should be careful who to put in. Some of these "pro-Palestinian" people aren't pro-Palestinian at all.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
14:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support doing something, but mixed on the alternative rename. I think that the "Pro-Palestinian activists" are indeed a more specific subgroup that are definitely nested within Anti-racist activists. Perhaps splitting or nesting/reorganizing to acknowledge that there are also activists for Palestinian civil rights etc. idk 🤷 It's really complicated.
Mason (
talk)
18:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Smasongarrison, it is quite complicated, you're right. I'm not too sure about myself but, IMO and as you have said yourself, "Pro-Palestinian" is less vague and more definable than "Activists for Palestinian solidarity".
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
19:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
That's a fair point. (To be clear, I'm not opposed to the rename if that's were consensus goes. ) I've started cleaning up the ethnic/religious intersections with the group in the hope that I'll have some inspiration.
Mason (
talk)
19:37, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: No clear consensus on rename. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
02:56, 3 June 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.
They do sound a bit like containercats, but if we treat them like that, it forces us to either upmerge articles, or diffuse articles and create small cats, for which we would need to upmerge them again, but two levels. Hence a bit of pragmatism seems called for until we've got more options.
NLeeuw (
talk)
06:26, 13 June 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:Invasions of the Republic of Genoa
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:Pretenders to the Albanian throne
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.
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 cafeteria workers
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: This is a rather small and narrow category with no real-life equivalent. We don't need a hyperspecific category for literally every job. Edit: Actually it should probably just be deleted, when you remove Chef from South Park, who is already under "Fictional chefs", there is nothing pertinent here.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
06:03, 12 June 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:Fictional extraterrestrial royalty
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:Mythological male/female royalty
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: Yet another
WP:NARROWCAT pointless category. This is such a narrow intersection (mythical + gender + royalty) that a category is not necessary. I don't believe it should be merged to "fictional" as myth and fiction are separate.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
05:38, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Nom is right that having categories with just 2 subcategories isn't very useful for navigation, but we should upmerge to all parents.
NLeeuw (
talk)
06:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Fiction may overlap with mythology in some cases but the two are distinct concepts. Mythology can also contain embellished or rumored versions of real events. The Bible has mythological elements, but most would not agree it is a pure "work of fiction".
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
07:39, 12 June 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:Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms economists
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.
Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms Buddhist monks
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:Socialists by occupation
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.
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:History of Lithuania (1569–1795)
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 - early modern age in Lithuania according to my knowledge starts a century before 1569 (if we take 1453 as the starting year of early modern age). Seems a bit much to make out those to be identical.--
+JMJ+ (
talk)
22:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Around 1500 is most often mentioned as the start of the early modern age and articles about the period between 1500 and 1569 can still be put in the early modern category.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
18:54, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Agree with Marco. "1453" is a bit arbitrary, as it takes the fall of Constantinople as the measure of world history, instead of a rather minor event that was bound to happen to a Byzantine Empire in terminal decay for centuries. "1500" may also be arbitrary as a random round number, but at least it does not assign an arbitrary value of significance to any event, and it has been a commonly used convention in historiography. For Lithuania, of course, 1569 is much more significant, but given that we've already got 2 categories and it doesn't make sense to create separate categories for 1500 to 1568, and 1796 to 1799.
NLeeuw (
talk)
06:35, 12 June 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:PAW Patrol (franchise)
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Merge or reverse merge, too little content for two categories. Technical note, if it is going to be a downmerge then parent categories have to be added to the target manually.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
02:41, 12 June 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:Members of the League of Women Voters
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on renaming and purging? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him)
02:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose given that both nominee and target are very large categories, and no navigational value seems to be served by throwing them together.
NLeeuw (
talk)
19:35, 5 June 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:Coke Studio (franchise)
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:Character songs
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: Category hardly has any entries, with Megalovania being more of a theme song than "sung by the voice actor", of which there is none. The current category members could be merged to parent categories if they aren't in them already.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
00:12, 12 June 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.
36 to 42 days old
June 11
Category:Cute 'em ups by series
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:Kurdish physicists
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: Upmerge. Narrow intersection for small category, which isn't helpful for navigation. There's not even a Kurdish biologist category, so why would we need a subfield?
Mason (
talk)
23:14, 11 June 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:Jeremy Jordan (singer) albums
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:Medieval Kurdish philosophers
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: Upmerge for now. There's no need to diffuse the Kurdish philosophy category by period. There are only 9 people in the entire tree (at the time of nomination).
Mason (
talk)
23:08, 11 June 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.
Middle Ages by country
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 all children of
Category:Middle Ages by country to Medieval history of Fooland per precedent Early modern history of Fooland, and indirectly the Military history of Fooland precedents, as well as consistency (an indirect
WP:C2C argument) with sibling categories
Category:Ancient history by country,
Category:Early modern period by country, and
Category:Modern history by country. Follow-up to
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Early modern period, where we decided to rename all categories to Early modern history of Fooland. Renaming could avoid a lot of anachronisms about modern countries that did not yet exist as such, or not with their modern-day borders, or at least not under their modern names, in the Middle Ages. It's also a lot like how we are currently reframing battles in (former country/region) to military history of (current country/region). Although it has relatively few main articles following this formula (such as
Medieval history of Nepal, or the variation
History of medieval Tunisia,
History of medieval Cumbria, or
Political history of medieval Karnataka), it has been found that article titles using the formula ...in the Middle Ages or ...in antiquity are usually not about countries, but social or cultural phenomena, and that the formula Ancient history of Fooland or History of ancient Fooland is very common, leading to a relatively strong basis in the article space (an indirect
WP:C2D argument). Therefore, the result of the preliminary discussion was Option 1: rename to Medieval history of Fooland. All nominees will be tagged as such (but options for alternative target names remain open if participants can provide compelling rationales).
Preliminary discussion on renaming options
There may also be a need to harmonise the categories further according to either one of the following options:
Medieval Fooland: one option is to keep the current category names, but seek to change the main article titles instead, per a small minority of main articles, such as
Medieval India,
Medieval Croatia,
Medieval Armenia,
Medieval Jerusalem,
Medieval Corsica, and some derivatives like
Norman and medieval London or
Europeans in Medieval China,
Slavery in medieval Europe. This would save us a lot of trouble renaming categories, it just adds to our trouble of renaming articles, which is a different projectspace. And although it is more concise, this option does not have my preference, because it makes the anachronism problem much worse. It will not be consistent with our recent renaming of Early modern history of Fooland either, and we might have to revisit it. But for the sake of completeness, I do offer it for your consideration.
