The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 23:01, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:18th-century Xhosa people to Category:Xhosa people and Category:18th-century African people

Nominator's rationale: merge, isolated century category with only two articles. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:41, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge per nom Mason ( talk) 05:41, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 23:01, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:1470s establishments in Poland to Category:15th-century establishments in Poland

Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_January_19#Category:1430s_establishments_in_Poland, which seems to have accidentally omitted this sibling. The member pages are already in year subcats of Category:1470s establishments in Europe. – Fayenatic London 22:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:44, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  Merge per nom Mason ( talk) 05:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. – Aidan721 ( talk) 22:53, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 23:00, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Meena people ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, only two articles in the category which already link to each other directly. In addition, based on the text of the main article Meena, it seems that the other article Susawat needs an overhaul or needs to be AfD'd. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 08:27, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 23:00, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Anti-Hindu violence in Australia to Category:Anti-Indian sentiment in Australia
• Propose deleting Category:Anti-Hindu sentiment in Australia ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: a category for one article, Violence against Indians in Australia controversy. The article is about "reports of crimes and robberies against Indians in Australia that were described as racially motivated." This is not religion-related, and frankly I don't believe that perpetrators of racial hatred against Indians have any idea or care at all whether their victims are Hindu, Muslim, Sikh or else. Place Clichy ( talk) 18:54, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Just delete, the article already is in Category:Anti-Indian sentiment in Oceania and Category:Anti-Asian sentiment in Australia which seems to suffice. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:03, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  Also fine by me. Place Clichy ( talk) 08:27, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 23:00, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Assassinated politicians by method to Category:Assassinated politicians
• Propose merging Category:Assassinated politicians by firearm to Category:Deaths by firearm
• Propose merging Category:Assassinated politicians by explosive device to Category:Deaths by explosive device
• Propose merging Category:Assassinated politicians by decapitation to Category:Deaths by decapitation
• Propose merging Category:Assassinated politicians by beating to Category:Deaths by beating
• Propose merging Category:Assassinated politicians by stabbing to Category:Deaths by stabbing

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between type of murder, occupation, and cause of death. See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_November_11#Category:Killings_of_politicians for similar arguments about non-defining intersections for deaths of politicians. Mason ( talk) 04:17, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Pinging folks from that previous discussion: @ Marcocapelle, @ Place Clichy, and @ Thinker78. Mason ( talk) 04:32, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete, trivial intersections again. I suppose the categories can just be deleted, instead of merged, as the articles should already be deeper in the tree of the proposed targets, but I have not checked it in detail. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  I think its a safe assumption for assassinated politician, but I wasn't confident for the method. Mason ( talk) 21:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• Oppose. WP:NONDEF states, A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to. Certainly reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to how politicians were assassinated. From the beheading of Louis XVI to the shooting of JFK and all in between. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 23:42, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Also per WP:NONDEF,

if the characteristic would not be appropriate to mention in the lead section of an article (determined without regard to whether it is mentioned in the lead), it is probably not defining

.

• Assassination of John F. Kennedy, when he was fatally shot info in the first paragraph of the lead.
• Execution of Louis XVI, The execution by guillotine was performed by Charles-Henri Sanson, info in the first paragraph of the lead.
• Assassination of Shinzo Abe, Abe was delivering a campaign speech for a Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) candidate when he was fatally shot, info in the first paragraph of the lead.
• Assassination of Alexander II of Russia, a second assassin, Ignacy Hryniewiecki, threw a bomb that fatally wounded Alexander II., info in the second paragraph of the lead.
• Linda Collins, she was found stabbed to death., info in the second paragraph of the lead.

It is evident these are not trivial intersections. They are also about one of the most crucial parts of the politician's life, their killings and how they were killed. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 19:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• Oppose per Thinker78. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 22:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  The contention is whether the intersection between the two is defining. Thinker78 doesn't address that issue at all. Mason ( talk) 02:17, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  @ Smasongarrison I think I addressed that with the examples of pages above. JFK and the others are assassinated politicians and the method of assassination is mentioned in the lead as indicated by the guideline. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 03:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Of course a certain method was used for every assassination. But that method is unrelated to the fact that they were a politician. Anyone could have been murdered by any method. The intersection is trivial, not the method of killing. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:25, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  Per WP:TRIVIALCAT,

  In general, if something could be easily left out of a biography, it is likely that it is a trivial characteristic.

