Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< February 1
February 3 >

February 2

Category:Geography of the United States 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 result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Not a useful way to divide geography of populated places in the US. Geography is not affected by the legal definition (city, town, village, etc.) of a place. Merge both to Category:Geography of the United States by populated place – Aidan721 ( talk) 23:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom, and per recent precedent to move cities, towns and villages to populated places. There are only a few towns subcategories anyway. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Support per nom Mason ( talk) 06:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:University of Pennsylvania Graduate Division School of Arts & Sciences alumni

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 10#Category:University of Pennsylvania Graduate Division School of Arts & Sciences alumni

Category:Armorials of Russia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 25#Category:Armorials of the Netherlands, in which this was listed but never tagged or processed. . * Pppery * it has begun... 21:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Armorials of Finland

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 25#Category:Armorials of the Netherlands, in which this was listed but never tagged or processed. The sole entry is already in all relevant parents so a merge is not needed. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Franklin Athletic Club football seasons

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:09, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only one page in category Let'srun ( talk) 02:58, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 19:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Noblesville Athletic Club football seasons

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:09, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only one page in category Let'srun ( talk) 02:58, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Which Athletic Club does the target refer to? We only have Athletic club as a disambiguation page. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:45, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    It doesn't to any specific one, from my understanding. Let'srun ( talk) 21:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 19:04, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Partial satellite launch failures

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Satellite launch anomalies. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: This is for partial failures among satellite launches. Parent is Category:Satellite launch failures. I am open to other suggestions. – Fayenatic London 21:52, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:47, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

See also the list of 262 transclusions at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Partial_failure. These are potential candidates for this category. ( sdsds - talk) 02:36, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 European scribes

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 23:26, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: There's no need to narrow this category to only European scribes. The sibling category, " Category:Ancient scribes" doesn't constrain themselves to a single continent. Mason ( talk) 01:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
In fact Category:Ancient scribes contains only Egyptian, Greek and Near-Eastern subcats, so is "constrained" to the Mediterranean. Johnbod ( talk) 18:15, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
It isn't constrained, someone could still be added to the main category of Ancient scribe if they were from somewhere outside the mediterranean. But "Medieval European scribe", does not allow someone from medieval egypt to be added. Mason ( talk) 02:34, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Oppose They are in fact all European, & there is no harm in helping the reader by saying so. Other traditions are in the extensive tree under Category:Medieval calligraphers. Btw, the Irish ones (nearly all authors who wrote out their own books) represent about 50% of 80-odd in the category, & should have their own sub-cat. Johnbod ( talk) 03:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
But is european+medieval scribe a meaningful intersection? I don't see how it helps readers to exclude non-european medieval scribes. Mason ( talk) 19:43, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
One might drop the "medieval", as there are no "scribes" in Europe after the Renaissance, and "medieval" is not a term that works or is used for eg East Asia. Or one might drop "European" for that reason, but hoiw does that help anyone? The current category is a useful definition of a distinct tradition & function. Johnbod ( talk) 18:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Which scribes are being excluded? I see Category:Calligraphers of the medieval Islamic world, which could possibly contain articles that would fit "Medieval scribes". Those ones, at least, seem pretty discoverable where they are. Are there others? -- asilvering ( talk) 01:35, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Just delete, per WP:OVERLAPCAT, articles are already in a more specific branch of the tree of Category:Medieval writers or in Category:Medieval calligraphers. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Nonsense - scribes should not be in a "writers" category at all, unless they clearly did both (as authors or translators), which very many did not. I don't think you actually looked at Category:Medieval calligraphers; it consists entirely of by-century subcats, each containing only a Chinese, Japanese and Korean sub-cat. So there is no OVERLAP at all with this category! Johnbod ( talk) 18:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      • @ Johnbod: I am not sure why writers should be limited to authors and translators. According to whom? The articles of this category just factually are in another writers subcategory, so apparently there is consensus that scribes is also a subset of writers. With respect to calligraphers, I found David Aubert in Category:Medieval European scribes but he was not yet in the Category:Medieval calligraphers tree, I added this article there just now. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:01, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
        • And I reverted you! You didn't even put him in a century sub-cat! He was left as the only entry outside one, and the only European in that whole tree. What RS do you have that call him a calligrapher? It is not a term used of Medieval European scribes, hence the diffferent categories. The aim of medieval scribing was to produce a clear and accurate text in a variety of very tightly-defined scripts; once printed type could do this more reliably the scribing industry mostly vanished at the top end, just leaving scriveners for legal work etc. This is very different from other cultures where artistic calligraphy was and is pursued. It is clear from the cats above that the "writers" tree is for authors, to which the many translators can be added - Aubert was a translator and adapter of texts, so he is rightly there. Johnbod ( talk) 19:47, 19 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. Speaking as a topic expert here, I find little to disagree with in Johnbod's comments. Scribes are not necessarily calligraphers, and they are certainly not usefully categorized as "writers". We could change the category to "Medieval scribes" broadly; this is how many works in the field describe them. But these works omit "European" typically because it is assumed, not because they mean to include scribes who were not European. We could use the term most often used in palaeography ("Latin"), but I believe this will be unhelpfully confusing to the typical Wikipedia user. -- asilvering ( talk) 01:31, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 20:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Why relist this? There are no supports at all, apart from the nom, and he seems less sure of his case now. Johnbod ( talk) 04:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • @ Johnbod: when I wrote "I am not sure" I said I was not sure about your response. And you haven't answered my question why scribes need to be excluded from writers. "It is clear from the cats above that the "writers" tree is for authors," -> No that is not clear, in fact categories above have nothing to do with the question. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I didn't mean you - you are not the nom and not supporting the proposal anyway. Authoring and copying are two very different activities - you might as well categorize scriveners and court reporters as judges. I have explained why your suggestion to delete (also with no other support) is based on more than one misunderstanding. Imo too many discussions are being rolled-over ad infinitum. asilvering, are you actually a "Keep"? Johnbod ( talk) 14:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Johnbod I don't particularly care either way, but I guess that's a weak keep. -- asilvering ( talk) 15:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I guess you are - thanks! Caring is optional at Cfd. Johnbod ( talk) 15:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Please don't misgender me. @ Johnbod. And I don't understand what your opposition is to making the category broader. Mason ( talk) 20:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete per Marco. Omnis Scientia ( talk) 11:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

