The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Rationale: opposed speedy on the grounds that 'Deaf' (uppercase) might be preferable (see eg
Deaf culture). I have no views on deaf/Deaf but am opposed to the present name.
Oculi (
talk) 19:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Copy of speedy discussion
Oppose So I personally don't have a problem with these renamings or the use of identity first language, but I suspect that others from the disability community might have some concerns with some of these renamings.
Mason (
talk) 22:36, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Clarification, I think that this should have a full discussion rather than a speedy for all the disability related categories
Mason (
talk) 22:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The vast majority of disability related categories use the adjective already: see eg
Category:American people with disabilities. These are nationality categories, nothing to do with language.
Oculi (
talk) 13:02, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Some of these renames alter the capitalization of d/Deaf, which some members in the d/Deaf community might find problematic. I still oppose the speediness of these disability related renames.
Mason (
talk) 02:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm happy to withdraw my concerns related to the non-d/Deaf renames. I'm merely requesting that the d/Deaf renames be moved to a full discussion. I understand that the naming convention isn't fully consistent, @
Marcocapelle, but this is an area of debate that I think that WP:DEAF would probably be interested in discussing.
Mason (
talk) 15:02, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Correct. I think it's also worth noting that the default naming style in seems to be "Deaf people from" if you look at the parent category "
Category:Deaf_people_by_nationality". I think that the current naming style allows folks to sidestep the little d vs big D question.
Mason (
talk) 18:11, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I shall move this to cfd shortly.
Oculi (
talk) 19:20, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Discussion
Support - as nom. No objection to 'Deaf'. I have notified
WP:DEAF.
Oculi (
talk) 19:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support as nominated. After having read
Deaf culture I do not think that capitals are applicable here.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:58, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Protests against the islamic religious police
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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:Rage against the veil protests deaths of women
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Weird name apparently reflecting deaths related to wearing compusory
hijab. Other suggested name is possible.
Brandmeistertalk 12:04, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge to the category discussed below. So far there are two articles about individual deaths, a separate category is too premature for that.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 12:17, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Rage against the veil protests
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Weird name apparently reflecting protests against compulsory
hijab or possibly other Islamic dress. The subcategory is also up to renaming.
Brandmeistertalk 11:56, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:American gay actors
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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:procedural keep (abandoned by nominator). Nominator never tagged category. Nominator has withdrawn (below).
(non-admin closure)William Allen Simpson (
talk) 18:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Also the category page has not been tagged for CfD. See
WP:CFD for instructions.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 12:34, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. With 1,184 articles across the target and its subcategories, a single merged category here would be too large, so
Category:American LGBT actorsrequires subcategorization for size purposes — and, in fact, CFD already weighed in on this very category just over a year ago (
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 November 21#Category:American gay actors) and landed at a keep. Nominator has also not made any serious case for why gay actors, lesbian actresses, etc., should not be subcategorized by nationality, yet somehow should be subcategorized by a television vs. film vs. stage distinction that has no relationship to sexual orientation or gender identity at all — the reasoning above boils down to "because I said so", not any actual reasons why a film/TV/stage distinction would be more meaningful and relevant than distinguishing by nationality in this context. And finally, duplicate "parent + subcategory" issues are resolved by removing the parent from the affected articles, not by completely erasing the entire existence of the subcategory — I just did an AWB run to fix the dupes, and found that to be a minor issue affecting just 32 articles total. But that's a small and insignificant percentage of 1,184, making that not a major problem — and spoiler alert, on at least two of those articles the nominator was the person who put the unnecessary duplicate category on the page, even though it was already appropriately subcategorized, in the first place.
Bearcat (
talk) 13:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose -
Category:Gay actors can be subcatted by nationality and by some other property. It should be a double upmerge to a gay category as well: it is surprising that there is no 'by nationality' subcat scheme for
Category:Gay men.