  I think leaving out the method of assassination in a few articles of assassinated politicians would deprive them of crucial information, more so in notable politicians like JFK or Alexander II.

  But I have to mention in the same piece of guideline,

  Also avoid categorizing people by information associated with a person's death, such as the age at which the person died, the place of the person's death, or by whether the person still had unreleased or unpublished work at the time of their death.

  But I think then we need to remember this is a guideline, not a policy. Because if we literally were to enforce this in all cases about person's deaths, then many categories and subcategories would be deleted, like Category:Assassinations, Category:Deaths by cause, Category:Deaths by period‎. And honestly, I think removing these categories would do more harm than good to Wikipedia. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 00:11, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  No one is arguing that the the method of death is not defining. The argument is that the intersection between the fact at someone was assassinated AND that they're a politician AND that they were assassinated using a specific method. If you can point to literature that discusses the INTERSECTION in scholarly sources. Like each by themselves add value, but your argument isn't addressing the core concern I'm raising. Mason ( talk) 02:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge as nominated. The method of death is defining. The assassination of politicians is defining. BUT, the intersection of the two is not defining. – Aidan721 ( talk) 00:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Merge As Aidan721 says above, this is a trivial intersection.-- User:Namiba 19:16, 11 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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...} 23:33, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose purging Category:Fictional characters by behavior

1. Category:Fictional characters by political orientation does not belong here, this concerns a conviction rather than behavior.
2. Category:Fictional characters by religion does not belong here, this concerns a conviction rather than behavior.
3. Category:Fictional characters with mental disorders does not belong here, this concerns a disability rather than behavior. It may result in atypical behavior but that is something else and it does not continuously happen while the disorder is still there.

The former two subcategories should be moved up to parent Category:Fictional characters by attribute. I am bringing it to CfD since it is apparently controversial, I got reverted. On top of that, the category contains a wide range of very different behaviors while we do not have many categories by behavior anyway, so I am also open to dispersing all contents of the category and just deleting it. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Support purge, and I agree that these three categories should be purged as described, especially Category:Fictional characters with mental disorders. Mason ( talk) 20:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I also think that Fictional characters by sexuality‎ should be purged. It may result in behavior but that's a really narrow view (and has some potentially problematic implications, like what if someone discovers they aren't attracted to a gender after a "behavior", does that mean they are categorized as bisexual, even if that person doesn't identify as bisexual?" Mason ( talk) 20:22, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Selectively purge so that Category:Fictional characters by behavior only contains subcategories which mirror their respective real-life counterparts listed under Category:People by behavior. AHI-3000 ( talk) 21:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

So given that you're the one who reverted these categories. Can you give us your thoughts on the categories in question? Because I don't want to have to repeat this discussion for those same three categories if they're added to the People by behavior category... Mason ( talk) 21:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:33, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Basement Jaxx video albums ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only contains one entry, and said entry isn't even a video album. I think the placement is referring to The Videos, but those would've been more appropriately placed on a redirect; I have created one and will move the other categories there. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 08:05, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

@ QuietHere: I'm not sure I understand this nomination. Instead of nominating this for deletion, why don't you add this category to the redirect you created, The Videos (Basement Jaxx album)? You added categories relating to video albums to that redirect, so how would this not apply to save it from being deleted? If it's not a video album, then the redirect shouldn't have any "video album" categories on it at all. Edit: I've gone ahead and moved the video albums category to the redirect. As I said, I don't understand how the other video album categories would apply but this doesn't. Ss 112 16:06, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Because it's still a category dedicated to a single item which isn't necessary when the container isn't crowded. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 16:45, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I wasn't aware that we deleted categories simply because they only have a single item in them. Ss 112 17:52, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Sometimes they're merged but there needs to be a reason, such as its unhelpful for navigation or Wikipedia:C2F if its one eponymous page. Mason ( talk) 21:39, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