What, again! @Qwerfjkl - why? 16 days and not a single support. 2 keeps and 2 deletes. That's a very clear no consensus. Johnbod ( talk) 04:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:19th-century Kazakhstani people

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge to Category:Kazakh people from the Russian Empire * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: merge, largely overlapping categories, and Khazakstan did not exist yet. The category does not contain articles about Kazakh people before the Russian Empire ruled the area. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:17, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Firelighting using electricity

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 all to Category:Firelighting (which was renamed to Category:Fire making while this discussion was open) * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: best to treat these as an article. And I am usually pro-categories!!n. 121.98.204.148 ( talk) 23:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I've tagged the additional categories.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:17, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:19th-century mayors of places in Oklahoma

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename as nominated, no consensus to delete Category:19th-century Oklahoma politicians (without prejudice to a new nomination focusing solely on deleting it). * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Oklahoma did not exist before 1907 so there are no 19th century mayors of places in Oklahoma. There are 19th-century mayors of places in Oklahoma Territory and Indian Territory TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk) 00:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Support, and its parent category Category:19th-century Oklahoma politicians should be considered for renaming for the same rationale.-- TommyBoy ( talk) 22:16, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Category:19th-century Oklahoma politicians?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:11, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment. I oppose deleting the 19th-century American politicians by state or territory helps. It has enough categories in it. I am neutral on the rest of it. Mason ( talk) 02:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Phytogeographers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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: Manual merge (@ Smasongarrison:) * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. These are small categories that doesn't need to be diffused by nationality, yet. Mason ( talk) 02:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom, to the first two targets. "Geographer" does not seem very applicable to many articles. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    From what I understand, this category is a grandchild of Geographers by specialty, so perhaps manual merge to geographers, when appriopriate? Mason ( talk) 23:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: merge targets?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

    • @ Smasongarrison: I don't have an objection to a manual merge. When the discussion is closed would you be willing to check to which articles "geographers" is applicable? Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:05, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
      I can do that. (Can whoever closes ping me to remind me to do it?) Mason ( talk) 17:10, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Establishment category Indian 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 result of the discussion was: Rename Uncontested for two weeks * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: To match {{ establishment category Indian state}} (which for transparency I WP:BOLDMOVE'd to its current location from {{ estcatIndiastate}} per WP:TPN; that is also why I am avoiding WP:C2D). House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 02:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:French Quebecers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 23:28, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: French Quebecers constitute the vast majority of Quebec residents and have since the first settlers arrived in the 17th-century. As such, this category fails WP:EGRS. Moreover, most of those in this category have no claim to French ancestry in their biography and have been placed in it without evidence, making it a major problem for WP:BLPCAT. User:Namiba 16:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Probably the same applies to parent Category:Francophone Quebec people. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment French Quebecers are Quebecers who are not Quebecois, but originate more recently from France, thus are not ethnic Quebecois. It should be so scoped, and cleared of pure-laine [1] [2], de-souche [3] [4] [5], who are desceneded from the pre-British conquest with roots in Quebec prior to 1760. Any person descended from France that arrived after 1760 would appear in this category, those who have roots older that this would be removed -- 65.92.247.66 ( talk) 07:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep and change according to IP above JM ( talk) 23:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 03:27, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • I may have misunderstood the purpose of the category but then I would like to see sources that support this specific meaning of the term. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: I note that there is no Category:Québécois people or similar, so if they are not intended for this category, I don't know where they're meant to be... Grutness... wha? 10:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Note, we already have Category:Quebecers of French descent. Anyone with demonstrably French descent can be placed there. There is no purpose for this category otherwise.-- User:Namiba 14:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
This whole tree is problematic. This is the (incorrect, IMO) description of Category:Quebecers of French descent: "This category lists Quebecers of French descent who are not francophone or whose first language is unclear. For Quebecers who known to be francophone see Category:French Quebecers."-- User:Namiba 14:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. It is useless to categorize members of the dominant ethnicity in a place. The difference cited above for recent arrivals from France is reflected by Category:French emigrants to Quebec. Place Clichy ( talk) 14:19, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    That's not the same, since it doesn't include the descendants of the immigrants to Quebec that would be in that indicated category -- 65.92.247.66 ( talk) 19:19, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I'm sorry, I just don't get this comment. Note that French Quebecer redirects to disambiguation page Québécois. So either term can refer to, depending on context, any of the following:
    • all people of all Québec
    • people of Québec City
    • the dominant ethnic group associated with descent from the early French settlers
    • 20th- or 21st-century moves from France
    • descendants of the former
    The IP wrote above that French Quebecers are Quebecers who are not Quebecois, but originate more recently from France, thus are not ethnic Quebecois. This contradicts the current 3,500+ articles in the category, which are mostly Québécois people with no recent link to immigration from France. Descendants of recent migrants from France who were born and grew up in Québec are not distinguishable from the Québec majority.
    There's no logic to any of it, and as a result people from that group are scattered inconsistently between several categories. Québec people clearly would benefit more from other categorization schemes such as People by populated place in Quebec or People from Quebec by occupation that this pseudo-ethnic category. Place Clichy ( talk) 14:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Education by city or town

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:53, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: "Populated place" is more consistent and inclusive. I intend the applicable sub-categories to be speedied if renamed. Here are some precedents that support this rename:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Sears

