The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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. I don't see clear consensus here for which way to organise these categories. There is not a clear relationship between folklore/lengend/myth.
(non-admin closure)Qwerfjkltalk 20:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:merge or reverse merge, the distinction between legendary and folklore is not clear enough to keep two separate categories. As a mere illustration of the problem, the legendary and folklore category are each other's child and parent category, in all three cases. I have tagged all six categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
What about the Mythological characters/creatures/people categories?
AHI-3000 (
talk) 08:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
That is quite different. E.g. Greek/Roman mythology, Germanic/Norse mythology and Indian/Hindu mythology are topics in their own right with very clear boundaries.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 16:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep But reverse AHI's edits that messed up the categories. Legends are not folklore and the edits to make them subcategories of each other are manifestly incorrect. I tried to fix it myself at
Category:Folklore characters, but he reverted me, so here we are I guess. I wouldn't mind moving the folklore categories to folkloric though.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 12:27, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Where would you draw the line between folkloric and legendary?
Marcocapelle (
talk) 16:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Folkloric creatures are those from rumors in the recent past. Examples are
cryptids like Chupacabra, Mothman and Nessie, or supposed fairies and the like. AHI has made the categories into a massive interconnected mess, like putting deities as a subcategory of folklore, but they are provably different things.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 19:27, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Legends and mythology are definitely subsets of folklore. There are of course folkloric creatures that are modern and so wouldn't be considered legendary or mythological, but legends and mythology are generally ancient and medieval examples of folklore.
MClay1 (
talk) 14:31, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment - We've had several discussions over the years concerning "folklore/legend/myth". There are several issues. But the primary one is that myth can also be religion for some. (Creatures are less of an issue, but people/characters are very much an issue.) So we have to be careful to not mix folklore with myth. The next issue is that "legendary" sits right between folklore and myth. Usage is sometimes for myth and sometimes for folklore. And as we on Wikipedia only report, and not do
WP:OR, we're kind of "stuck". Because books may call something "myths and legends" or other things "Legends and folklore", or sometimes a book will have all three and not differentiate which is which. The best solution for our usage, I think, would be to only use myth/mythology and folklore as nouns. For example, the standard in
Category:Mythology is X in mythology. And I see similar in
Category:Folklore. ("folklore people" is just bad form.) And only using Legend in its adjective form: Legendary, unless paired with one of the other two words. And yes, this will take some cleanup. I'd be happy to help work on it if there is consensus to clean this up. - jc37 02:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)reply
That is a very elegant solution. So split legendary to mythological and folkloric.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I wouldn't mind this either if it would reduce confusion. I just don't think legend should be solely merged into folklore and it should be very clear that they need to be kept separate.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 16:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep but fix the category tree – Legends and mythology are subsets of folklore. Mythology is folklore even if some people believe it as part of their religion (folklore doesn't necessarily imply something is untrue). Folklore is defined by the
Cambridge Dictionary as "the traditional stories and culture of a group of people". It's a very broad subject that requires subcategorisation into different forms of folklore, including mythology and legends. The distinction between myth and legend isn't always clear, but there are cases that are clearly one or the other: a cyclops is mythological, a medieval Swedish king that may or may not have existed is legendary. And then there are obviously things in folklore that don't fall under myth or legend. Myth and legend categories should be subcategories of folklore categories, but the categorisation has been messed up.
MClay1 (
talk) 14:31, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
If there isn't going to be consensus on merging or splitting then I support the clean-up of the hierarchy as a second best solution.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I think MClay1 has a good point here.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 22:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 18:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 22:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Former penal colonies
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: No parent category. The article about
Koro Toro in
Chad includes a sourced statement describing it as a present-day penal colony. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 06:20, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 18:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 22:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Wikipedians in Kaduna
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 18:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 22:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:16th-century men 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.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. No need to diffuse by nationality, when there's only one category in here
Mason (
talk) 18:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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. I am not sure what Gonnym meant by does so automatically, but this is such a small nomination that I will do it manually. EDIT: Apparently the recategorization is automatically done by {{
Fiction-based redirects to list entries category handler}}!