Oculi (
talk) 21:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose I agree that this should be a bundled nomination for all nationalities, not just American, but given that I belive this is the nominator's first proposal at CFD (and given how confusing the procedure of nominating multiple categories can seem), it is understandable why he would start with just one category. I think the big mistake is seeing
Category:American gay actors as redundant to
Category:American LGBT actors The LGBT categories are "parent" categories to the gay, lesbian, bisexual "child" categories and are on a different level of categorization so they are both necessary. Not only can we have both, we should have both. Lumping all sexualities into one big LGBT category for some occupational fields would lead to a very large category that would be too big to be very useful. The nominator doesn't explain their reasoning for wanting to do away with gay, lesbian, bisexual categories but it seems like an attempt to avoid labeling individuals according to their sexuality and an effort to just use the umbrella term of LGBT which is not specific. That seems a bit
pointy to me and requires a fuller discussion here at CFD as this change would affect many other categories for other occupational fields, not just those for actors. LizRead!Talk! 19:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
After reading this more clearly, I had decided to rescind my nomination to merge the categories. I’ve always been a firm believer in the saying "If you can’t beat em, join em." Also, the reasoning for opposing the nomination appeared to make more sense after reading it thoroughly. This is why I’ve created several more categories for musicians and writers.
Giovanni 0331 (
talk) 13:00, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Hardcore music genres
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 name is ambiguous and could be perceived as a category combining hardcore techno and hardcore punk + other possible variants
Solidest (
talk) 22:51, 23 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 10:46, 31 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Agreed on the confusion and why it should be renamed, but it should also follow its parent article, which doesn't use the natural disambiguation proposed. It's possible that
Hardcore (electronic dance music genre) could be retitled as
Hardcore techno or
Hardcore house but it hasn't been and there was disagreement last time it was discussed (2012 in the talk page archives). My suggestion, until that resolves differently, would be to rename as
Category:Hardcore electronic dance music genres, as unwieldly as that is, per the last bullet of
Wikipedia:Category names#General conventions and since there isn't consensus for "Hardcore techno" as the natural disambiguation. czar 02:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 09:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I oppose "styles", as the term "style" is clearly defined only within classical music, while in terms of popular (= electronic) music it is used as an interchangeable term with genre everywhere, as well as
on Wikipedia. But we use "genres"
in categorization due to consistency. I also oppose merging it into
Category:Hardcore techno (
Category:Hardcore (electronic dance music genre)) as I see no point in removing a detailed category in which many articles are already in a better place than is proposed to be done. But I would support any of "Hardcore [ techno / (electronic dance music) / (EDM) ] genres" options.
Solidest (
talk) 15:46, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment — having been overtaken by events, I've modified from Rename to Merge above. William Allen Simpson (
talk) 09:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:1866 in sports in 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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 09:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Support — unnecessary triple intersection with no room for growth. Heck, could be the beginning of removal of the whole useless series divided by state, when there simply aren't that many states. There are even sparsely populated subcategories years in the future. William Allen Simpson (
talk) 08:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 09:32, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge this and the other 3 pre-1900 Wisconsin sports items into
Category:19th-century in sports in Wisconsin and delete all annual and decade categories. We have single item categories for 1866 1879 and two later years. If there are enough articles to populate more detailed categories, they can be re-created, but in this case there are not. SMALLCAT applies.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: One page. Merge to county-level. Source indicates he was from McLennan County part of town
here. –
Aidan721 (
talk) 06:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:People from Ingleside, Texas
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Lone article states that he coached in Ingleside, but has no claim that he is "from Ingleside, Texas" (in fact he was born elsewhere), therefore this category should be deleted. –
Aidan721 (
talk) 06:50, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support, there is no confirmation that he really lived in Ingleside, and he worked there for a very short period anyway.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 12:28, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete after listing (done) —
WP:SMALLCAT. A cited reference says there's a street named after him in Ingleside, Texas, so I've added him as a Notable resident. He wasn't born here, and we don't categorize people by insignificant birthplace. William Allen Simpson (
talk) 10:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Cultural depictions of criminals
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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:Templates that must be substituted
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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.