If their purpose is simply to separate one item from a small group then they are essentially pointless. This is not the first time I've proposed such a deletion and seen it approved. Why keep it separate by a layer that exists only for it when it's certainly not going to get lost in a higher level? QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 14:24, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• Keep per my reasoning/action as explained above. Ss 112 16:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:NARROWCAT and WP:NONDEFINING. The single article is not a video album but has a section on a video album with a redirect to it. That underlying article is already under Category:Basement Jaxx compilation albums so no merge is needed. I haven't seen any affirmative argument for why this category would aid navigation. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 18:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete per RevelationDirect. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars ^{Talk to me} 20:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:NARROWCAT with no prejudice against recreation if the category can be appropriately populated. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 02:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete, only contains a redirect, which is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:08, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:59, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Images of Oklahomans (0) to Category:Images of Oklahoma and Category:Images of American people
• Propose merging Category:Images of people from Illinois (0) to Category:Images of Illinois and Category:Images of American people

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. We don't need to diffuse images of people by state. Mason ( talk) 16:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge, no other states have this sort of categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:11, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 replacing "/" with "and". * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:34, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Lawyers in Upper Canada/Canada West to Category:?????
• Propose renaming Category:Lawyers in Lower Canada/Canada East to Category:???

Nominator's rationale: I don't know what to rename this, but the slashes are really unhelpful. There's no "Lower Canada/Canada East" or Upper Canada/Canada West category. Also, seems relevant: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_January_16#Category:Lawyers_from_the_Province_of_Canada. Mason ( talk) 17:03, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• Just delete. All are already in Category:19th-century Canadian lawyers. – Aidan721 ( talk) 18:45, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• Keep the categories, rather than delete completely; Split into four categories: "Lawyers in Lower Canada"; "Lawyers in Canada East"; "Lawyers in Upper Canada"; "Lawyers in Canada West". Responding first to the suggestion to delete, that would not be consistent with the existing framework of categories for Canadian lawyers. The top-level category is /info/en/?search=Category:Canadian_lawyers . That category has four sub-categories by century (18th, 19th, 20th and 21st), but it also has eleven sub-categories based on province or territory. It would be anomalous not to have a category that covered lawyers in Lower Canada, Canada East, Upper Canada and Canada West, but only included those lawyers by the century. Second, with respect to the request for a change to the categories, I'd be okay with splitting Lower Canada/Canada East into two categories, and Upper Canada/Canada West into two categories. The Lower Canada and Canada East categories should be sub-cats of /info/en/?search=Category:Lawyers_in_Quebec , and the Upper Canada and Canada West categories should be sub-cats of /info/en/?search=Category:Lawyers_in_Ontario . The reason I suggest this approach is that there is historical and legal continuity between the lawyers from Lower Canada, Canada East, and Quebec, and a different historical and legal continuity between the lawyers from Upper Canada, Canada West, and Ontario. The reason I created the sub-cats Lower Canada/Canada East and Upper Canada/Canada West is that I think there was considerable continuity between those jurisdictions, but the creation of the provinces of Ontario and Quebec in 1867 was a marked change in the constitutional structure and hence the categorisation of the legal profession. However, I'm not very familiar with categories, and if others think a split into four categories is better, I defer to those who are more experienced in this area. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz ( talk) 23:03, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• Even more fragmentation does not seem very helpful. Can't we just replace "/" by " and "? Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• I’d be fine with that as well. As said, I defer to those with more experience than me in categories. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz ( talk) 20:13, 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 18:29, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Non-Malayali Keralites ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, a negation is hardly ever a defining characteristic and this is not an exception. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:05, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:28, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete. That's a bit racist. Tell people what they are, not what they are not. Place Clichy ( talk) 18:55, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  Delete per nom and agree that it is pretty racist. Mason ( talk) 05:42, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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...} 23:34, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:13th-century Danish non-fiction writers (0) to Category:13th-century Danish people
• Propose merging Category:12th-century Danish non-fiction writers (0) to Category:12th-century Danish people