(non-admin closure)HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 20:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC); edited 20:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Does so automatically.
Gonnym (
talk) 23:02, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Gonnym: the bot only does it automatically when the discussion is closed as merge, not when the discussion is closed as delete.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I did not say bot.
Gonnym (
talk) 06:58, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Then who or what does automatically?
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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.
It is not entirely nonsense, there is also an article
Weird fiction, but its definition is not very clear.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh hey
Marcocapelle, sorry for the short nomination. Busy day! Weird fiction is a thing, but "weird fiction video games" are not an established concept. I went through the articles, only
Control (video game) explicitly is stated as weird fiction, the only other mention of weird fiction is at
The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, mentioning that the developer was inspired by it, the game itself is not called that. I was so bold in removing the incorrect categories.
soetermans.
↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:25, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong delete Not an established genre, at least not yet. Besides some devs self-describing their games as inspired by weird fiction, there is nothing to put here that isn't pure
WP:OR.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 22:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Yugoslav political writers
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Only one category in here
Mason (
talk) 14:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:58, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Writers from the Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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. I don't think further discussion is going to be conducive here.
(non-admin closure)Qwerfjkltalk 20:24, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's not enough writers in 20th-century Moldovan writers to justify this level of diffusion
Mason (
talk) 13:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Dual merge, per nom. Besides, this ASSR only lasted 16 years so I wonder if we should category its people at all.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 19:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Marcocapelle: The MASSR was entirely contiguous with modern
Transnistria, and was therefore entirely outside the much larger
Bessarabia, which is the core of Moldovan categories. Thanks to Stalin's Great Purge, the near-entirety of MASSR notabilities (writers, politicians etc.) managed to die before those 16 years ended, making their inclusion simply in Moldovan categories, rather than in a proxy subcategory, a tad anomalous. Let alone that they were also subjects of the Ukrainian SSR (unlike all other Moldovans), which is something neither you nor the nominator seem to have even contemplated.
Dahn (
talk) 23:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment “not enough” according to whom? —
BiruitorulTalk 13:28, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
"According to whom?" What are you really trying to ask here. I think that this are not enough people in the parent category for this to helpful for navigation. Aiding navigation is the purpose of categories. There's four people in the nominated category, compared to 7 in the parent.
Mason (
talk) 17:25, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Smasongarrison: Will a user specifically trying to find the writers active in the MASSR, and nowhere else in Moldova, to 1940, be helped by their being lumped together with
Grigore Vieru and hundreds of others of 20th-century Moldovan writers, all of whom never set foot in the MASSR? Is it conceivable that someone interested in the cultural life of a polity that had its capital in
Tiraspol, comprising mostly people that wanted to be there because they were staunch communists, will not be served by having no instrument to pick them out from among hundreds of people who were simply born as Romanian or Soviet citizens in
Bessarabia, with its capital in
Chișinău? Are you aware, for instance, that books or at least chapters of books have been written specifically about this topic, which you claim is irrelevant to categorization? (And yes, before you ask, it is hundreds of others: nobody has yet moved articles from
Category:Moldovan writers and its subcategories to the corresponding century category.)
Dahn (
talk) 23:51, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Incidentally, I would also be interested to know if your action plan also calls for the removal of categories which will always and for ever have a very small number of articles, such as
Category:Nirvana (band) members. What is the scope of Mason's methodology?
Dahn (
talk) 00:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong oppose I have to ask: is the nominator aware of the special geographic and political status of the
Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic? For instance, are they aware that the polity in question was a subdivision of the Ukraine, whereas the successor Moldovan republic was entirely outside Ukraine? That this is why the writers in question are also a relevant subdivision of Ukrainian and
Transnistrian categories? That this distinction has cultural significance (for instance, the writers in question were supervised by a specialized body in
Balta, later
Tiraspol)? There are currently four articles in the category, which is plenty to warrant its existence; anyone with some modicum of interest in the topic will know that these are not all articles that would go into it -- existing articles have redlinks to
Pavel Chioru,
Nistor Cabac,
Mihai Andriescu,
Ion Canna,
Leonid Madan, and
Teodor Malai. I personally handled the existing articles (which is also why I feel my contributions are stalked by
Smasongarrison, who nevertheless did not bother notifying me of this discussion); note how I wrote them from nothing to consistent articles, sourced to academic-level works and newspaper articles -- only so that now I am informed that I should keep on filling all possible redlinks until nominator, who spends much of their time simply on this rather wasteful activity, is perhaps convinced that the categorizing work has merits. Note how not even one objective criterion is being cited for this -- we're on X-Factor or The Apprentice, having to justify our work lest it is simply deleted.