Thank you for this big nomination and elaborate rationale. Option 3 is clearly a no-go for reasons already outlined. Initially I thought I'd have a clear preference for option 1 but at second thought I no longer see a good reason why, they each have their own pros. So either option 1 or 2.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
21:47, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
You're welcome, and thank you for paving the way with the early modern period precedent, as well as voicing your support earlier today when I asked your advice. I also thought this was gonna be a lot easier beforehand, but there is a substantial number of Fooland in the Middle Ages articles that gave me pause. In the end, the article space should always be prioritised over the category space, and
WP:C2D will almost always be a stronger argument than
WP:C2C. So I've currently got a slight preference for option 2 over option 1, but it's close. I hope others can persuade us to a better perspective.
NLeeuw (
talk)
22:58, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
PS: One reason why the ...in the Middle Ages might be so popular, whereas ...in the early modern period is essentially unheard of, might be because we often speak and think of the Middle Ages as a "place" rather than a time. Say "Middle Ages" or "medieval", and someone else may soon imagine castles and catapults, convents and chronicles, commerce and crusaders. But if someone says "early modern", I struggle a lot more to paint a picture for myself of what that time looked like, and to imagine it as a "place" where people walked around. Strange thing how that works linguistically. Not sure if I'm the only one? But that might help to explain why these articles and categories are titled so differently.
NLeeuw (
talk)
23:14, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Hmmm no other input? I guess we'll have to wait for relisting or I'll have to start tagging pages... At the moment, option 2 seems most promising due to its strong basis in the article space. Many could be C2D'd if we wanted to. The other articles could be BOLDly moved per TITLECON... But I prefer to have a discussion, as we still to justify ignoring the early modern history of Fooland precedent which Marcocapelle set.
NLeeuw (
talk)
23:05, 16 June 2024 (UTC)reply
After thinking about this some more, I've realised that the Renaissance category tree should be within the early modern category tree. I've also found lots of instances of Prehistory of Fooland as opposed to Prehistoric Fooland (which weren't previously in
Category:National prehistories), so perhaps an Early modern history of Fooland–style naming schema can work for prehistory after all.
Ham II (
talk)
17:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Hmm. Well, at the very least the catname should be clarified.
Category:Prehistory by country? Parents
Category:History by country and
Category:Prehistory by region suggest catname Prehistory by country as a logical intersection. (The catname "national prehistories" had me think they meant 'the history of nation X before it became a nation-state (in the 19th century)', or something like that. But they do mean prehistory in the sense of "before the time of written sources". Just an odd catname for it).
NLeeuw (
talk)
20:36, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
"Ancient history of" works much better to get country-themed articles. Lots of articles are names "Ancient history of Fooland" or "History of ancient Fooland". Option 1 has a very strong basis in the article space, unlike with "Medieval history of" / "History of medieval". Option 2 seems to be strongly tied to countries "in the Middle Ages", but very weakly tied to countries "in antiquity".
Option 3, "Ancient Fooland", has similar problems to option 2: it's often not about countries. And if it is, it may sometimes be considered anachronistic. E.g. "Ancient France' seems wrong, but with "Ancient Gaul" we probably have no problem (although "Ancient" seems redundant: we assume Gaul to be places in antiquity). "Ancient Russia" or "Ancient Ukraine" are somewhat dubious, but "Ancient Rus' " is sometimes used (although it refers to Middle Ages rather than antiquity, and the preferred term is "
Kievan Rus'"). Similarly "Ancient England"... why should we call it "England" before there are any
Angles there? Ancient history of England seems much more tenable, because that way we're less trying to force "England" into antiquity where it wasn't yet known as such. And so on.
Overall, I think I'm starting to favour option 1 Ancient/Medieval/Early modern history of Fooland for all catnames now.
A few exceptions may be made, especially for countries / societies / cultures which were already called by that name at the time. I don't think we should rename articles
Ancient Rome and
Ancient Greece to
History of ancient Rome and
History of ancient Greece, or something. That seems superfluous, especially with Rome. But for countries that didn't exist yet, Ancient history of Fooland seems the way to go, both as maim articles titles and as catnames
NLeeuw (
talk)
15:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ancient Egypt is another one. I'm not sure how strong "they were called that at the time" is as a rationale; possibly a better argument might be that they're ancient civilisations more than countries, with those names as
WP:COMMONNAMEs.
Ham II (
talk)
16:12, 28 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm leaning option 1 now: Ancient / Medieval / Early modern history of Fooland. It is the least ambiguous and anachronistic, and therefore most justifiable. It has a pretty strong basis in category and precedent, and some presence in the main article space (especially ancient history of Fooland).
Option 2 seems best fitted for subjects that aren't about countries, but social and cultural phenomena. Apart from several Fooland in the Middle Ages articles, it does not have a strong basis in the article space, and virtually no basis in the category space.
Option 3 has decent bases in both, but is most at risk of anachronisms. We seem to agree already that this is a no-go (also given precedent Early modern history of Fooland). Only given exceptions such as
Ancient Rome and
Ancient Greece need not be changed.
NLeeuw (
talk)
01:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Update: I've now tagged all nominees with the Option 1 target name as a result of the preliminary discussion. I'd like to thank
Marcocapelle and
Ham II for their input. I've got two further questions at the moment:
1. Should we leave the current names as redirects as soon as the proposal is approved? That would help editors (and readers) navigate and edit, and prevent re-creation and thus duplication. The current names often correspond to several main articles and links, so leaving redirects seems appropriate. Thoughts?
Support renaming to Medieval history of Fooland, per my earlier comments. And, eventually, Prehistory of / Ancient history of / Modern history of Fooland, to match Medieval history of / Early modern history of Fooland.
Ham II (
talk)
16:12, 28 June 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:Battles involving Germanic peoples
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:Former synagogues Nebraska
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:Former synagogues Wisconsin
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:Bond (string quartet)
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: With subcategories only for the quartet's albums and their covers, the eponymous category is unnecessary per
WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me15:56, 11 June 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:Battles involving the Nizari Ismaili state
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:Central March
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 per nom. In addition, governor of the Central March seems to be a relatively minor position, not contributing much to the notability of the subject of the article.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
17:07, 11 June 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.
Oppose. The category is part of a wider category family on governments of historical states. What exactly is the gain of deleting it and upmerging, that is enough to counterbalance the loss in categorization? There are likely even more articles already on WP that can be added there, and certainly still more that can be written, as the topic is under-represented.
Constantine ✍ 16:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. The two articles aren't really about government of the Ayyubid Sultanate, they are about the outskirts of it. If anything, they are about social geography rather than about government, but having them simply in the main category is even better.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
17:57, 11 June 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:Government of the Samanid Empire
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:Ambassadors of the Republic of Venice to the Kingdom of Sardinia
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 P, 0 C.
WP:MFN. There are many, many underpopulated (1 to 4 P) ambassador cats like this created in February–May 2024 by the same person. Others were created longer ago.