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in each here, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason ( talk) 17:41, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia ( talk) 17:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• Keep At least Category:13th-century Danish non-fiction writers. I have added a few pages and I'm sure there are more. Ramblersen2 ( talk) 23:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• Ingeborg of Denmark, Queen of France wrote some letters, that does not mean she is a writer. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:06, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  I agree with Marco on this. Ingeborg isn't defined as someone who is a writer, they just happen to have written things. Mason ( talk) 22:19, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge, also considering that the 14th and 15th century are entirely empty right now. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:06, 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 18:28, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge as nominated, per above. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 23:03, 11 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 23:02, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Social groups of Oman to Category:Society of Oman

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle ( talk) 18:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:27, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 18:55, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 biographies. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 19:08, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Triplets ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Fictional triplets ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:American triplets ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:British triplets ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:English triplets ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Estonian triplets ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Identical triplets ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: For almost everyone in these categories, being a triplet is WP:NOTDEFINING. There are a few articles for which it is potentially defining e.g. The Noise Next Door, but not enough to warrant a whole hierarchy of categories filled with people for which the fact they're a triplet is irrelevant to their notability. Personally, I think this also applies to twins, quadruplets etc, but wanted to do one set of nominations at a time. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 14:26, 19 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• At least purge biographies about individual people, being part of a triplet is a trivial characteristic but being a triplet may be kept. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:31, 19 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  Oppose. Is it is notable, and is often used to describe individuals. Mason ( talk) 04:23, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • But only when the triplet together is notable. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:58, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• I'd agree here that it is only notable to define the whole triplet rather than just one individual in the triplet. – Aidan721 ( talk) 14:55, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  Oppose. Entirely subjective nomination. Dimadick ( talk) 08:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  It's not entirely subjective. It is on the other hand WP:NOTDEFINING for most people in this category. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 15:45, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  I don't think it's fair to call the nomination subjective. You may disagree with their conclusion, but the nom has made a reasonable case. Mason ( talk) 22:17, 2 February 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) 20:56, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:22, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. The number of siblings one has is non-defining in the vast majority of circumstances. Though it is often mentioned as an anomaly, it is as defining as one's dominant hand or foot.-- User:Namiba 19:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Purge or Delete, whichever has consensus. I could see a case for categorizing articles like Speusippus, Eleusippus and Melapsippus and Leo, Gerry and Myles Fitzgerald but the vast majority are individual biographies which aren't defined by their siblings. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:49, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Purge per Marco. Certainly a defining characteristic for actual sets of triplets, but being a triplet is not defining. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 23:08, 11 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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...} 04:05, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Fictional characters with animal abilities ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: "Animal abilities" is so vague as to be subjective. I am not sure that any of these would count as "elemental or environmental abilities" anyway, so I suggest deletion, as it doesn't seem like anything would be put out of place. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 07:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Oppose. We've gone over this nonsense before, and the argument that this is too "vague" or "subjective" isn't any more compelling than it was last time. AHI-3000 ( talk) 18:51, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

"No consensus" means it can be relisted at any time. If it resulted in a solid consensus before, I'd abide by it. But it's perfectly normal to list something twice with a different proposal if people could not agree on the original proposal. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 19:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete/merge per nom, the subcategories are very unrelated. I guess if the content does not fit Category:Fictional characters with elemental and environmental abilities then we may still move the first two subcategories under Category:Fictional superhumans by ability. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:55, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• Comment - this category was recently up for a merge to Category:Animal superheroes, but was closed as a no consensus ( Link here). Pinging those involved in that CfD, @ AHI-3000: @ LaundryPizza03: @ Dimadick:. (Oinkers42) ( talk) 18:55, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  Also pinging @ Smasongarrison:, odd how the other delete !voter got skipped over here, but I'm going to assume it was just an accidental omission. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 19:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  Sorry about that, I completely missed them. (Oinkers42) ( talk) 20:06, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  Delete/merge, it's still too vague/non-defining for my taste. Mason ( talk) 22:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  Pinging @ Dimadick: and @ LaundryPizza03: for their opinions AHI-3000 ( talk) 18:48, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  Delete With the creation of Category:Fictional characters who can communicate with animals, we have mostly animal-themed characters with disparate abilities that belong elsewhere in Category:Fictional superhumans. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 11:20, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Oppose Neither vague, nor subjective. Typically specifically mentioned in the text. Dimadick ( talk) 06:39, 21 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) 21:05, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:21, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete I find some of the subcategories here helpful for navigation. But this parent category only contains a few articles seem to be WP:SUBJECTIVE, and the subcategories don't benefit from this vague parent category either. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete per RevelationDirect. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 23:17, 11 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 23:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose splitting Category:Danzig emigrants to the United States to Category:Polish emigrants to the United States and Category:German emigrants to the United States