Dahn (
talk) 23:33, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Pavel Chioru is now bluelinked.
Dahn (
talk) 11:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Also allow me to underscore this:
Smasongarrison makes it a central argument in their objection that "There's not enough writers in 20th-century Moldovan writers to justify this level of diffusion". However, this statement seems entirely unaware of the fact that whoever created the 20th-century subcategory never bothered diffusing writers out of the supra-
Category:Moldovan writers, most of whom are 20th-century writers (this also includes the subcats, adding up to hundreds of articles). This is an additional reason why editors should not start noms until and unless they have had a thorough look at the immediate category tree(s).
Ahem.Dahn (
talk) 09:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose the MASSR was a Soviet creation aimed at influencing Romanian Bessarabia and the first playground of
Moldovenism through these writers among others. The MASSR was also the first predecessor of modern Transnistria. These are two different perspectives from which this category can be useful. Dahn has created articles for five such writers which contain redlinks to other five. Ten articles is already a nice number for a category. But as Moldovans/Romanians were only less than a third of the population, I imagine there must be other Ukrainian or Russian (maybe even Jewish) writers from the ASSR with potential for an article.
SuperΨDro 13:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Super Dromaeosaurus: Indeed, though note that the category is already multiethnic (including
one Jewish writer -- though even he was made to play the part of a Moldavian, for ideological purposes). But yes, presumably there were a few writers among the Moldavian refugees of various backgrounds who made their way into Romania.
Dahn (
talk) 14:27, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose, obviously, for the many reasons enumerated above. We are dealing with a distinct polity with a distinct literary culture. —
BiruitorulTalk 16:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Martiniquais photographers
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one person in here, which isn't helpful for navigation.
Mason (
talk) 13:38, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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.
After I have spent some time thinking about it, yes. A detainee is a prisoner, no doubt about it. I don't see what the major difference is here. Perhaps they are temporarily being held, but are imprisoned nonetheless.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 06:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose per parent
Category:Prisoners and detainees. Plenty of fiction deals with detainees who are not imprisoned for a crime, just suspect of one.
NLeeuw (
talk) 07:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 23:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The category currently contains a mishmash of articles in which prison often plays a limited role. The category may become more useful when its scope is constrained to
Category:Characters in prison fiction.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 10:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 13:01, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
While I think this renaming proposal makes sense, I think we should start by renaming
Category:Prisoners and detainees and all of its similarly named subcategories first.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 20:34, 22 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 prison escapees
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: There's too much
overlap between fugitives and prison escapees. While prison escapees was the older category, I'm not sure it matters where they escaped from, just that they're a fugitive.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 14:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose merger. There's a significant distinction between a suspected criminal fleeing to avoid prosecution and imprisonment, and a convicted prisoner escaping from incarceration. I think a better idea would be to keep both categories, while selectively purging articles from them; any character who escaped from jail should stay in
Category:Fictional prison escapees, but remove them from
Category:Fictional fugitives to avoid too much redundant overlap.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 02:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose merger. I agree with AHI-3000 that purging categories so they aren't redundant (basically, treat it as a diffusing category rather than a non-diffusing category?) is the better next step, rather than wholesale merging. Prison escapee is a prolific enough character trope, and sufficiently different from being a fugitive in general.
Edmond Dantès's escape from the Château d'If involves a much different story than
Zuko being on the run from the Fire Nation.
P-Makoto (she/her) (
talk) 01:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 23:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, a well-populated category with a definite and limited focus.