NLeeuw (
talk)
14:50, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The category is not arbitrary and has clearly room of expansion, as the Republic of Venice and the Kingdom of Sardinia overlapped by several centuries. If the category exists, articles will be added to it. If it is deleted, they won't; not many WP members are actively engaged in categorization. If a reader, like myself, is interested in the bilateral relations between Venice and specific other states, why should they go hunting in more generic categories? This equally applies to the other 'underpopulated categories' mentioned in the nomination. I really don't understand what the project gains from deletions like this.
Constantine ✍ 16:12, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The purpose of categories is easy navigation between articles. Categories in categories in categories which contain only 1 article do not ease navigation.
NLeeuw (
talk)
19:02, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge, per nom. One may be interested in this intersection, sure, but if there aren't any other articles then the most closely related articles are in the more general categories and merging helps navigation to them. Of course, no objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
18:21, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge per nom. There categories are indeed extremely underpopulated, and often isolated from where readers expect to see them (somewhere in the modern country category typically).
Mason (
talk)
22:24, 11 June 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:SaarLorLux Open
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:Government of the Almohad Caliphate
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Government of the Khwarazmian Empire
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:People by ethnic 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.
Nominator's rationale: These categories are for people of different ethnic descents. There is nothing here specific to any particular continent. Additionally, the names might wrongly imply that this is the person's own ethnicity when, in reality, it refers to their ancestors' ethnicity.
Aldij (
talk)
12:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Most of the categories are already included through the nationality descent category. However, I agree to the duplicate merge as well.
Aldij (
talk)
07:11, 12 June 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.
Category:Gilgit-Baltistan history stubs
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:merge, poorly populated stub categories and we usually do not have stub history categories by Pakistani province.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:28, 11 June 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:Events at the Amway Center
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on FL's proposal? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
00:49, 11 June 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.
My point was the OP's argument was not compelling by itself because that would mean that anything defunct would be worth deleting. (I picked the Roman Empire because it was obviously worth keeping, but would fail using op's argument)
Mason (
talk)
05:02, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Lean keep Main article
This TV does not say anywhere explicitly that the network is defunct, just that its website went down in May 2024. Secondly, this category has a main article,
List of This TV affiliates, implying that this subject qualifies for a stand-alone page. Personally, I think that article is poorly sourced, and perhaps it should be AfD'd, which would open the way for a deletion of this category. But until that happens, I don't see a compelling reason to delete the category just yet.
NLeeuw (
talk)
15:32, 11 June 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:Wesley L. McDonald Distinguished Statesman and Stateswoman of Aviation Award
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.
This is probably the most prominent award for civil aviation that exists in the United States. It more than a defining characteristic.
Nayyn (
talk)
11:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on deletion? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
00:42, 11 June 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.
June 10
Category:Gaborone task force
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.
Keep The main article is
Ex-Muslims. ”apostate is a pejorative label and is meant to reflect the sense of betrayal felt by those who remain members of the religion”.
[8] --
Thi (
talk)
20:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ok does the category exist because of discontent with the name of the parent category?
Apostasy in Islam is commonly defined as the abandonment of Islam by a Muslim, in thought, word, or through deed. There is nothing pejorative about it.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:49, 10 June 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:Berber former Christians
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:Lists of film festivals in Oceania
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: Category which exists solely to hold one list at the same level of differentiation. This would be fine if one or more Oceanian countries had their own separate standalone lists independently of the continent-wide list, but none do, so the list does not need an "eponymous" category just to recursively contain itself if there are no supplementary sublists for specific Oceanian countries to file along with it. The list, further, was left double-filed in all of the parent categories alongside this, so no upmerging is needed.
Bearcat (
talk)
15:24, 10 June 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:Lists of awards received by Ugandan writer
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:Lists of awards received by Ugandan film director
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:Society of Kurdistan
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. The only proponent is a blocked sock; anyone else is welcome to renominate this category if they wish to pursue this further. HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
15:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Kurdistan is a region, not an ethnicity. The nom has been blocked, and they also changed the parent category from Category:Society by region to Society by ethnicity
Mason (
talk)
21:32, 14 June 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.
Battles in Spain 2
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:Aunty Disco Project
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:Unreal Engine 5 games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Duplicative with
Category:Unreal Engine games. No merge required, as all members of the nominated category are in the original already. Each version of Unreal Engine is not independently notable or distinct. --
ferret (
talk)
22:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I disagree because Category:Unreal Engine games is very large and spans more than two decades of video games. There isn't much use in knowing that a game was made with "just" Unreal Engine from the point of view of someone reading about the game compared to knowing that it was made in Unreal 5 which tells you a lot more about what you can expect from the game both in terms of graphics and gameplay (that is, within a given specific genre). Similarly, there isn't much use in knowing a game was made in "just" Unreal from the point of view of someone reading about Unreal itslef as nobody develops games in "Unreal Engine." Consider also that the Video Game infobox Engine field usually has the Unreal Engine version listed, not just "Unreal Engine", because just listing "Unreal Engine" is not so useful. Each version of Unreal is a separate piece of software. Also, not all members of the nominated category are in the original already (at least at the time that I added some of them).
I propose instead of deleting the category, it should be a sub-category under
Category:Unreal Engine games. In fact, I think the all the pages under this category also should be sorted by Unreal Engine type, i.e. UE1, UE2, UE3 and UE4. This rationale is made since the list of games for each Unreal Engine version is deleted, and there should be categories that list by version to clean up
Category:Unreal Engine games. Otherwise the alternative is to simply delete
Category:Unreal Engine games. ~
Limyx826 (
talk)
19:30, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
WP:DEFINING requires that reliable sources consistently describe the games as having this property.
WP:TRIVIALCAT may also be applicable. Can you please point me to the discussion about the — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Marcocapelle (
talk •
contribs)
Thanks. I can see how
WP:DEFINING is applicable here (even though there're enough sources to model this in Wikidata, like ModDB, those are mostly unreliable in enwiki). But then I don't see how the same logic is not applicable to the general
Category:Unreal Engine games (since the
List of Unreal Engine games was deleted). To me it looks like either we should delete most of the engines' categories, or we can keep separate categories for Unreal Engine versions. Whenever a media covers game engines, it usually specifies UE version (
Stormgate,
Mass Effect Legendary Edition,
Sin City, etc).And I don't see how
WP:TRIVIALCAT is applicable. The difference between Unreal Engine 1 and Unreal Engine 5 is very significiant, both from user's and developer's perspective, so in my opinion it actually helps the navigation.There were no inwiki discussion about splitting the category as far as I can remember. We discussed some aspects of it on Russian WPVG Discord server, but that's probably it.