Nominator's rationale: Manual merge, "The Free City of Danzig was a city-state under the protection and oversight of the League of Nations between 1920 and 1939, consisting of the Baltic Sea port of Danzig". I don't think that this intersection is defining or helpful for emigrants as they are emigrating away from Danzig. I don't think we should merge into Category:People from the Free City of Danzig because that isn't defining for any of the people here. And arguably I think that it is overcategorized Mason ( talk) 22:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• If merged, then manually merge dependent on date of migration: just to Category:Immigrants to the United States (if migrated before 1939, or if date unknown), or to Category:German emigrants to the United States (migrated between 1939 and 1945) or to Category:Polish emigrants to the United States (migrated after 1945). The Free City of Danzig was neither Polish nor German between 1920 and 1939. Marcocapelle ( talk) 23:31, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 21:46, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Manually merge per Marco. Omnis Scientia ( talk) 17:06, 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 18:12, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Manually Merge Per above. The short-lived country is likely defining, the city not. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:57, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 , reverting to the status quo ante at Category:Dance in film. WP:NPASR. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 20:46, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Films about dance to Category:Dance in film

Nominator's rationale: Reverse the decision at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 7#Category:Dance in film. IMHO the close was mistaken; there is no clear distinction between the new name "Films about dance" and the subcat Category:Dance films, but they are meant to be a topic category and a set category; the category contains subcats for choreographers and awards, and is part of Category:Dance in arts alongside Dance in art & Dance in theatre. – Fayenatic London 12:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• ALT-1: Also consider Category:Dance in cinema as a clearer alternative name; but the Category:Film hierarchy currently only uses "Cinema" by culture and by location. – Fayenatic London 12:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• @ LaundryPizza03, Marcocapelle, Zxcvbnm, Paul foord, Smasongarrison, and HouseBlaster: pinging participants in the previous CFD. – Fayenatic London 14:03, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• I opposed in the previous discussion for exactly this reason, so obviously I am supporting a reversal for substantive reasons. I would also question if there was consensus in the previous discussion, but admittedly I am biased. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:27, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• Oppose Seems to me that Category:Dance films should be merged here instead, given how misleading the name of that category is. A category called "Dance films" should contain films with actors prominently dancing, not films concerning dance as a subject. Either way, a move back to "Dance in film" is non-defining. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 19:59, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 21:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:11, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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, with no consensus on which merge proposal to use. Hence, I'm defaulting to Place Clichy's alt, and anyone who wants to merge those further can file a new CfD. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:27, 17 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Russian Orthodox churches in Australia ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Russian-Australian culture
• Propose merging Category:Russian Orthodox church buildings in Cuba ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Cuba–Russia relations
• Propose merging Category:Russian Orthodox church buildings in Iran ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Russian Orthodoxy in Iran, and Category:Russian Orthodox church buildings in Asia
• Propose merging Category:Russian Orthodox cathedrals in Israel ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Russian Orthodox cathedrals in Asia
• Propose merging Category:Russian Orthodox church buildings in North Korea ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:North Korea–Russia relations, Category:Eastern Orthodoxy in North Korea, Category:Churches in North Korea, and Category:Russian Orthodox church buildings in Asia
• Propose merging Category:Russian Orthodox church buildings in Norway ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Norway–Russia relations, Category:Eastern Orthodoxy in Norway, and Category:Russian Orthodox church buildings in Europe
• Propose merging Category:Russian Orthodox church buildings in Serbia ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Eastern Orthodox church buildings in Serbia, Category:Russia–Serbia relations, and Category:Russian Orthodox church buildings in Europe
• Propose merging Category:Russian Orthodox cathedrals in the State of Palestine ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Russian Orthodox cathedrals in Asia