Randy Kryn (
talk) 10:56, 15 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Purge? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 12:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree with keeping but purge per AHI-3000. The prison escapees category is rightly a subcategory of
Category:Fictional fugitives, so prison escapees should be
diffused properly. HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 16:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:People by former city
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: I think we should broaden this category to be populated place, in the same spirit as other recent CFDs
Mason (
talk) 12:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Rename, for consistency with many other similar renames.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 19:29, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory and one article. Merging to
Category:Discrimination is not needed, both entries are already in that tree. The article is also in both other parents, while I doubt that the subcategory would belong there.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom
Mason (
talk) 12:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Azulejos
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: rename/merge per actual content, all articles in these categories are about buildings and structures.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Mason (
talk) 17:29, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
By period
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Support per nom
Mason (
talk) 12:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Support: Seems reasonable.
BOZ (
talk) 13:46, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddy
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation. There are only three pages total in this entire tree. Created by a disruptive, now banned editor.
Mason (
talk) 05:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, the articles are already directly interlinked.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:20th-century Greek American writers
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining four-way (4) intersection of century + nationality + occupation + ethnic/national descent
Mason (
talk) 03:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge, trivial intersection between century and ancestors' nationality.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:English queer actresses
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's no need to have a single page in a category. I strongly urge the page creator to populate categories they create.
Mason (
talk) 01:17, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge for now, without objection to recreate the category when some more articles can be added.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:54, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I'd be happy to keep the category, instead of merging. Especially now that it is clear that these categories were depopulated out of process.
Mason (
talk) 19:52, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There is a list and a single baron in here, which is not helpful for navigation
Mason (
talk) 01:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Pigasse family
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: This family category is an uncle-nephew pair, which doesn't need a category for navigation
Mason (
talk) 01:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, the articles are already directly interlinked.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:01, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Fézensac family
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Delete category. There's no actual people in this category and the only page is the county they share a name with. The child category is already categorized.
Mason (
talk) 01:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one person in each of these categories, which isn't helpful for navigation.
Mason (
talk) 00:04, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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:keep. I don't see clear consensus here for which way to organise these categories. There is not a clear relationship between folklore/lengend/myth.
(non-admin closure)Qwerfjkltalk 20:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:merge or reverse merge, the distinction between legendary and folklore is not clear enough to keep two separate categories. As a mere illustration of the problem, the legendary and folklore category are each other's child and parent category, in all three cases. I have tagged all six categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
What about the Mythological characters/creatures/people categories?
AHI-3000 (
talk) 08:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
That is quite different. E.g. Greek/Roman mythology, Germanic/Norse mythology and Indian/Hindu mythology are topics in their own right with very clear boundaries.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 16:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep But reverse AHI's edits that messed up the categories. Legends are not folklore and the edits to make them subcategories of each other are manifestly incorrect. I tried to fix it myself at
Category:Folklore characters, but he reverted me, so here we are I guess. I wouldn't mind moving the folklore categories to folkloric though.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 12:27, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Where would you draw the line between folkloric and legendary?
Marcocapelle (
talk) 16:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Folkloric creatures are those from rumors in the recent past. Examples are
cryptids like Chupacabra, Mothman and Nessie, or supposed fairies and the like. AHI has made the categories into a massive interconnected mess, like putting deities as a subcategory of folklore, but they are provably different things.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 19:27, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Legends and mythology are definitely subsets of folklore. There are of course folkloric creatures that are modern and so wouldn't be considered legendary or mythological, but legends and mythology are generally ancient and medieval examples of folklore.