A particle for world to form (
talk)
06:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. The separate versions pretty much characterize the games, comparing to just "Unreal Engine", given its existence for many years. The UE versions are quite different from each other, both in terms of development and end result. They all have their own separate version tree as well, so I would even say to some extent these are the different engines under the same brand name. The versions are also extensively covered in the sources, just as the versions for individual games are often supported by sources and are listed in the infobox. There may not be enough material for individual articles (needs to be verified), but there is enough material to split up this clogged category. The difference between the versions is enormous and obvious to anyone who follows the industry, and generally useful to any reader. Practically, you'll have little use for the information that
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (video game) and
Tekken 8 were made on the same engine. But looking at them as separate versions is already a defining characteristic -
WP:DEFINING. The distinct version categories also correspond better to
WP:CATDD, which explicitly states to use the most specific categories.Therefore, I support splitting c:Unreal Engine games into 5 subcategories with gradual moving of articles to corresponding versions and turning the main category into a meta category. On Russian Wikipedia it really looks much cleaner and more informative than the endless listing we have now.
Solidest (
talk)
05:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep Either we get rid of the "Unreal Engine games" category entirely, or this should stay. Unreal Engine 5 is absolutely distinct from something like the original Unreal Engine, to the point that it's essentially two separate pieces of software sharing a similar name. The argument that they are the same thing doesn't hold water from either a technical or a visual standpoint.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
08:57, 10 June 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:Female drug traffickers
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 gender, criminal, and specific kind of crime committed. I don't think that this holds up under
WP:EGRS.
Mason (
talk)
03:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Split There is no main article for female drug traffickers, which is a good indication it's not defining. If someone can prove otherwise and/or make a main article, I would think otherwise.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
05:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Question: Can any of the opposers (@
AHI-3000@
Dimadick) make the case that this specific intersection with gender and type of crime is actually defining per EGRS? No one is saying that crime and gender isn't defining, but I struggle to see how this specific crime type is defining.
Mason (
talk)
00:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: For those in favor of getting rid of the category, what should it be replaced with? Single merge? Double merge? Split? For those in favor of keeping the category, evidence that this is defining? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
02:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I didn't realize most were already under gangsters, so I can support the single merge. As long as this category is removed.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
06:20, 10 June 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:Accidents during the New Year celebrations
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.
June 9
Category:Ipswich town preachers
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.
Propose capitalisation: move
Category:Ipswich town preachers to
Category:Ipswich Town Preachers. When this category entered the jigsaw world of signs, known as wikipedia, it was unclear whether the category should use uppercase letters to initialise not merely Ipswich, but also "Town Preacher". The Oxford Academic use lower case, but local historian
John Blatchly goes for uppercase. I think the advantage of this that it is clear that this refers to people who held a formal role, rather than a simply being a wikipedia category that lists Clergy from Ipswich. Often
Ipswich Corporation appointed people from elsewhere. Bearing in mind the significance of some of those who occupied this role such as
Samuel Ward (minister) or
Cave Beck, it would seem appropriate to have such a category. I feel that capitalisation will indicate the category is more formal/historical.
Leutha (
talk)
12:08, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Question: I've reverted your unexplained removal of this category from the proposed merge target. How is this category not Clergy from Ipswich? And why is the current category parented by 17th-century clergy.
Mason (
talk)
12:50, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
As can be seen from the discussion above, the category is quite formal. Many people filing this role were not from Ipswich:
Samuel Ward (minister) was from
Haverhill,
Matthew Lawrence (preacher) was from North
Lincolnshire,
Cave Beck was from London. The references for the Town Preachers are largely consistent from 1604, G. R.Clarke gives a list of 7 before 1604 in his 1830 The history and description of the town and borough of Ipswich: 343 . However only one appears in Blatchly's list in his book on The Town Library of Ipswich (1989): 177 . Any suggestions as regards how to handle the earlier individuals such as
Roger Kelke, the
Marian exile who returned to become Ipswich Town Preacher from 1560 until 1575, according to Blatchly? ibid : 4 .
Leutha (
talk)
15:56, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Ok... so it sounds like this information would be better served as a list. Categories are supposed to be there to help people navigate between pages. I would *strongly* encourage you to look at how other categories handle clergy from a region.
It seems like you are under the impression that People from a city is only for people who were born from the city. That's too narrow of a definition, as Bishops of CITY/ diocese are placed within the clergy from CITY/REGION etc category. And, so if I am understanding your very long comment, you're added the parent because there's only one example of of a precher from before the 17th century, but you don't speak to what about after the 17th century.
Mason (
talk)
00:44, 17 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.
Category:Battles by location in Greece
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:Housing rights activists from Detroit
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:Acquired citizenship
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:Drake–Kendrick Lamar feud
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.
not sure this is a good idea. because some things might not be a song for example the New Ho King restaurant which got very famous because of the feud. there was also a pizzeria, and if more things comes up "songs" would not make sense Freedun (
yippity yap)
00:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I will note that Freedun has been blocked as a sock (in other words, I consider this unopposed as of now). Given that there is a potential objection, I will relist, but in a week if there are no further comments I would close this as soft rename. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
22:01, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree with this decision. As long as there are articles about the feud that are not about songs, having the parent category will be pretty handy.
RPI2026F1 (
talk)
00:28, 15 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I also support a partial merge per Relinus, considering there are multiple articles in this category that aren't songs, a full rename wouldn't be appropriate. ULPS(
talk •
contribs)16:39, 25 June 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:Internet technology companies by Bangladesh
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.
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:Hamas bombers
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: "Bomber" and "military wing membership" aren't specific roles – they are attributions or in some cases here allegations or associations. Leadership is also a vague concept in the context and can refer to individuals at all different levels up and down the hierarchy, so "leader" is also not a specific role here. There's no reason why these sub-categories wouldn't simply be more usefully listed under the main category anyway.
Iskandar323 (
talk)
04:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The category wasn't populated with any "bombers", which are aircraft. It contained five military engineers and bomb markers and one suicide bomber, which is a precise term.
Iskandar323 (
talk)
18:08, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I have restored the six members. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk17:51, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
It can be merged to
Category:Hamas military members, but that would only prequel a further discussion on renaming/deletion. At the moment, it is imprecise and could be readily deleted as vapid and meaningless. Alternatively, five members are "bomb markers", not "bombers", so it could be renamed to that; however, the last is a suicide bomber, which would need removing in case of renaming.