• Propose deleting Category:Eastern Orthodox church buildings in Cuba ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Eastern Orthodoxy in Cuba ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Eastern Christianity in Cuba ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Eastern Orthodox cathedrals in Israel ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Eastern Orthodox church buildings in North Korea ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Eastern Orthodox cathedrals in the State of Palestine ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Narrow intersection where all nominated categories have 1-2 articles. Upmerge as appropriate. Note that the articles were often already in the levels above so less merging was needed in certain cases. – Aidan721 ( talk) 15:28, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge/delete per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:42, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
• Oppose Cuba, Palestine and Israel, support the rest. First I'd like to thank Aidan721 for a carefully designed and balanced nomination, especially in regards to the research of appropriate or redundant parent categories. However in some cases I don't think that it is appropriate to remove or erase part of a hierarchy relative to Eastern Orthodoxy, which is a major branch of Christianity:
  • Alt merge Category:Russian Orthodox church buildings in Cuba to Category:Cuba–Russia relations AND Category:Eastern Orthodox church buildings in Cuba, keeping that category and its parents Category:Eastern Orthodoxy in Cuba and Category:Eastern Christianity in Cuba. Although Eastern Christianity is arguably small in Cuba, it is still a major branch and these categories are useful as part of a large set. There is potential, e.g. Arab Cubans mentions a Maronite presence among the Lebase/Syrian community.
  • Alt merge Category:Russian Orthodox cathedrals in Israel to Category:Eastern Orthodox cathedrals in Israel and Category:Russian Orthodox cathedrals in Asia
  • Alt merge Category:Russian Orthodox cathedrals in the State of Palestine to Category:Eastern Orthodox cathedrals in the State of Palestine and Category:Russian Orthodox cathedrals in Asia. Israel and Palestine are a home territory with an important native Orthodox population, so there is clearly a need for these categories. Place Clichy ( talk) 05:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Remember that potential for growth is no longer applicable. I'm not sure how keeping a higher level in an alt merge is useful. The categories can be recreated when they are sufficiently populated. Can those targets be populated now? – Aidan721 ( talk) 07:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

(after relisting) My argument is not potential for expansion. It is that in Jerusalem and around, Eastern Orthodoxy is pretty darn meaningful. And as for Cuba, although Eastern Christianity is arguably thinner, it does exist and shall not be erased (I usually stand clear of the erasure argument, but I believe it applies here).

I'm currently looking for articles about other Orthodox cathedrals in Israel/Palestine, which is a bit of an issue because cathedrals don't really play the same role in Greek Orthodoxy as they do in other faiths and often go by other names. According to this page, it seems that the Church there actually considers their major shrines as cathedrals: the shared Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem and the Greek Orthodox Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth. I found at least this one, which was a bit hidden. This other page mentions in Jerusalem a Cathedral of Saint James the Brother of God: wherein the Chapels of the Myrrh-bearing Women (Myrophorae) and the Holy 40 Martyrs, where the relics of the Patriarchs of Jerusalem are deposited. I don't know if it is identical to the Cathedral of Saint James, Jerusalem. Place Clichy ( talk) 14:33, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 21:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:09, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Both WP:NARROWCAT and the small communities in most of their places makes this many layers unhelpful. If Place Clichy's counter-proposal approaches a consensus, I'd support that as well. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 02:02, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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: withdrawn ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 18:51, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:American English-language television shows ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary and redundant category. Basically all American productions will be in this category. WP:OVERCAT. I have yet to see an article that mentions American-English as the language used. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 17:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Comment, this is follow-up on this earlier discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:50, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Comment OK. I withdraw this nomination. I read it be American-English as the language used. Didn't notice the location of the hyphen in the category name. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 18:05, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 23:38, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose splitting Category:Surnames by culture to Category:Surnames by continent and Category:Surnames