MClay1 (
talk) 14:31, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment - We've had several discussions over the years concerning "folklore/legend/myth". There are several issues. But the primary one is that myth can also be religion for some. (Creatures are less of an issue, but people/characters are very much an issue.) So we have to be careful to not mix folklore with myth. The next issue is that "legendary" sits right between folklore and myth. Usage is sometimes for myth and sometimes for folklore. And as we on Wikipedia only report, and not do
WP:OR, we're kind of "stuck". Because books may call something "myths and legends" or other things "Legends and folklore", or sometimes a book will have all three and not differentiate which is which. The best solution for our usage, I think, would be to only use myth/mythology and folklore as nouns. For example, the standard in
Category:Mythology is X in mythology. And I see similar in
Category:Folklore. ("folklore people" is just bad form.) And only using Legend in its adjective form: Legendary, unless paired with one of the other two words. And yes, this will take some cleanup. I'd be happy to help work on it if there is consensus to clean this up. - jc37 02:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)reply
That is a very elegant solution. So split legendary to mythological and folkloric.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I wouldn't mind this either if it would reduce confusion. I just don't think legend should be solely merged into folklore and it should be very clear that they need to be kept separate.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 16:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep but fix the category tree – Legends and mythology are subsets of folklore. Mythology is folklore even if some people believe it as part of their religion (folklore doesn't necessarily imply something is untrue). Folklore is defined by the
Cambridge Dictionary as "the traditional stories and culture of a group of people". It's a very broad subject that requires subcategorisation into different forms of folklore, including mythology and legends. The distinction between myth and legend isn't always clear, but there are cases that are clearly one or the other: a cyclops is mythological, a medieval Swedish king that may or may not have existed is legendary. And then there are obviously things in folklore that don't fall under myth or legend. Myth and legend categories should be subcategories of folklore categories, but the categorisation has been messed up.
MClay1 (
talk) 14:31, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
If there isn't going to be consensus on merging or splitting then I support the clean-up of the hierarchy as a second best solution.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I think MClay1 has a good point here.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 22:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 18:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 22:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Former penal colonies
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: No parent category. The article about
Koro Toro in
Chad includes a sourced statement describing it as a present-day penal colony. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 06:20, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 18:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 22:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Wikipedians in Kaduna
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 18:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 22:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:16th-century men 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.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. No need to diffuse by nationality, when there's only one category in here
Mason (
talk) 18:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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. I am not sure what Gonnym meant by does so automatically, but this is such a small nomination that I will do it manually. EDIT: Apparently the recategorization is automatically done by {{
Fiction-based redirects to list entries category handler}}!
(non-admin closure)HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 20:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC); edited 20:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Does so automatically.
Gonnym (
talk) 23:02, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Gonnym: the bot only does it automatically when the discussion is closed as merge, not when the discussion is closed as delete.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I did not say bot.
Gonnym (
talk) 06:58, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Then who or what does automatically?
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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.
It is not entirely nonsense, there is also an article
Weird fiction, but its definition is not very clear.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh hey
Marcocapelle, sorry for the short nomination. Busy day! Weird fiction is a thing, but "weird fiction video games" are not an established concept. I went through the articles, only
Control (video game) explicitly is stated as weird fiction, the only other mention of weird fiction is at
The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, mentioning that the developer was inspired by it, the game itself is not called that. I was so bold in removing the incorrect categories.
soetermans.
↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:25, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong delete Not an established genre, at least not yet. Besides some devs self-describing their games as inspired by weird fiction, there is nothing to put here that isn't pure
WP:OR.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 22:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Yugoslav political writers
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Only one category in here
Mason (
talk) 14:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 18:58, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Writers from the Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate 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. I don't think further discussion is going to be conducive here.
(non-admin closure)Qwerfjkltalk 20:24, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's not enough writers in 20th-century Moldovan writers to justify this level of diffusion
Mason (
talk) 13:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Dual merge, per nom. Besides, this ASSR only lasted 16 years so I wonder if we should category its people at all.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 19:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Marcocapelle: The MASSR was entirely contiguous with modern
Transnistria, and was therefore entirely outside the much larger
Bessarabia, which is the core of Moldovan categories. Thanks to Stalin's Great Purge, the near-entirety of MASSR notabilities (writers, politicians etc.) managed to die before those 16 years ended, making their inclusion simply in Moldovan categories, rather than in a proxy subcategory, a tad anomalous. Let alone that they were also subjects of the Ukrainian SSR (unlike all other Moldovans), which is something neither you nor the nominator seem to have even contemplated.