Iskandar323 (
talk)
18:28, 9 June 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:Ancient villages in Israel
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. There is no need to merge, the subcategory is already in appropriate parents.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
16:51, 9 June 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:People with acquired citizenship
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 People can acquire citizenship through other means than naturalization. Many jus sanguinis countries allow people to register as citizens without going through the naturalization process if they have family ties to the country. The discussion was poorly attended and flat out wrong because most people with acquired Israeli citizenship got it via a different process than naturalization. (
t ·
c) buidhe05:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I would lean towards opposing merge because heritage citizenship acquisition is very different from naturalization, and could be a defining difference. Besides naturalization is a more common term, because most countries with a lot of new citizens get them via naturalization primarily or exclusively. (
t ·
c) buidhe05:47, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle, @
Smasongarrison I think merging as is would be better, don't you? I would also open to reverse merge too since "aquired" is a more broader term covering types of citizenships. I just don't think splitting hairs between types of methods is advisable here.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
20:41, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That is also true, so I am not wedded to a particular merge direction. I do think that these categories should be merged somehow since the difference between the two is pretty trivial.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
21:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I think it was already processed two days ago, but the categories can be retagged and included here, if there is consensus to revert we can revert.
Ymblanter (
talk)
05:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Note 1: If a merge does go ahead, the parent categories will need to be edited manually. Note 2: I only found this after merging Wikidata on some of the former set. I am willing to undo that work if there is consensus to revert. –
FayenaticLondon10:09, 11 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: I don't think we need to diffuse Bavand or Baduspanid dynasty by century. Instead I think we should repurpose it to be a nationality category.
Mason (
talk)
20:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, the category only contains two centuries... and we don't typically have categories at the intersection of occupation+century+family dynasty. And we don't have parent categories for several of the two way intersections, which makes it hard for me to see a case for why this narrow intersection is defining.
Mason (
talk)
20:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Lots of differing options; any compromise? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
16:14, 9 June 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:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia
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: no accurate reliable sources to verify such a classification, even the category descroption says "This category is not necessarily indicative of total loss of population, traditions, language or culture - each specific case may have particular individual contexts" that its unable to be clearerly define or even confirm that the launguage, culture, people, knowledge, country is actually extinct Wikipedia should not be categorising as such.
Gnangarra13:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Gnangarra The category description can be changed. If articles can use past tense words like "were" and "was" in reference to a tribe, I'm not seeing why the word "extinct" is out of question.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
18:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The thing is the issue of using the "
tribes" to decsribe Indigenous Countries, Cultures and People in Australia is inaccurate at best racist at worst. The term itself implies a lot of colonial misinformation and a distinct lack of understanding of Indigenous Cutlures in Australia. The use of past tense in words like were or was is also not an indicator of the Indigenous Countries, cultures, languages or peoples continuation. Very specifically by calling a Country extinct that frees the restriction of cultural protocols applying when working on with Indugenous Cultural materials. All countries are still in existance and are represented through Land Councils who manage everything from protocols on entering a country, to land rights. My reasoning is not playing words games its saying that the assumption of being extinct is a misnomer, even in languages and cultures where a recent Language conference in Queensland a professor was luaghed off stage when he stated that a language was extinct yet multiple people stood up and spoke the language. Without rocksolid gold plate sources published within the last 4 years the label of extinct is a false narrative derived from the recent history wars, and anti landrights campaigners. The other issue we have is the Australian Bureau of Statistics problematic collection of reliable data as it records just one language spoken not all In the context of the Census, 'Indigenous' or 'First Nations' results are defined by respondents who have answered that they are of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander background. There are over 230 Australian Indigenous Languages that the Census records which is less than the actual number of Indigenous languages.[9].
Gnangarra09:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, the use of "tribe" isn't my decision. It is used for many articles about Aboriginal Australian groups, so that seems to perhaps be a wider issue worth fixing. What is the continuation of a group like the
Toogee? What is the relevant land council?
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
07:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Tribe is not used in Australia, the poor use of terms in Wikipedia articles is one of the many barriers people working with Indigenous cultures struggle to address as shows Wikipedia in a bad light and not respectful of the culture. Basically ticks all the racists, Inforwar, challenge faced out on the street its up to us to lift our standards.
Gnangarra12:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle Aren't we talking about cultural extinction? Are you defining extinction as the literal death of all group members without any descendants? That seems like an unorthodox interpretation. The
Susquehannock people are extinct as a tribe, despite having some descendants in the
Seneca-Cayuga Nation. I don't see any contradiction here.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
18:41, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Frustratingly, the term "extinct" seems to be used somewhat inconsistently for both cultural extinction and the death of all group members (at least, from a google search). Is there a better term we could use to distinguish the two?
Category:Extinct ethnic groups is currently a subcategory under
Category:Human extinction which implies the latter, so perhaps it should be renamed and/or categorized differently if most of the members are groups that are only culturally extinct.
Psychastes (
talk)
19:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Seneca-Cayuga Nation is not an Indigenous Country in Australia, you are making comparisons that are not like for like.
Gnangarra09:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Genocide happens. Wishful thinking doesn't change that. "Extinct" is a harsh and ugly word to apply to people; it's natural to recoil in disgust at the idea. It may be very appealing to think that a group "didn't really go extinct" because some of their descendants blended into other groups. But if the group no longer exists as a distinct people with a distinct culture and language, the group really is extinct. Perhaps something like
Category:Former Indigenous peoples would be less noxious to the moral sense of the reader.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
04:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Mitch Ames That leads to two questions. Is there even one example in all of Australian history of an entire group being murdered without any known descendants? Are there any examples of groups who, through genocidal violence and assimilation, ceased to exist as distinct cultural groups? In both cases, there would have to be terminology to describe a group that once was and now is no longer. If not "extinct", there would still have to be some other description.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
10:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Actually, we need to be careful not to conflate "genocide" and "extinction".
Genocide does not require killing all of the people - it is defined as "intentional destruction ... in whole or in part".
Extinction requires that they all die, but doesn't require intent. There may be an overlap, but they are not the same thing, and neither implies the other.
Mitch Ames (
talk)
12:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Gnangarra Since my meaning apparently wasn't clear; there are genocidal acts of violence which lead to the literal or cultural destruction of peoples. What terminology would you use to refer to groups that have been physically annihilated in entirety through genocidal violence, disease, etc? What terminology would you use to refer to historical groups that may have living descendants but that are no longer culturally distinct due to genocidal violence, etc?
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
13:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
This is the issue the assumptions here are made based on the use of past tense language in the article, none of them have any reliable sources to support being included in this category. Given that the category itself should be deleted.
Gnangarra13:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Gnangarra There are a small number of articles. I do not have a strong opinion on the category, whether it should be renamed or deleted. But I reiterate my question; are there any historical Indigenous Australian groups that can be said to have once existed but that no longer do? What terminology should be used to refer to those historical groups?
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
15:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I dont have any reliable sources to answer that question, all I know is the articles in this category dont have reliable sources to even be included in the category. The whole purpose of raising it here is exatcly the category itself not some wider theoretical discussion on meanings or what ifs. I gather I can remove them all from this category for lack of sourcing that clearly supports the claim.