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename to Category:Sears (department store) * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping category, where the only two pages in the newer category could be linked instead of siloed. Mason ( talk) 05:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose as Sears and Sears Holdings are not the same thing. Sears is a chain of retail stores (+catalogs +e-commerce), as is/was Kmart. Sears Holdings was a corporate structure that held the two chains. Sears stores are now mostly operated by either Grupo Sanborns (90+ stores in Mexico), Transformco (US) and Sears de Guatemala. Kmart stores are now entirely under Transformco. We need to distinguish between Sears as a brand and chain, which should hold most of the content, versus Sears Holdings, which should be limited to holding Sears, Kmart, and any holding company-related articles. Keizers ( talk) 14:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Ok... so how would you feel about renaming Category:Sears to Category:Sears (brand) to help make that distinction clearer? I also think that a concise description in the category page would be extremely helpful. Mason ( talk) 23:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I'm not crazy about it, because really, it's about the Sears stores and catalog, not so much the brand (I mean, I understand that it's a brand that is franchised to Transformco, Grupo Sanborns and Homemart, S.A. for Guatemala), but people might understand to be consumer brands like Kenmore, Craftsman, etc. Maybe Sears (department store)? Keizers ( talk) 00:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Sears (department store) sounds like a good suggestion to me. Then the categories would be more clearly distinguished, and that should help make it clear that the categories are distinct. Mason ( talk) 17:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:49, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Convocations of the Mazhilis

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 12#Category:Convocations of the Mazhilis

Category:Development of individual fictional 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 result of the discussion was: Rename to Category:Development of specific works * Pppery * it has begun... 23:30, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Not sure how many articles used to be here, but a single article does not a category make. This should probably be removed as it is no longer relevant. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 07:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge into Category:Development of specific works - I found one additional article for this category ( Development of Bugs Bunny). However, that would still be too small of a category. Creating this category, however, would allow it to contain other articles such as Development of the DC Extended Universe, as well as allow it to be a parent to both Category:Production of specific films and Category:Development of specific video games. (Oinkers42) ( talk) 18:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I support Oinkers's proposal. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 03:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Countesses of Barcelona

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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: Purge * Pppery * it has begun... 23:30, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining. This category "lists the Countess consorts of the County of Barcelona, for the regnant Countess of Barcelona see: Category:Counts of Barcelona." Mason ( talk) 01:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

LGBT people by sexual orientation and nationality

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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: implement the alt merge proposal. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:51, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Propose renaming:
more nationalities
Nominator's rationale: rename, I am proposing changing this category name to include transgender, non-binary and intersex people in this category. Giovanni 0331 ( talk) 19:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose. Merge and delete instead. Several recent CfDs have reached the consensus that these interleaving “by identity”, “by gender identity”, or “by sexual orientation” category layers are unhelpful, and we have been in the process of getting rid of them. It is much simpler and clearer to have all the LGBTQ+ identity subcategories directly in the parent category, grouped under a sort key. (See Category:LGBT people by religion for an example.)-- Trystan ( talk) 22:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Just to clarify, the alt merge proposal below is exactly what I had in mind.-- Trystan ( talk) 17:37, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Upmerge all, "by identity" is too vague and one would expect the subcategories to be in the parent category anyway. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Upmerge all per above replies. Omnis Scientia ( talk) 07:44, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See previous discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 November 22#LGBT people by sexual orientation. Almost all of the categories were untagged, so I have tagged them. If you are proposing upmerging instead, please handle adding the targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

more nationalities
  • Support alt merge. – Aidan721 ( talk) 15:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    I'd support the alt merge. I think that using identity has some potential problematic implications, such as identity implying that orientation is a choice among other things. Mason ( talk) 17:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Kirksville Osteopaths football seasons

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 page in category. Let'srun ( talk) 20:36, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep. This was a 30-year college football program; there will be more seasons that are notable and will be created in the future; there is also an accepted categorization scheme that all college football teams with seasons should have categories. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 20:51, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
"potential for growth" is no longer a valid reason to keep. – Aidan721 ( talk) 23:09, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
And WP:CFB does not make the rules of WP:Categorization. – Aidan721 ( talk) 23:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
What part of that page, specifically, does this violate? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 02:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete for now. Omnis Scientia ( talk) 08:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Amended my response to a merger. – Aidan721 ( talk) 05:43, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per BeanieFan11. If "potential for growth" is no longer a valid, then that policy needs to change. Jweiss11 ( talk) 00:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    No. WP:SMALLCAT is no longer backed by community consensus. The category can be recreated when a sufficient number of articles exist. For now, it must be merged (see my revision above). – Aidan721 ( talk) 05:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note this category now contains two articles. Jweiss11 ( talk) 02:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • This category now contains three articles. Is that enough to withdraw the nomination? Jweiss11 ( talk) 16:21, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: 3 articles as of relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • I am also ok with the merge as proposed by Aidan721. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:09, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    • How many articles do you think are necessary for a category? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 00:23, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
      • Traditionally editors here mention a minimum of five. Marcocapelle ( talk) 12:31, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
        • @ Jweiss11: and @ Cbl62: Would either of you be willing to do one or two more articles on notable Kirksville seasons? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 20:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Did they have any perfect seasons or seasons with some other extraordinary feature. For smaller programs like the Osteopaths, I've been limiting my season creation work of late to seasons of clear, lasting sigificance. Cbl62 ( talk) 20:31, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Cbl62: Seems they had two undefeated years, albeit a 4–0 1912 and 1–0 1913 – they also had 6–1 seasons in 1916, 1921 and 1927. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 21:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
I created 1900 Kirksville Osteopaths football team (played Missouri) and 1921 Kirksville Osteopaths football team (played TCU). We now have five articles in the category. Let'srun, will you withdraw the nomination? Jweiss11 ( talk) 18:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep as it is now appropriately populated. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:12, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Kirksville Osteopaths football coaches