Dahn (
talk) 23:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment “not enough” according to whom? —
BiruitorulTalk 13:28, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
"According to whom?" What are you really trying to ask here. I think that this are not enough people in the parent category for this to helpful for navigation. Aiding navigation is the purpose of categories. There's four people in the nominated category, compared to 7 in the parent.
Mason (
talk) 17:25, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Smasongarrison: Will a user specifically trying to find the writers active in the MASSR, and nowhere else in Moldova, to 1940, be helped by their being lumped together with
Grigore Vieru and hundreds of others of 20th-century Moldovan writers, all of whom never set foot in the MASSR? Is it conceivable that someone interested in the cultural life of a polity that had its capital in
Tiraspol, comprising mostly people that wanted to be there because they were staunch communists, will not be served by having no instrument to pick them out from among hundreds of people who were simply born as Romanian or Soviet citizens in
Bessarabia, with its capital in
Chișinău? Are you aware, for instance, that books or at least chapters of books have been written specifically about this topic, which you claim is irrelevant to categorization? (And yes, before you ask, it is hundreds of others: nobody has yet moved articles from
Category:Moldovan writers and its subcategories to the corresponding century category.)
Dahn (
talk) 23:51, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Incidentally, I would also be interested to know if your action plan also calls for the removal of categories which will always and for ever have a very small number of articles, such as
Category:Nirvana (band) members. What is the scope of Mason's methodology?
Dahn (
talk) 00:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong oppose I have to ask: is the nominator aware of the special geographic and political status of the
Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic? For instance, are they aware that the polity in question was a subdivision of the Ukraine, whereas the successor Moldovan republic was entirely outside Ukraine? That this is why the writers in question are also a relevant subdivision of Ukrainian and
Transnistrian categories? That this distinction has cultural significance (for instance, the writers in question were supervised by a specialized body in
Balta, later
Tiraspol)? There are currently four articles in the category, which is plenty to warrant its existence; anyone with some modicum of interest in the topic will know that these are not all articles that would go into it -- existing articles have redlinks to
Pavel Chioru,
Nistor Cabac,
Mihai Andriescu,
Ion Canna,
Leonid Madan, and
Teodor Malai. I personally handled the existing articles (which is also why I feel my contributions are stalked by
Smasongarrison, who nevertheless did not bother notifying me of this discussion); note how I wrote them from nothing to consistent articles, sourced to academic-level works and newspaper articles -- only so that now I am informed that I should keep on filling all possible redlinks until nominator, who spends much of their time simply on this rather wasteful activity, is perhaps convinced that the categorizing work has merits. Note how not even one objective criterion is being cited for this -- we're on X-Factor or The Apprentice, having to justify our work lest it is simply deleted.
Dahn (
talk) 23:33, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Pavel Chioru is now bluelinked.
Dahn (
talk) 11:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Also allow me to underscore this:
Smasongarrison makes it a central argument in their objection that "There's not enough writers in 20th-century Moldovan writers to justify this level of diffusion". However, this statement seems entirely unaware of the fact that whoever created the 20th-century subcategory never bothered diffusing writers out of the supra-
Category:Moldovan writers, most of whom are 20th-century writers (this also includes the subcats, adding up to hundreds of articles). This is an additional reason why editors should not start noms until and unless they have had a thorough look at the immediate category tree(s).
Ahem.Dahn (
talk) 09:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose the MASSR was a Soviet creation aimed at influencing Romanian Bessarabia and the first playground of
Moldovenism through these writers among others. The MASSR was also the first predecessor of modern Transnistria. These are two different perspectives from which this category can be useful. Dahn has created articles for five such writers which contain redlinks to other five. Ten articles is already a nice number for a category. But as Moldovans/Romanians were only less than a third of the population, I imagine there must be other Ukrainian or Russian (maybe even Jewish) writers from the ASSR with potential for an article.
SuperΨDro 13:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Super Dromaeosaurus: Indeed, though note that the category is already multiethnic (including
one Jewish writer -- though even he was made to play the part of a Moldavian, for ideological purposes). But yes, presumably there were a few writers among the Moldavian refugees of various backgrounds who made their way into Romania.