Gnangarra12:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Mitch Ames I'm not conflating genocide and extinction; I myself belong to a group whose history includes the former but not the latter. But I would question why the word extinction has to automatically mean everybody dies. I don't think a term like "cultural extinction" implies that.
Bohemian Baltimore (
talk)
13:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
why the word extinction has to automatically mean everybody dies — Because when we are talking about people, that's what the word means "
Extinction is the termination ... by the death of its last member." Admittedly if we are talking about culture we could say that the group is extinct if nobody belongs to it. (If we all gave up editing and
WMF deleted Wikipedia,
Wikipedians could be said to be "extinct", but most us would still be alive.)
My main point
here is that we should probably not use the word "genocide" in this discussion, because it is neither necessary nor sufficient for "extinction", and is unnecessarily emotive. Yes genocide happened, but that does not determine whether a particular people is extinct or not.
Mitch Ames (
talk)
14:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The term "cultural extinction" is not helpful at all. Even if there is no tangible remainders of a culture you never know how much of customs and oral literature have been exchanged with and integrated in other cultures.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
15:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: having now been through every article not one defines the culture, people, or country as extinct, sadly Tindale works from 1974 is the primary source in every article and the most recent. The issue there their inclusion is based on whoever started the article using a generic type sentence like according to tindale they (some past tense word) from this area in Queensland. Ironically the only article with recent sourcing is about the current issue of domestic violance in Australia which makes no sense as its in this category.
Gnangarra12:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Presumably you could solve the problem by changing "The Xxxx were ..." to "The Xxxx are ..." (other verb tense changes as appropriate), and providing a reliable source to support the statement of their continued existence.
Mitch Ames (
talk)
14:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I could change the wording, but as all the articles are basically say Tindale described these countries on his map as being xxxx, their inclusion in the category isnt based on reliable sources or hints of a reference to Extinct. I suggest the category becomes extinct.
Gnangarra14:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment - for the record I had created this category in response to seeing a universal category being created for Extinct Indigenous groups, including Australian people, it seemed at the time better to identify the Australian component of an apparent claim. Note that by creating the category, I did not necessarily agree with either the category title or its assumptions, which is why I placed in bold comments as to the very specific event/issue raised in articles. I am intrigued by the discussion to date, as it seems either concentrating upon category trees and related subjects, or the issues of how to name groups of people who have been affected by reduction or severe loss of population. As the process in this particular part of wikipedia is relative to categories, there is a problem as to whether the actual subject is best ventured as to the veracity of terminology. It could be for everyones advantage to delete the original parent category, and find somewhere other than this CFD to explore the issues that are raised here. A collaborative approach to the wider wikipedian understanding of how to 'frame' the larger world wide issue of how and when ethnic groups have decimation of population is something well beyond the bounds of this cfd, and to simply arrive at a decision here on one small perspective does the larger project some significant disservice. Definitely not a 'free for all' RFC or similar, it needs a very specific guideline and process that works through the issues raised here, for the larger project. But then this is wikipedia, anything could happen.
JarrahTree02:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Lots of discussion, but no concrete proposals (which is not inherently a bad thing!). What should happen to the category? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
16:13, 9 June 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.
Oppose. The current name strikes an acceptable compromise between person-first or identity first language that neither of proposed renames addresses.
[10][11][12][13] Furthermore, the main article was moved to Autism, which doesn't solve the problem for people on the spectrum.
Mason (
talk)
00:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment, this is really a
WP:COMMONNAME type of discussion. I think "people on the autism spectrum" has become the common name by now but I would welcome if someone would come up with relevant statistics.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose:"on the autism spectrum" is terminology that has significant support amongst autistic people themselves
[14] and is at the very least terminology that few people hate.
[15] The preference for identity-first language is not as uniform as it's made out to be, and "on the autism spectrum" represents a fairly non-controversial compromise. Its only drawback is that it's not as popular. In academic research, I'm assuming it's because they tend to use the full name "autism spectrum disorder". Google Scholar search results of the past 10 years yields this: "people with autism" -> 29.300 results, "autistic people" -> 16.900 results, "people on the autism spectrum" -> 5.590 results, "people with autism spectrum disorder" -> 12.200 results, "people with ASD" -> 17.000 results. On Google Trends, "autistic people" has overtaken "people with autism", and "people on the autism spectrum" ranks far beneath both of them.
[16]
Based on popularity (academic and common) and the fact that there is support among autistic people, I'm not completely opposed to changing it to "autistic people", but said support is far from uniform so I'm hesitant about a hard line stance.
TheZoodles (
talk)
08:34, 31 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:Hospitals in Dharwad
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: These categories are one half of a twin city
Hubli-Dharwad. The cities have a single municipal corporation called Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corporation. (It's like the Twin-Cities Minnesota). Almost all of these categories were made by now blocked sock puppet.
Mason (
talk)
01:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting as this is will impact a lot of categories. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
16:00, 9 June 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:Former Jewish agricultural colonies of Podolia Governorate
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 for now, only one article in the category is not helpful for navigation. No objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
15:26, 9 June 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:United States religion navigational boxes
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.
Honestly, this whole thing video game language category is just a big mess. These categories are tied to three previous Cfd -
here,
here, and
here - where the nominator is behaving oddly. They nominated it but the began to oppose it the moment people voted delete, saying they would withdraw it but never did and instead created more categories. I don't know what is going on. These are the rest of the categories which weren't nominated.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
07:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose and close. But will Rename parent cat to "Single-language video games." These are diffing and categorize video games in a certain way.
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
19:24, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Per nom and others. To QuantumFoam, please familiarize yourself with category policy or it may lead to a block.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
04:02, 20 June 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.
Category:Former atheist critics of atheism
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: Upmerge this narrow intersection. Also, it's unclear from the name if this is supposed to be former critics of atheism or former atheists.
Mason (
talk)
03:21, 9 June 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.
Category:Video games by language
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: The reason why I'm deleting these categories are only for video games supported in a single language, and none of these categories are fully-populated either. More importantly many titles only available in a single language can alternatively be found in
Category:Region-exclusive video gamesQuantumFoam66 (
talk)
01:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment There are several multiregional languages, such as English, French (France, Canada, French Africa, French Polynesia, French Caribbean), Portuguese (Brazil, Portugal, Macao), Spanish (Spain, Latin America, Philippines), Russian (North Asia, Central Asia, Europe), Arabic (North Africa, West Asia, East Africa, Central Asia, Islamic World), Hebrew (Jewish World) --
65.92.244.143 (
talk)
06:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment, this is a container category. Its fate is conditional on what happens with the subcategories, which have also been nominated on this page.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
19:35, 3 June 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:English-language-only video games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: I am deleting this category along with other Video games by language categories, (expect Chinese-language-only video games, which will merge with China-exclusive video games). Reason: Many English-only titles are otherwise located in Category:North-America-exclusive video games
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
01:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Australia is not a multilingual region, indigenously developed games would be in English, same with New Zealand. Both are not in North America. Elon Musk's game Blastar was developed in South Africa in English only. So English isn't a language that is restricted to North America. Many games for the Acorn or the BBC were developed only in English and were mostly released in Britain and Australia --
65.92.244.143 (
talk)
06:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I will tag the category. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
18:12, 8 June 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:Chinese-language-only video games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Some of these titles may be available be it digitally or physically outside of China. But I don't follow that logic. Merge.