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:11, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 page in category Let'srun ( talk) 20:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:30, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 tubers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Fictional potatoes. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 20:55, 18 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only one article/subcategory here that is actually properly categorized, and they're also in another category within the same group. Unnecessarily specific category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 06:58, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 21:12, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:29, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Druze people by nationality

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: the intent is to make it clearer that these categories are for individual people, and not topic categories, per WP:SEPARATE. Categories named with adjectives are always ambiguous. Place Clichy ( talk) 15:08, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Rename per nom, they are clearly used as biography categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Support per nom and Marco Mason ( talk) 02:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Energy industry in North Rhine-Westphalia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: merge, neither of the parent categories are diffused by state level. Merging is not needed, the articles already are in appropriate subcategories of Category:Energy industry in Germany and Category:Power stations in Germany respectively. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Interdenominational Churches

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: As per parent category Category:Christian ecumenical organizations Gjs238 ( talk) 13:53, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Just delete, ecumenical organizations are a thing (they advocate unity or cooperation between denominations), but ecumenical churches do not exist. The two articles are about parishes which are affiliated with two denominations, they can be categorized by these two denominations. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:29, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. As I've read once on the dedicated article, interdenominational is an Evangelical Protestant denomination. Place Clichy ( talk) 15:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as suggested above. Gjs238 ( talk) 14:43, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Formula 1 (board game)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only contains the epon page and 4 images that are used on the page. It's not helpful for navigation Mason ( talk) 13:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Coaster 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 result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Only one category in here which isn't helpful for navigation Mason ( talk) 13:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge for now, without objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available. Marcocapelle ( talk) 13:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:South African people of Hispanic descent

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only two quite unrelated categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:South African people of West Indian descent

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:South African people of Caribbean descent. There is no consensus on Mason's additional proposal, with no prejudice against speedy renomination. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:49, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of an older, better parented, category. Place Clichy ( talk) 09:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 10:00, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Support per nom. And I propose renaming the following per parent Category:European people of Caribbean descent Mason ( talk) 13:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Names by culture

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Split * Pppery * it has begun... 23:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Based on the content these are categorized by country, not culture Mason ( talk) 05:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Animorphs 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 result of the discussion was: delete ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Almost all redirects following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Individual articles in the Animorphs series * Pppery * it has begun... 05:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:East Asian fashion

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There are only categories by country in here, (and the parent category Asian fashion by region only contains this category). It's not helpful for navigation. Mason ( talk) 05:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Love in Arabic literature

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:47, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection. I couldn't find any other language/literature that had a category like this Mason ( talk) 04:36, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Zoos established in 1752

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge/delete as nominated. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:46, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCYEAR: avoid creating a category tree of individual by year categories with very few members, So for example, instead of grouping by year, group by decade. And then diffuse the by decade categories by year only when necessary. This tree doesn't need to be diffused by year for the nominated categories. Upmerge. – Aidan721 ( talk) 01:55, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Support per nom Mason ( talk) 04:37, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom. "Tourist attractions established in" might have been a better merge target but that category tree does not exist at all. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:41, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge as described in Nominator's rationale - chris_j_wood ( talk) 10:00, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge the nominated individual year categories but keep the nominated decades categories. The latter decades of the 1800s have a sufficient number of articles.-- User:Namiba 15:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Viz Media children's picture 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 result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only page in here is a list of books. No need for a category. I was leaning towards delete. Mason ( talk) 01:51, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Senegalese books by 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 result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in each, which is unhelpful for navigation. Mason ( talk) 01:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Books by Indian authors

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 11#Category:Books by Indian authors

Category:Kiss of Life 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.
The result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per long-standing precedent for subcategories of Category:Musicians by band when only one band/group member has an article. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 00:28, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge per nom. toobigtokale ( talk) 00:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Nightclubs in Belfast

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only 3 entries each. Merge for now until it can be sufficiently populated. – Aidan721 ( talk) 20:54, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:31, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose. Night clubs are very much a feature of city life, probably more so that most other topics, and more so than national culture. So if there are a handful of articles for which we should avoid the troublesome, unofficial and contemptuous moniker of [Republic of] Ireland, it should be these ones. Category:Nightclubs by city is a coherent tree, well-established, defining for nightclubs, and the present nomination would remove valid content from that category. Place Clichy ( talk) 12:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Upmerge for now. I don't really understand Place Clichy's argument, categories are to help navigation, this category isn't large enough to help navigation. It doesn't really matter that Nightclubs by city is a coherent tree. Mason ( talk) 01:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The argument is that these categories, and the articles in them, won't be any more in Category:Nightclubs by city under the proposal, and that doesn't help navigation IMHO. Place Clichy ( talk) 09:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
But Category:Nightclubs by city consists of large enough cities anyway, not every city. Marcocapelle ( talk) 10:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Presumably cities associated with nightlife, and there's no reason to remove Belfast and Dublin from that. Alright, I don't feel strongly enough about that one to fight over it, but I wished to record this opinion. Place Clichy ( talk) 10:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Categories: By-elections to the Parliament of the United Kingdom in Suffolk constituencies by century

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. No compelling reason to exceptionally subdivide this category by century. LukeSurl  t  c 15:03, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:19, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Support in principle per nom. But the categories should also be manually merged to Category:19th-century elections in the United Kingdom, etc Mason ( talk) 01:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:By-elections to the Parliament of the United Kingdom in Hackney constituencies

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. No compelling reason this area of London is given a sub-category. LukeSurl  t  c 14:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Merge for now, the target is currently not diffused this way. I have no opinion on whether it should be diffused this way, but it does not make sense to have just this single subcategory. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:04, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:GA-Class Nazi Germany articles

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 9#Category:GA-Class Nazi Germany articles

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_February_2&oldid=1208763150"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< February 1
February 3 >