Rationale: opposed speedy on the grounds that 'Deaf' (uppercase) might be preferable (see eg
Deaf culture). I have no views on deaf/Deaf but am opposed to the present name.
Oculi (
talk) 19:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Copy of speedy discussion
Oppose So I personally don't have a problem with these renamings or the use of identity first language, but I suspect that others from the disability community might have some concerns with some of these renamings.
Mason (
talk) 22:36, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Clarification, I think that this should have a full discussion rather than a speedy for all the disability related categories
Mason (
talk) 22:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The vast majority of disability related categories use the adjective already: see eg
Category:American people with disabilities. These are nationality categories, nothing to do with language.
Oculi (
talk) 13:02, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Some of these renames alter the capitalization of d/Deaf, which some members in the d/Deaf community might find problematic. I still oppose the speediness of these disability related renames.
Mason (
talk) 02:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm happy to withdraw my concerns related to the non-d/Deaf renames. I'm merely requesting that the d/Deaf renames be moved to a full discussion. I understand that the naming convention isn't fully consistent, @
Marcocapelle, but this is an area of debate that I think that WP:DEAF would probably be interested in discussing.
Mason (
talk) 15:02, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Correct. I think it's also worth noting that the default naming style in seems to be "Deaf people from" if you look at the parent category "
Category:Deaf_people_by_nationality". I think that the current naming style allows folks to sidestep the little d vs big D question.
Mason (
talk) 18:11, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I shall move this to cfd shortly.
Oculi (
talk) 19:20, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Discussion
Support - as nom. No objection to 'Deaf'. I have notified
WP:DEAF.
Oculi (
talk) 19:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support as nominated. After having read
Deaf culture I do not think that capitals are applicable here.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:58, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Protests against the islamic religious police
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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:Rage against the veil protests deaths of women
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Weird name apparently reflecting deaths related to wearing compusory
hijab. Other suggested name is possible.
Brandmeistertalk 12:04, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge to the category discussed below. So far there are two articles about individual deaths, a separate category is too premature for that.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 12:17, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Rage against the veil protests
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Weird name apparently reflecting protests against compulsory
hijab or possibly other Islamic dress. The subcategory is also up to renaming.
Brandmeistertalk 11:56, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:American gay actors
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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:procedural keep (abandoned by nominator). Nominator never tagged category. Nominator has withdrawn (below).
(non-admin closure)William Allen Simpson (
talk) 18:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Also the category page has not been tagged for CfD. See
WP:CFD for instructions.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 12:34, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. With 1,184 articles across the target and its subcategories, a single merged category here would be too large, so
Category:American LGBT actorsrequires subcategorization for size purposes — and, in fact, CFD already weighed in on this very category just over a year ago (
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 November 21#Category:American gay actors) and landed at a keep. Nominator has also not made any serious case for why gay actors, lesbian actresses, etc., should not be subcategorized by nationality, yet somehow should be subcategorized by a television vs. film vs. stage distinction that has no relationship to sexual orientation or gender identity at all — the reasoning above boils down to "because I said so", not any actual reasons why a film/TV/stage distinction would be more meaningful and relevant than distinguishing by nationality in this context. And finally, duplicate "parent + subcategory" issues are resolved by removing the parent from the affected articles, not by completely erasing the entire existence of the subcategory — I just did an AWB run to fix the dupes, and found that to be a minor issue affecting just 32 articles total. But that's a small and insignificant percentage of 1,184, making that not a major problem — and spoiler alert, on at least two of those articles the nominator was the person who put the unnecessary duplicate category on the page, even though it was already appropriately subcategorized, in the first place.
Bearcat (
talk) 13:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose -
Category:Gay actors can be subcatted by nationality and by some other property. It should be a double upmerge to a gay category as well: it is surprising that there is no 'by nationality' subcat scheme for
Category:Gay men.