Dahn (
talk) 14:27, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose, obviously, for the many reasons enumerated above. We are dealing with a distinct polity with a distinct literary culture. —
BiruitorulTalk 16:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Martiniquais photographers
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one person in here, which isn't helpful for navigation.
Mason (
talk) 13:38, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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.
After I have spent some time thinking about it, yes. A detainee is a prisoner, no doubt about it. I don't see what the major difference is here. Perhaps they are temporarily being held, but are imprisoned nonetheless.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 06:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose per parent
Category:Prisoners and detainees. Plenty of fiction deals with detainees who are not imprisoned for a crime, just suspect of one.
NLeeuw (
talk) 07:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 23:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The category currently contains a mishmash of articles in which prison often plays a limited role. The category may become more useful when its scope is constrained to
Category:Characters in prison fiction.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 10:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 13:01, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
While I think this renaming proposal makes sense, I think we should start by renaming
Category:Prisoners and detainees and all of its similarly named subcategories first.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 20:34, 22 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 prison escapees
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: There's too much
overlap between fugitives and prison escapees. While prison escapees was the older category, I'm not sure it matters where they escaped from, just that they're a fugitive.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 14:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose merger. There's a significant distinction between a suspected criminal fleeing to avoid prosecution and imprisonment, and a convicted prisoner escaping from incarceration. I think a better idea would be to keep both categories, while selectively purging articles from them; any character who escaped from jail should stay in
Category:Fictional prison escapees, but remove them from
Category:Fictional fugitives to avoid too much redundant overlap.
AHI-3000 (
talk) 02:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose merger. I agree with AHI-3000 that purging categories so they aren't redundant (basically, treat it as a diffusing category rather than a non-diffusing category?) is the better next step, rather than wholesale merging. Prison escapee is a prolific enough character trope, and sufficiently different from being a fugitive in general.
Edmond Dantès's escape from the Château d'If involves a much different story than
Zuko being on the run from the Fire Nation.
P-Makoto (she/her) (
talk) 01:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 23:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, a well-populated category with a definite and limited focus.
Randy Kryn (
talk) 10:56, 15 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Purge? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Qwerfjkltalk 12:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree with keeping but purge per AHI-3000. The prison escapees category is rightly a subcategory of
Category:Fictional fugitives, so prison escapees should be
diffused properly. HouseBlaster (
talk · he/him) 16:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:People by former city
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: I think we should broaden this category to be populated place, in the same spirit as other recent CFDs
Mason (
talk) 12:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Rename, for consistency with many other similar renames.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 19:29, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory and one article. Merging to
Category:Discrimination is not needed, both entries are already in that tree. The article is also in both other parents, while I doubt that the subcategory would belong there.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom
Mason (
talk) 12:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Azulejos
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: rename/merge per actual content, all articles in these categories are about buildings and structures.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 08:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Mason (
talk) 17:29, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
By period
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Support per nom
Mason (
talk) 12:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Support: Seems reasonable.
BOZ (
talk) 13:46, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddy
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation. There are only three pages total in this entire tree. Created by a disruptive, now banned editor.
Mason (
talk) 05:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, the articles are already directly interlinked.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:20th-century Greek American writers
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining four-way (4) intersection of century + nationality + occupation + ethnic/national descent
Mason (
talk) 03:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge, trivial intersection between century and ancestors' nationality.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:English queer actresses
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's no need to have a single page in a category. I strongly urge the page creator to populate categories they create.
Mason (
talk) 01:17, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge for now, without objection to recreate the category when some more articles can be added.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:54, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I'd be happy to keep the category, instead of merging. Especially now that it is clear that these categories were depopulated out of process.
Mason (
talk) 19:52, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There is a list and a single baron in here, which is not helpful for navigation
Mason (
talk) 01:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Pigasse family
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: This family category is an uncle-nephew pair, which doesn't need a category for navigation
Mason (
talk) 01:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, the articles are already directly interlinked.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:01, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Fézensac family
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Delete category. There's no actual people in this category and the only page is the county they share a name with. The child category is already categorized.
Mason (
talk) 01:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one person in each of these categories, which isn't helpful for navigation.
Mason (
talk) 00:04, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.