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
01:55, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong delete, strong oppose merger You can’t just say “I don’t follow that logic, must be deleted” and expect it to work. But yes delete.
48JCLTALK19:28, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment This merger makes no sense. Taiwan exists. There have been vidoegames that were made for Taiwan or Hong Kong (pre-1997) that were only in Chinese. If this is properly populated, it should not contain just PRC-exclusive games. --
65.92.244.237 (
talk)
06:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep: I suppose I will withdraw my will the delete this category because of that logic. While Japanese, English, get deleted for some other reasons.
QuantumFoam66 (
talk)
00:09, 30 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:Billionaires of African 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.
Keep. The intersection isn't trivial there's a long academic interest in economic inequality in the African American community. Billionaires are a good indicator of progress in that regard because it indicates that African Americans have made progress and can break into the elite. If not kept, the categories should be merged, not deleted.
Mason (
talk)
22:09, 19 June 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.
We can clearly discern intent, and it absolutely matters. Intentionally cited retractions have been reviewed by humans as appropriate to cite for the context, e.g.
[18]. Articles with unintentionally cited retracted papers need review and very likely an update of the content based on a retracted paper, e.g.
[19]. Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}03:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
+1 that it absolutely matters. Citing
doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)11096-0 (the infamous
Lancet MMR autism fraud paper) is fine if you are citing it as a primary source (with the usual caveats about citing primary sources), but citing it as a legitimate piece of research absolutely needs to be checked. This is a tracking category; intent is determined by |intentional= parameter. HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
04:52, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - as the botop here that's inconveniently finding stuff to go into this category, it is absolutely important to distinguish which categories have been tagged and which have been checked. I'm not going to guess if the tag I've just applied is intentional or now. Happy with the renaming proposal as long as it's kept consistant with all 3 of the template types, this won't affect the bot as long as it's done in the template correctly.
Mdann52 (
talk)
13:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Mdann52: you wrote "Happy with the renaming proposal" which I think overrides your first word "Keep" – did you just mean "Keep them separate", rather than "Keep current names"? –
FayenaticLondon07:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)wreply
@
Fayenatic london: thanks for checking. Essentially, if this is just nominating one category, we should keep this as is. If we are changing the naming convention of all 3 categories, then I'm happy to support that.
Mdann52 (
talk)
10:10, 23 June 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:Teen Titans Go! (TV series) images
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 female mechanics
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 see any reason to split this by gender. There's only 10 articles in it, so there's no reason based on size. I don't really think being a female really matters with me mechanics. JDDJS (
talk to me •
see what I've done)16:37, 8 June 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:Nepali language movement activists
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on renaming? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
16:03, 8 June 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.
Category:Historical geography of Fars
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: This distinction for people who attended the extension school seems like an arbitrary distinction and is likely not defining for any of the two members in the category
Mason (
talk)
01:24, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. The UCLA Extension is one of the constituent colleges in the UCLA Systems, and one of the oldest at UCLA (it is a separate accredited college and not a designation for off campus students). Several other universities have extension colleges as can be seen
here. These colleges, designed for working people, are becoming more popular, particularly post COVID. There are many links to the main article for people, which likely means the cat can be populated well beyond the 10 already in it (I added a few since the start of this CFD). Also, this cat provides an opportunity for subcategorization of an overpopulated upper level cat. Semper Fi!
FieldMarine (
talk)
02:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge per nom. While you are right that there are other extension schools, this is the only one with a category and there doesn't seem to be a big difference between normal alumni and extension school alumni.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
20:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I would still say merge per my second reasoning. I don't think the Harvard Extension School teaches anything special anymore than UCLA Extension does. @
Smasongarrison, I think you should nominate this category as well, in fact (and any other similar one).
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
23:14, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I've added to nom per @
Omnis Scientia, pinging @
FieldMarine. No one is saying that the extension school isn't notable, but that the distinction isn't defining for alumns. For example, Folks aren't introduced as UCLA Extension alumn, but they are as UCLA law school alumn.
Mason (
talk)
23:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Omnis Scientia: Like at UCLA, the Harvard Extension School is one of the oldest colleges at Harvard University and it is distinct, with its own graduation exercises. With respect to, "Folks aren’t introduced as…", a Google search of, "Graduated from Harvard Extension School" shows people are frequently "introduced" with that distinction. Semper Fi!
FieldMarine (
talk)
11:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, at least Harvard's. HES has separate degrees (ALB, ALM which aren't earned at other schools at Harvard), commencement ceremony, etc. for the extension school like the rest of the schools. There are unique classes at HES, that aren't offered at other schools. If UCLA, LaSalle, and any others are more like Harvard, keep them separate as well.
Patken4 (
talk)
13:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: This is an interesting case. A
WP:OTHERCATSEXIST argument was resolved by adding the other categories to the nomination, which seems to have produced a small
WP:TRAINWRECK. I am going to relist (though I was about to close this as no consensus without prejudice against seperate but simultaneous nominations); comments are welcome, though I suspect that this is heading to a no consensus with
no prejudice against speedy renomination result. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/they)
04:42, 8 June 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:Protesters
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:Convicted participants in the Canada convoy protest
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: Dual merge for now. There's only one person in here, which isn't helpful for navigation.
Mason (
talk)
04:33, 8 June 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:Illeists
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, the characteristic is defining enough to be covered by and discussed in reliable sources (often a multitude of reliable sources, such as for
Zlatan Ibrahimović and
Donald Trump). Besides, there is a body of scientific research on the various contexts and psychological meaning of illeism (see section "In everyday speech" in article
Illeism). --
HPfan4 (
talk)
23:30, 31 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.
Works by year
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.