February 2

Category:Geography of the United States 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 result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Not a useful way to divide geography of populated places in the US. Geography is not affected by the legal definition (city, town, village, etc.) of a place. Merge both to Category:Geography of the United States by populated place – Aidan721 ( talk) 23:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom, and per recent precedent to move cities, towns and villages to populated places. There are only a few towns subcategories anyway. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Support per nom Mason ( talk) 06:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:University of Pennsylvania Graduate Division School of Arts & Sciences alumni

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 10#Category:University of Pennsylvania Graduate Division School of Arts & Sciences alumni

Category:Armorials of Russia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 25#Category:Armorials of the Netherlands, in which this was listed but never tagged or processed. . * Pppery * it has begun... 21:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Armorials of Finland

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 25#Category:Armorials of the Netherlands, in which this was listed but never tagged or processed. The sole entry is already in all relevant parents so a merge is not needed. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Franklin Athletic Club football seasons

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:09, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only one page in category Let'srun ( talk) 02:58, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 19:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Noblesville Athletic Club football seasons

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:09, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only one page in category Let'srun ( talk) 02:58, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Which Athletic Club does the target refer to? We only have Athletic club as a disambiguation page. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:45, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    It doesn't to any specific one, from my understanding. Let'srun ( talk) 21:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 19:04, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Partial satellite launch failures

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Satellite launch anomalies. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: This is for partial failures among satellite launches. Parent is Category:Satellite launch failures. I am open to other suggestions. – Fayenatic London 21:52, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:47, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

See also the list of 262 transclusions at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Partial_failure. These are potential candidates for this category. ( sdsds - talk) 02:36, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 European scribes

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 23:26, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: There's no need to narrow this category to only European scribes. The sibling category, " Category:Ancient scribes" doesn't constrain themselves to a single continent. Mason ( talk) 01:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
In fact Category:Ancient scribes contains only Egyptian, Greek and Near-Eastern subcats, so is "constrained" to the Mediterranean. Johnbod ( talk) 18:15, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
It isn't constrained, someone could still be added to the main category of Ancient scribe if they were from somewhere outside the mediterranean. But "Medieval European scribe", does not allow someone from medieval egypt to be added. Mason ( talk) 02:34, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Oppose They are in fact all European, & there is no harm in helping the reader by saying so. Other traditions are in the extensive tree under Category:Medieval calligraphers. Btw, the Irish ones (nearly all authors who wrote out their own books) represent about 50% of 80-odd in the category, & should have their own sub-cat. Johnbod ( talk) 03:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
But is european+medieval scribe a meaningful intersection? I don't see how it helps readers to exclude non-european medieval scribes. Mason ( talk) 19:43, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
One might drop the "medieval", as there are no "scribes" in Europe after the Renaissance, and "medieval" is not a term that works or is used for eg East Asia. Or one might drop "European" for that reason, but hoiw does that help anyone? The current category is a useful definition of a distinct tradition & function. Johnbod ( talk) 18:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Which scribes are being excluded? I see Category:Calligraphers of the medieval Islamic world, which could possibly contain articles that would fit "Medieval scribes". Those ones, at least, seem pretty discoverable where they are. Are there others? -- asilvering ( talk) 01:35, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Just delete, per WP:OVERLAPCAT, articles are already in a more specific branch of the tree of Category:Medieval writers or in Category:Medieval calligraphers. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Nonsense - scribes should not be in a "writers" category at all, unless they clearly did both (as authors or translators), which very many did not. I don't think you actually looked at Category:Medieval calligraphers; it consists entirely of by-century subcats, each containing only a Chinese, Japanese and Korean sub-cat. So there is no OVERLAP at all with this category! Johnbod ( talk) 18:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      • @ Johnbod: I am not sure why writers should be limited to authors and translators. According to whom? The articles of this category just factually are in another writers subcategory, so apparently there is consensus that scribes is also a subset of writers. With respect to calligraphers, I found David Aubert in Category:Medieval European scribes but he was not yet in the Category:Medieval calligraphers tree, I added this article there just now. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:01, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
        • And I reverted you! You didn't even put him in a century sub-cat! He was left as the only entry outside one, and the only European in that whole tree. What RS do you have that call him a calligrapher? It is not a term used of Medieval European scribes, hence the diffferent categories. The aim of medieval scribing was to produce a clear and accurate text in a variety of very tightly-defined scripts; once printed type could do this more reliably the scribing industry mostly vanished at the top end, just leaving scriveners for legal work etc. This is very different from other cultures where artistic calligraphy was and is pursued. It is clear from the cats above that the "writers" tree is for authors, to which the many translators can be added - Aubert was a translator and adapter of texts, so he is rightly there. Johnbod ( talk) 19:47, 19 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. Speaking as a topic expert here, I find little to disagree with in Johnbod's comments. Scribes are not necessarily calligraphers, and they are certainly not usefully categorized as "writers". We could change the category to "Medieval scribes" broadly; this is how many works in the field describe them. But these works omit "European" typically because it is assumed, not because they mean to include scribes who were not European. We could use the term most often used in palaeography ("Latin"), but I believe this will be unhelpfully confusing to the typical Wikipedia user. -- asilvering ( talk) 01:31, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 20:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Why relist this? There are no supports at all, apart from the nom, and he seems less sure of his case now. Johnbod ( talk) 04:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • @ Johnbod: when I wrote "I am not sure" I said I was not sure about your response. And you haven't answered my question why scribes need to be excluded from writers. "It is clear from the cats above that the "writers" tree is for authors," -> No that is not clear, in fact categories above have nothing to do with the question. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I didn't mean you - you are not the nom and not supporting the proposal anyway. Authoring and copying are two very different activities - you might as well categorize scriveners and court reporters as judges. I have explained why your suggestion to delete (also with no other support) is based on more than one misunderstanding. Imo too many discussions are being rolled-over ad infinitum. asilvering, are you actually a "Keep"? Johnbod ( talk) 14:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Johnbod I don't particularly care either way, but I guess that's a weak keep. -- asilvering ( talk) 15:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I guess you are - thanks! Caring is optional at Cfd. Johnbod ( talk) 15:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Please don't misgender me. @ Johnbod. And I don't understand what your opposition is to making the category broader. Mason ( talk) 20:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete per Marco. Omnis Scientia ( talk) 11:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