Oculi (
talk) 21:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose I agree that this should be a bundled nomination for all nationalities, not just American, but given that I belive this is the nominator's first proposal at CFD (and given how confusing the procedure of nominating multiple categories can seem), it is understandable why he would start with just one category. I think the big mistake is seeing
Category:American gay actors as redundant to
Category:American LGBT actors The LGBT categories are "parent" categories to the gay, lesbian, bisexual "child" categories and are on a different level of categorization so they are both necessary. Not only can we have both, we should have both. Lumping all sexualities into one big LGBT category for some occupational fields would lead to a very large category that would be too big to be very useful. The nominator doesn't explain their reasoning for wanting to do away with gay, lesbian, bisexual categories but it seems like an attempt to avoid labeling individuals according to their sexuality and an effort to just use the umbrella term of LGBT which is not specific. That seems a bit
pointy to me and requires a fuller discussion here at CFD as this change would affect many other categories for other occupational fields, not just those for actors. LizRead!Talk! 19:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
After reading this more clearly, I had decided to rescind my nomination to merge the categories. I’ve always been a firm believer in the saying "If you can’t beat em, join em." Also, the reasoning for opposing the nomination appeared to make more sense after reading it thoroughly. This is why I’ve created several more categories for musicians and writers.
Giovanni 0331 (
talk) 13:00, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Hardcore music genres
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 name is ambiguous and could be perceived as a category combining hardcore techno and hardcore punk + other possible variants
Solidest (
talk) 22:51, 23 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 10:46, 31 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Agreed on the confusion and why it should be renamed, but it should also follow its parent article, which doesn't use the natural disambiguation proposed. It's possible that
Hardcore (electronic dance music genre) could be retitled as
Hardcore techno or
Hardcore house but it hasn't been and there was disagreement last time it was discussed (2012 in the talk page archives). My suggestion, until that resolves differently, would be to rename as
Category:Hardcore electronic dance music genres, as unwieldly as that is, per the last bullet of
Wikipedia:Category names#General conventions and since there isn't consensus for "Hardcore techno" as the natural disambiguation. czar 02:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 09:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I oppose "styles", as the term "style" is clearly defined only within classical music, while in terms of popular (= electronic) music it is used as an interchangeable term with genre everywhere, as well as
on Wikipedia. But we use "genres"
in categorization due to consistency. I also oppose merging it into
Category:Hardcore techno (
Category:Hardcore (electronic dance music genre)) as I see no point in removing a detailed category in which many articles are already in a better place than is proposed to be done. But I would support any of "Hardcore [ techno / (electronic dance music) / (EDM) ] genres" options.
Solidest (
talk) 15:46, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment — having been overtaken by events, I've modified from Rename to Merge above. William Allen Simpson (
talk) 09:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:1866 in sports in 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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 09:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Support — unnecessary triple intersection with no room for growth. Heck, could be the beginning of removal of the whole useless series divided by state, when there simply aren't that many states. There are even sparsely populated subcategories years in the future. William Allen Simpson (
talk) 08:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 09:32, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge this and the other 3 pre-1900 Wisconsin sports items into
Category:19th-century in sports in Wisconsin and delete all annual and decade categories. We have single item categories for 1866 1879 and two later years. If there are enough articles to populate more detailed categories, they can be re-created, but in this case there are not. SMALLCAT applies.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: One page. Merge to county-level. Source indicates he was from McLennan County part of town
here. –
Aidan721 (
talk) 06:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:People from Ingleside, Texas
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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: Lone article states that he coached in Ingleside, but has no claim that he is "from Ingleside, Texas" (in fact he was born elsewhere), therefore this category should be deleted. –
Aidan721 (
talk) 06:50, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support, there is no confirmation that he really lived in Ingleside, and he worked there for a very short period anyway.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 12:28, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete after listing (done) —
WP:SMALLCAT. A cited reference says there's a street named after him in Ingleside, Texas, so I've added him as a Notable resident. He wasn't born here, and we don't categorize people by insignificant birthplace. William Allen Simpson (
talk) 10:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Cultural depictions of criminals
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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:Templates that must be substituted
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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.