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:Ming dynasty overseer of rituals
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 characteristic appears to be a highly important ministerial post, overseeing the
Court of Imperial Sacrifices under the
Ministry of Rites. The linked
zh:Category:明朝太常寺卿 (Category: Ming Dynasty Taichang Temple Ministers) and its 3 subcats hold over 200 biographies. However, if
Huang Zicheng is the only one with an English wiki article, the category is not currently useful for navigation, so it can be deleted for now. Can anyone put together a PetScan to check if any more of the Chinese wiki articles have an English counterpart? –
FayenaticLondon17:51, 20 June 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:Crossover characters in television
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 Based on the description, it is likely to be
WP:OCTRIVIA: This category is for characters in television who have made crossover appearances within other shows that are not their own. One appearance of a character does not make a defining trait. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
02:19, 9 June 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.
East Bengal
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, we had discussions about the category
Category:East Bengal. You proposed to merge it into
Category:East Pakistan (see
here) saying they were actually same thing. The consensus was to merge the category. That's why these establishment categories are East Pakistan, not East Bengal. Now saying we have to rename them because it was East Bengal is contradictory because in 2022 you proposed the opposite showing different reason. If you want to rename establishment categories then I propose you to discuss to bring back East Bengal category first.
Mehedi Abedin (
talk)
10:01, 8 June 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.
Comment The attacks seem to be connected to Islamist extremist opposition polio vaccination in Pakistan, although this is not explicitly stated in either of those articles. Maybe the attack articles should be linked to from the main article? Other than that, not very useful for navigation, so I also lean delete.
NLeeuw (
talk)
05:59, 8 June 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.
Category:Manx centenarians
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Delete; only one article which is actually about a woman born on the Isle of Mann to an American citizen and who moved to America soon after.
Omnis Scientia (
talk)
23:56, 7 June 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:Guernsey centenarians
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:Philadelphian cricket tours of England
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: Narrow category, do we really need a category for only tours from a single city in the united states?
Mason (
talk)
23:53, 7 June 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:Former Christian creationists
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 no categories for specific song titles nor should there be. Something like this could lead to a glut of overcategorization of other titles that could include a film named after the song, or any album that contains a cover version. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me21:46, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Greetings Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars
I see. Also, I know it does not have to do with this, but why does “Gangnam Style” article has its eponymous category although it’s a single?
"The purpose of categories is navigation between subjects connected by common defining traits"
@
QuietHere Just curious my friend, and I'm not trying to be nosy or sound condescending, but what do you mean by common defining traits? I'm learning. Thanks!
@
Inajd0101 per
CATDEF, "A defining characteristic is one that
reliable sourcescommonly and consistently refer to in describing the topic, such as the nationality of a person or the geographic location of a place. For example, Italian and artist are defining characteristics of
Caravaggio, and so of the article on him, because virtually all reliable sources on the topic mention them."
DEFINING also has more details.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
04:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
QuietHere Fair enough. I understand that by then. Thanks! And just to let you know, AGAIN, I do my best to learn about Wikipedia although not all of them because it's not my lifestyle (although it might not be an excuse to you). And any of my works at Wikipedia is usually based on
Frankie Lymon and his songs, such as "
I'm Not a Juvenile Delinquent" and any articles related to him which I am passionate of learning about it. And @
QuietHere, excuse me for adding categories without asking. I was so eager to see how it works, but I misinterpreted the purpose of categories. I should stick to editing most of my part on Wikipedia. And I wouldn't mind if you don't care about my passion regarding Frankie Lymon and the Teenagers and their songs.
@
Inajd0101 to be clear, nobody is blaming you for this. You made a simple mistake and it's being taken care of. I think I can speak on behalf of any editor when I say I'm glad that you're willing to learn, even if there are bumps in the road. Heck, any other editor could tell you about plenty of bumps in the road they dealt with. I know I certainly had my fair share (some more recent than I'd like to admit).
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
04:39, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh and plus, I wouldn't mind if you wouldn't care about Frankie Lymon and the Teenagers and their songs, especially of how I'm passionate about them. You and @
Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars are just probably paid to do the job and nothing else. Anyways, thanks!
All right, fair enough. Not paid. I would assume the majority of people here are passionate about Wikipedia, or journalism, and nothing else, especially when it has to do with me being passionate about Frankie Lymon and his songs, especially “I’m Not a Juvenile Delinquent,” et cetera. But thanks!
Delete per nomination: I misunderstood the purpose of categories. And now I know why QuietHere explained to me earlier. Also, excuse me for the inconvenience I made. Inajd
Inajd0101 (
talk)
22:14, 7 June 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:Why Do Fools Fall in Love (film)
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.
Rename per nomination: I misunderstood the purpose of categories. And now I know why QuietHere explained to me earlier. Also, excuse me for the inconvenience I made. I did my best although not much of a Wikipedia (which I use it for the research I am willing to make regarding Frankie Lymon and The Teenagers). Inajd
Inajd0101 (
talk)
22:16, 7 June 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.
Nominator's rationale: merge, they are almost all single-article categories, which is not helpful for navigation. Besides there are a number of establishments articles in this tree which do not belong directly in a year category, and they are already in an Establishments in Thailand category. So part of the nomination is merging, another part (the establishments bit) is deletion.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
16:10, 7 June 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:Rugrats and All Grown Up! books
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:American people 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.
Category:1996 Windows-only freeware games
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Narrow intersection of year and type of software and obvious overcategorization. Should be merged back to where it formerly was.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
05:40, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
This is not overcategorization - every yeas had around 30 games - we will have toooo many items in one page. I did not add all games to all years yet.
Vitaly Zdanevich (
talk)
11:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Hundreds of items is still a normal amount for a category - some have thousands of items. Wikipedia won't crumble under the weight of a few hundred items being in a category. But if these year categorizations are kept, they should be by decade per
WP:OCYEAR. Things should only be sorted by exact year when absolutely necessary.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
18:38, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge Only one of the three possible two-way intersections between "[released in] 2005", "Windows-only", and "
freeware" actually exists. There are only 29 articles in the tree. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
18:37, 7 June 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:Alpha male chimpanzees
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:Music memes
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: Was
previously deleted in 2022 for being non-defining to most entries, and it appears this is the case again now. In that prior discussion, Bibliomaniac15 suggested that this information was better presented in lists rather than a category, and I'm inclined to agree.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
02:58, 7 June 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:Cultural policy by country
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: Upmerge for now. There's only one country in this category. At most there's two if you want to argue that East Germany isn't nested within Germany.
Mason (
talk)
02:10, 7 June 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.
Delete: Neither entry makes mention of
relational art as a subject, and the relational art article doesn't mention either entry nor their targets, leaving it entirely unclear why they are being included in the first place.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
08:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Now contains 2 articles and 3 redirects. I have also added the main article,
Relational art. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄)
00:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
New additions have the same issue of not mentioning the subject as the existing ones. Perhaps that just a matter of language and these articles all just need a rewrite to clarify their relevance, or maybe even new sources that do so, but as is there's no room for inclusion. Potential OR like Marcocapelle said. My vote remains the same.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
22:19, 7 June 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.