What, again! @Qwerfjkl - why? 16 days and not a single support. 2 keeps and 2 deletes. That's a very clear no consensus. Johnbod ( talk) 04:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:19th-century Kazakhstani people

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge to Category:Kazakh people from the Russian Empire * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: merge, largely overlapping categories, and Khazakstan did not exist yet. The category does not contain articles about Kazakh people before the Russian Empire ruled the area. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:17, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Firelighting using electricity

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 all to Category:Firelighting (which was renamed to Category:Fire making while this discussion was open) * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: best to treat these as an article. And I am usually pro-categories!!n. 121.98.204.148 ( talk) 23:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I've tagged the additional categories.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:17, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:19th-century mayors of places in Oklahoma

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename as nominated, no consensus to delete Category:19th-century Oklahoma politicians (without prejudice to a new nomination focusing solely on deleting it). * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Oklahoma did not exist before 1907 so there are no 19th century mayors of places in Oklahoma. There are 19th-century mayors of places in Oklahoma Territory and Indian Territory TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk) 00:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Support, and its parent category Category:19th-century Oklahoma politicians should be considered for renaming for the same rationale.-- TommyBoy ( talk) 22:16, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Category:19th-century Oklahoma politicians?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:11, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment. I oppose deleting the 19th-century American politicians by state or territory helps. It has enough categories in it. I am neutral on the rest of it. Mason ( talk) 02:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Phytogeographers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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: Manual merge (@ Smasongarrison:) * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. These are small categories that doesn't need to be diffused by nationality, yet. Mason ( talk) 02:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom, to the first two targets. "Geographer" does not seem very applicable to many articles. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    From what I understand, this category is a grandchild of Geographers by specialty, so perhaps manual merge to geographers, when appriopriate? Mason ( talk) 23:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: merge targets?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

    • @ Smasongarrison: I don't have an objection to a manual merge. When the discussion is closed would you be willing to check to which articles "geographers" is applicable? Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:05, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
      I can do that. (Can whoever closes ping me to remind me to do it?) Mason ( talk) 17:10, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Establishment category Indian 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 result of the discussion was: Rename Uncontested for two weeks * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: To match {{ establishment category Indian state}} (which for transparency I WP:BOLDMOVE'd to its current location from {{ estcatIndiastate}} per WP:TPN; that is also why I am avoiding WP:C2D). House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 02:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:French Quebecers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 23:28, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: French Quebecers constitute the vast majority of Quebec residents and have since the first settlers arrived in the 17th-century. As such, this category fails WP:EGRS. Moreover, most of those in this category have no claim to French ancestry in their biography and have been placed in it without evidence, making it a major problem for WP:BLPCAT. User:Namiba 16:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Probably the same applies to parent Category:Francophone Quebec people. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment French Quebecers are Quebecers who are not Quebecois, but originate more recently from France, thus are not ethnic Quebecois. It should be so scoped, and cleared of pure-laine [1] [2], de-souche [3] [4] [5], who are desceneded from the pre-British conquest with roots in Quebec prior to 1760. Any person descended from France that arrived after 1760 would appear in this category, those who have roots older that this would be removed -- 65.92.247.66 ( talk) 07:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep and change according to IP above JM ( talk) 23:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 03:27, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • I may have misunderstood the purpose of the category but then I would like to see sources that support this specific meaning of the term. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: I note that there is no Category:Québécois people or similar, so if they are not intended for this category, I don't know where they're meant to be... Grutness... wha? 10:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Note, we already have Category:Quebecers of French descent. Anyone with demonstrably French descent can be placed there. There is no purpose for this category otherwise.-- User:Namiba 14:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
This whole tree is problematic. This is the (incorrect, IMO) description of Category:Quebecers of French descent: "This category lists Quebecers of French descent who are not francophone or whose first language is unclear. For Quebecers who known to be francophone see Category:French Quebecers."-- User:Namiba 14:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. It is useless to categorize members of the dominant ethnicity in a place. The difference cited above for recent arrivals from France is reflected by Category:French emigrants to Quebec. Place Clichy ( talk) 14:19, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    That's not the same, since it doesn't include the descendants of the immigrants to Quebec that would be in that indicated category -- 65.92.247.66 ( talk) 19:19, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I'm sorry, I just don't get this comment. Note that French Quebecer redirects to disambiguation page Québécois. So either term can refer to, depending on context, any of the following:
    • all people of all Québec
    • people of Québec City
    • the dominant ethnic group associated with descent from the early French settlers
    • 20th- or 21st-century moves from France
    • descendants of the former
    The IP wrote above that French Quebecers are Quebecers who are not Quebecois, but originate more recently from France, thus are not ethnic Quebecois. This contradicts the current 3,500+ articles in the category, which are mostly Québécois people with no recent link to immigration from France. Descendants of recent migrants from France who were born and grew up in Québec are not distinguishable from the Québec majority.
    There's no logic to any of it, and as a result people from that group are scattered inconsistently between several categories. Québec people clearly would benefit more from other categorization schemes such as People by populated place in Quebec or People from Quebec by occupation that this pseudo-ethnic category. Place Clichy ( talk) 14:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Education by city or town

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:53, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: "Populated place" is more consistent and inclusive. I intend the applicable sub-categories to be speedied if renamed. Here are some precedents that support this rename:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Sears