Nominator's rationale: split per actual category content, the diffusion is primarily by continent. Move the Jewish and Arabic subcategory and the article directly under Surnames. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Further comment, I will remove the continent subcats from Category:Surnames by language. A continent is not a language, after all. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:27, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Support. I support moving categories about names, given names and surnames to a structure based on 1°) continent/country and 2°) language, with the very few categories that cannot be associated with either (like Jewish names or Sikh names) directly in the root category. Place Clichy ( talk) 18:58, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:57, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Angolan names‎ to Category:Angolan culture‎
• Propose merging Category:Cambodian names‎ to Category:Cambodian culture
• Propose merging Category:Cameroonian names‎ to Category:Cameroonian culture
• Propose merging Category:Central African Republic names‎ to Category:Central African Republic culture
• Propose merging Category:Chadian names‎ to Category:Chadian culture
• Propose merging Category:Republic of the Congo names‎ to Category:Republic of the Congo culture
• Propose merging Category:Libyan names‎ to Category:Libyan culture
• Propose merging Category:Malawian names‎ to Category:Malawian culture
• Propose merging Category:Mauritian names‎ to Category:Mauritian culture
• Propose merging Category:Mozambican names‎ to Category:Mozambican culture
• Propose merging Category:Nigerien names‎ to Category:Nigerien culture
• Propose merging Category:Rwandan names‎ to Category:Rwandan culture
• Propose merging Category:Tanzanian names‎ to Category:Tanzanian culture
• Propose merging Category:Ugandan names‎ to Category:Ugandan culture

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:06, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge per nom Mason ( talk) 05:43, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:57, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Gardening in Mexico ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. The only page in this category ( Chinampa)is also in the parent category (and only marginally fits in the category). This is unhelpful for navigation. Mason ( talk) 16:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:31, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 {{ Oslo-church-stub}} to {{ Norway-church-stub}}; delete the rest. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 22:12, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Buskerud church stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs
• Propose merging Category:Innlandet church stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs
• Propose merging Category:Nordland church stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs
• Propose merging Category:Oslo church stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs
• Propose merging Category:Rogaland church stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs
• Propose merging Category:Troms og Finnmark church stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs
• Propose merging Category:Trøndelag church stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs
• Propose merging Category:Vestfold og Telemark church stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs
• Propose merging Category:Vestland church stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs
• Propose merging Category:Viken church stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs

Nominator's rationale: Cluster of stub categories, too-narrowly overcategorizing an insufficient number of articles. As always, stub categories are not free for just anybody to create on a whim -- a stub category needs to have at least 60 articles before its creation is warranted, and for that very reason stub categories have to be authorized by WikiProject Stub sorting before their creation is permitted.
But there's no evidence that project approval was sought, and absolutely none of these categories have 60 articles in them -- the largest of them has just 19 articles, all of the others only have between two and four entries, and there aren't even 60 articles combined across all of them put together, so there's no need to stubsort them this narrowly.
I'm agnostic on whether the templates even need to exist -- templates can always just upfile their entries in parent categories even without a dedicated eponymous category of their own, so the bar for the creation of a template isn't 60 the way it is for a dedicated category, but it's still questionable whether this many separate templates are actually needed for just two, three or four articles each, when {{ Norway-church-stub}} already exists.
I should also note that it appears that an editor tried to make the Viken category (but none of the others) go away by upmerging its template to the national category, but they used the wrong spelling and left behind a redlinked "Norway-instead-of-Norwegian" category that I had to revert — but they still had the right idea that it's not needed, even if they followed the wrong process to get there. Bearcat ( talk) 16:42, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge Oslo; delete templates except Oslo and sort the respective stubs to Category:Norwegian church stubs instead. With so few stubs per stub category it is not even meaningful to keep the templates. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  @ Marcocapelle, can you clarify what the distinction is between replacing the templates (i.e. deleting them and sorting them under Category:Norwegian church stubs), and merging them? Qwerfjkl talk 19:17, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• @ Qwerfjkl: in stub category terminology, "merging" means editing the template such that stub articles are moved automatically to the parent category. It does not require the CfD bot to perform that action. In contrast, the template may be deleted, but this requires manual recategorization because the CfD bot is not designed for stub category operations. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:40, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  @ Marcocapelle, do you mean redirecting the template? Qwerfjkl talk 21:57, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • @ Qwerfjkl: yes. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:59, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge Oslo & delete other templates per Marcocapelle. Her Pegship ( ?) 15:38, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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: Relisted (wrapping this in a closebox so the bot sees it as closed) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:10, 14 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 February 11#Redirects of dubious utility