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename to Category:Sears (department store) * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping category, where the only two pages in the newer category could be linked instead of siloed. Mason ( talk) 05:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose as Sears and Sears Holdings are not the same thing. Sears is a chain of retail stores (+catalogs +e-commerce), as is/was Kmart. Sears Holdings was a corporate structure that held the two chains. Sears stores are now mostly operated by either Grupo Sanborns (90+ stores in Mexico), Transformco (US) and Sears de Guatemala. Kmart stores are now entirely under Transformco. We need to distinguish between Sears as a brand and chain, which should hold most of the content, versus Sears Holdings, which should be limited to holding Sears, Kmart, and any holding company-related articles. Keizers ( talk) 14:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Ok... so how would you feel about renaming Category:Sears to Category:Sears (brand) to help make that distinction clearer? I also think that a concise description in the category page would be extremely helpful. Mason ( talk) 23:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I'm not crazy about it, because really, it's about the Sears stores and catalog, not so much the brand (I mean, I understand that it's a brand that is franchised to Transformco, Grupo Sanborns and Homemart, S.A. for Guatemala), but people might understand to be consumer brands like Kenmore, Craftsman, etc. Maybe Sears (department store)? Keizers ( talk) 00:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Sears (department store) sounds like a good suggestion to me. Then the categories would be more clearly distinguished, and that should help make it clear that the categories are distinct. Mason ( talk) 17:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:49, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Convocations of the Mazhilis

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 12#Category:Convocations of the Mazhilis

Category:Development of individual fictional 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 result of the discussion was: Rename to Category:Development of specific works * Pppery * it has begun... 23:30, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Not sure how many articles used to be here, but a single article does not a category make. This should probably be removed as it is no longer relevant. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 07:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge into Category:Development of specific works - I found one additional article for this category ( Development of Bugs Bunny). However, that would still be too small of a category. Creating this category, however, would allow it to contain other articles such as Development of the DC Extended Universe, as well as allow it to be a parent to both Category:Production of specific films and Category:Development of specific video games. (Oinkers42) ( talk) 18:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I support Oinkers's proposal. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 03:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Countesses of Barcelona

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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: Purge * Pppery * it has begun... 23:30, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining. This category "lists the Countess consorts of the County of Barcelona, for the regnant Countess of Barcelona see: Category:Counts of Barcelona." Mason ( talk) 01:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

LGBT people by sexual orientation and nationality

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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: implement the alt merge proposal. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:51, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Propose renaming:
more nationalities
Nominator's rationale: rename, I am proposing changing this category name to include transgender, non-binary and intersex people in this category. Giovanni 0331 ( talk) 19:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose. Merge and delete instead. Several recent CfDs have reached the consensus that these interleaving “by identity”, “by gender identity”, or “by sexual orientation” category layers are unhelpful, and we have been in the process of getting rid of them. It is much simpler and clearer to have all the LGBTQ+ identity subcategories directly in the parent category, grouped under a sort key. (See Category:LGBT people by religion for an example.)-- Trystan ( talk) 22:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Just to clarify, the alt merge proposal below is exactly what I had in mind.-- Trystan ( talk) 17:37, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Upmerge all, "by identity" is too vague and one would expect the subcategories to be in the parent category anyway. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Upmerge all per above replies. Omnis Scientia ( talk) 07:44, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See previous discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 November 22#LGBT people by sexual orientation. Almost all of the categories were untagged, so I have tagged them. If you are proposing upmerging instead, please handle adding the targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

more nationalities
  • Support alt merge. – Aidan721 ( talk) 15:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    I'd support the alt merge. I think that using identity has some potential problematic implications, such as identity implying that orientation is a choice among other things. Mason ( talk) 17:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Kirksville Osteopaths football seasons

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 page in category. Let'srun ( talk) 20:36, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep. This was a 30-year college football program; there will be more seasons that are notable and will be created in the future; there is also an accepted categorization scheme that all college football teams with seasons should have categories. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 20:51, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
"potential for growth" is no longer a valid reason to keep. – Aidan721 ( talk) 23:09, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
And WP:CFB does not make the rules of WP:Categorization. – Aidan721 ( talk) 23:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
What part of that page, specifically, does this violate? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 02:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete for now. Omnis Scientia ( talk) 08:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Amended my response to a merger. – Aidan721 ( talk) 05:43, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per BeanieFan11. If "potential for growth" is no longer a valid, then that policy needs to change. Jweiss11 ( talk) 00:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    No. WP:SMALLCAT is no longer backed by community consensus. The category can be recreated when a sufficient number of articles exist. For now, it must be merged (see my revision above). – Aidan721 ( talk) 05:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note this category now contains two articles. Jweiss11 ( talk) 02:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • This category now contains three articles. Is that enough to withdraw the nomination? Jweiss11 ( talk) 16:21, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: 3 articles as of relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • I am also ok with the merge as proposed by Aidan721. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:09, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    • How many articles do you think are necessary for a category? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 00:23, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
      • Traditionally editors here mention a minimum of five. Marcocapelle ( talk) 12:31, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
        • @ Jweiss11: and @ Cbl62: Would either of you be willing to do one or two more articles on notable Kirksville seasons? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 20:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Did they have any perfect seasons or seasons with some other extraordinary feature. For smaller programs like the Osteopaths, I've been limiting my season creation work of late to seasons of clear, lasting sigificance. Cbl62 ( talk) 20:31, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Cbl62: Seems they had two undefeated years, albeit a 4–0 1912 and 1–0 1913 – they also had 6–1 seasons in 1916, 1921 and 1927. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 21:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
I created 1900 Kirksville Osteopaths football team (played Missouri) and 1921 Kirksville Osteopaths football team (played TCU). We now have five articles in the category. Let'srun, will you withdraw the nomination? Jweiss11 ( talk) 18:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep as it is now appropriately populated. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:12, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Kirksville Osteopaths football coaches