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 22:46, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Balto-Slavic words and phrases
• Propose deleting Category:Balto-Slavic names‎
• Propose deleting Category:Surnames of Balto-Slavic origin‎

Nominator's rationale: delete, largely empty category tree, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. The only content here is Category:Old-Prussian-language surnames (3 article incl. 1 which does not seem to be about a surname per se). It can be directly placed at Category:Surnames by language. Place Clichy ( talk) 19:01, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:46, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Adelaide O-Bahn to Category:O-Bahn Busway

Nominator's rationale: For consistency with O-Bahn Busway. Steelkamp ( talk) 09:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Rename per WP:C2D, this could have been listed at speedy. Marcocapelle ( talk) 12:11, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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 for now, with no prejudice against recreation if the category can be appropriately populated. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 22:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:NAIA Division II football independents to Category:NAIA Division II football standings
• Propose merging Category:NAIA football rivalries to Category:College football rivalries in the United States
• Propose deleting Category:NAIA Division I football ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:NAIA Division II football ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category/pagr in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. Deletions are because the child category is already properly categorized Mason ( talk) 04:53, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge/delete for now, per nom, without objection to recreate any of these categories when some more articles are available. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  Merge/delete for now: Per nom, this is unhelpful for navigation as it stands, no objection towards recreation at a later date if situation changes. Let'srun ( talk) 14:40, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge/Delete for now per WP:NARROWCAT and WP:MFN. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 02:19, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Festivals in Colombia by department to Category:Festivals in Colombia

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in here with isn't helpful for navigaiton Mason ( talk) 04:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:30, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Food and drink companies of Central America to Category:Food and drink companies of North America

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in here, might as well upmerge to the actual continent. Mason ( talk) 04:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:31, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Merge per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 19:02, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Crime victims by city to Category:Crime by city

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This category only has one category in it, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason ( talk) 03:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:33, 4 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:39, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Glider pilots at the 1936 Summer Olympics ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Gliding isn't and has never been an Olympic event, Gliding at the 1936 Summer Olympics was a demonstration sport, not an actual event, so this definitely fails WP:CATDEF. Clarityfiend ( talk) 01:48, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete for now, only one article, about someone who also participated in other sports in these Olympics. This is without objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Comment. There is one other person ( Hanna Reitsch). However, I don't believe that participants in a non-medal sport warrant a category. Clarityfiend ( talk) 15:31, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  Delete: Not a defining characteristic. Let'srun ( talk) 19:02, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:38, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:18th-century essayists by nationality to Category:18th-century essayists
• Propose merging Category:17th-century songwriters by nationality to Category:17th-century songwriters

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Only one category in these categories, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason ( talk) 01:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:41, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Comment British, German, Italian, even American sibling cats could easily be knocked up from the global one. Johnbod ( talk) 18:25, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:38, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Red list of Southeast european cultural objects at risk ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale:I think this category needs to be deleted as non-defining. There is only one category in here, and seems to be an abandoned project. If kept, it should be renamed to so that "European" is capitalized. Mason ( talk) 00:22, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete If someone wants to pick this up open again I'm open to reconsideration, but there's not much here. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 02:38, 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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) 22:38, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Tryon Palace ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category on has two pages in it, which already link to each other. This is not helpful for navigation. Delete for now. Mason ( talk) 00:14, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:44, 4 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.