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:11, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 page in category Let'srun ( talk) 20:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:30, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 tubers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Fictional potatoes. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 20:55, 18 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only one article/subcategory here that is actually properly categorized, and they're also in another category within the same group. Unnecessarily specific category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 06:58, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 21:12, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:29, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Druze people by nationality

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: the intent is to make it clearer that these categories are for individual people, and not topic categories, per WP:SEPARATE. Categories named with adjectives are always ambiguous. Place Clichy ( talk) 15:08, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Rename per nom, they are clearly used as biography categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Support per nom and Marco Mason ( talk) 02:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Energy industry in North Rhine-Westphalia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: merge, neither of the parent categories are diffused by state level. Merging is not needed, the articles already are in appropriate subcategories of Category:Energy industry in Germany and Category:Power stations in Germany respectively. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Interdenominational Churches

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: As per parent category Category:Christian ecumenical organizations Gjs238 ( talk) 13:53, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Just delete, ecumenical organizations are a thing (they advocate unity or cooperation between denominations), but ecumenical churches do not exist. The two articles are about parishes which are affiliated with two denominations, they can be categorized by these two denominations. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:29, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. As I've read once on the dedicated article, interdenominational is an Evangelical Protestant denomination. Place Clichy ( talk) 15:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as suggested above. Gjs238 ( talk) 14:43, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Formula 1 (board game)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only contains the epon page and 4 images that are used on the page. It's not helpful for navigation Mason ( talk) 13:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Coaster 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 result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Only one category in here which isn't helpful for navigation Mason ( talk) 13:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge for now, without objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available. Marcocapelle ( talk) 13:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:South African people of Hispanic descent

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only two quite unrelated categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:South African people of West Indian descent

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:South African people of Caribbean descent. There is no consensus on Mason's additional proposal, with no prejudice against speedy renomination. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:49, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of an older, better parented, category. Place Clichy ( talk) 09:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 10:00, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Support per nom. And I propose renaming the following per parent Category:European people of Caribbean descent Mason ( talk) 13:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Names by culture

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Split * Pppery * it has begun... 23:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Based on the content these are categorized by country, not culture Mason ( talk) 05:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Animorphs 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 result of the discussion was: delete ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Almost all redirects following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Individual articles in the Animorphs series * Pppery * it has begun... 05:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:East Asian fashion

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There are only categories by country in here, (and the parent category Asian fashion by region only contains this category). It's not helpful for navigation. Mason ( talk) 05:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Love in Arabic literature

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:47, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection. I couldn't find any other language/literature that had a category like this Mason ( talk) 04:36, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Zoos established in 1752

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge/delete as nominated. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:46, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCYEAR: avoid creating a category tree of individual by year categories with very few members, So for example, instead of grouping by year, group by decade. And then diffuse the by decade categories by year only when necessary. This tree doesn't need to be diffused by year for the nominated categories. Upmerge. – Aidan721 ( talk) 01:55, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Support per nom Mason ( talk) 04:37, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom. "Tourist attractions established in" might have been a better merge target but that category tree does not exist at all. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:41, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge as described in Nominator's rationale - chris_j_wood ( talk) 10:00, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge the nominated individual year categories but keep the nominated decades categories. The latter decades of the 1800s have a sufficient number of articles.-- User:Namiba 15:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Viz Media children's picture 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 result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only page in here is a list of books. No need for a category. I was leaning towards delete. Mason ( talk) 01:51, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Senegalese books by 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 result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in each, which is unhelpful for navigation. Mason ( talk) 01:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Books by Indian authors

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 11#Category:Books by Indian authors

Category:Kiss of Life 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.
The result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per long-standing precedent for subcategories of Category:Musicians by band when only one band/group member has an article. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 00:28, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge per nom. toobigtokale ( talk) 00:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Nightclubs in Belfast

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Only 3 entries each. Merge for now until it can be sufficiently populated. – Aidan721 ( talk) 20:54, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:31, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose. Night clubs are very much a feature of city life, probably more so that most other topics, and more so than national culture. So if there are a handful of articles for which we should avoid the troublesome, unofficial and contemptuous moniker of [Republic of] Ireland, it should be these ones. Category:Nightclubs by city is a coherent tree, well-established, defining for nightclubs, and the present nomination would remove valid content from that category. Place Clichy ( talk) 12:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Upmerge for now. I don't really understand Place Clichy's argument, categories are to help navigation, this category isn't large enough to help navigation. It doesn't really matter that Nightclubs by city is a coherent tree. Mason ( talk) 01:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The argument is that these categories, and the articles in them, won't be any more in Category:Nightclubs by city under the proposal, and that doesn't help navigation IMHO. Place Clichy ( talk) 09:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
But Category:Nightclubs by city consists of large enough cities anyway, not every city. Marcocapelle ( talk) 10:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Presumably cities associated with nightlife, and there's no reason to remove Belfast and Dublin from that. Alright, I don't feel strongly enough about that one to fight over it, but I wished to record this opinion. Place Clichy ( talk) 10:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Categories: By-elections to the Parliament of the United Kingdom in Suffolk constituencies by century

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. No compelling reason to exceptionally subdivide this category by century. LukeSurl  t  c 15:03, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:19, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Support in principle per nom. But the categories should also be manually merged to Category:19th-century elections in the United Kingdom, etc Mason ( talk) 01:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:By-elections to the Parliament of the United Kingdom in Hackney constituencies

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. No compelling reason this area of London is given a sub-category. LukeSurl  t  c 14:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Merge for now, the target is currently not diffused this way. I have no opinion on whether it should be diffused this way, but it does not make sense to have just this single subcategory. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:04, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:GA-Class Nazi Germany articles

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 9#Category:GA-Class Nazi Germany articles

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_February_2&oldid=1208763150"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE