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

The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Assassinated CIA agents. No consensus to change "agents" to "officers". (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 18:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Murdered CIA agents to Category:Murdered CIA officers

Nominator's rationale: More accurate. Agents refers to someone recruited to spy, rather than an agent handler referred to as a case officer. This category includes agent handlers who were employees of CIA, rather than people the CIA recruited to spy on their behalf. Longhornsg ( talk) 00:37, 28 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Alt rename and re-parent to "Assassinated" instead of "Murdered" and purge articles about more casual murders. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:55, 8 March 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, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename as nominated or take the alternative?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I like the alternative per marco. Mason ( talk) 01:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Comment should this also include executed officers? And what of assets that have been assassinated or executed? (foreigners recruited as "agents" and fixers) -- 65.92.247.66 ( talk) 22:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC) reply

  No, because execution is mutually exclusive with murder and assassination. Although we could use a Category:Executed CIA officers. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 03:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• @ Smasongarrison and Marcocapelle: do you support renaming to Category:Assassinated CIA agents or Category:Assassinated CIA officers? House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

  I'm indifferent between officer and agent. Mason ( talk) 20:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

  • @ HouseBlaster: most articles in the category are about officers but not all, so let's keep it at agents. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• I forgot to ask Longhornsg if you have thoughts about the alt rename? Is it an acceptable compromise for you? House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 13:38, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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) – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 00:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:American theatre people by populated place to Category:Theatre people from Cleveland

Nominator's rationale: I think that we should repurpose this category to contain all of the theater people form Cleveland rather than delete it. Mason ( talk) 22:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Just delete, redundant category layer with only two subcategories which are both already in another subcategory in the tree of Category:People from Cleveland by occupation. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:14, 26 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: split and merge. (non-admin closure) – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 00:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose splitting Category:Theatre directors from Cleveland to Category:American theatre directors and Category:Theatre people from Cleveland
• Propose merging Category:Dramatists and playwrights from Cleveland to Category:Theatre people from Cleveland and Category:Writers from Cleveland and Category:American dramatists and playwrights

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There's no need to diffuse American dramatists and playwrights by city. Notably this is the _only_ city category. Mason ( talk) 22:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Support in principle, but do not merge to the non-existing Category:Theatre people from Cleveland, instead manually add articles of the first one to Category:People from Cleveland insofar they aren't already in that tree. The remainder of the merge can go ahead as proposed. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:18, 26 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: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Acquitted evangelical leaders to Category:People acquitted of crimes

Nominator's rationale: A trivial intersection. User:Namiba 19:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

  Support per nom Mason ( talk) 22:55, 25 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 00:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Languages used in recruitment of Central Armed Police Forces of India ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Languages used in Staff Selection Commission of India ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Languages used in Press Information Bureau of India ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Languages used in Prime Minister's Office of India ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:MILs in Central Board of Secondary Education of India ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:MILs in Indira Gandhi National Open University ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is all kind of language trivia and this is content that is better covered in the relevant articles and in Category:Official languages of India. PepperBeast (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:29, 25 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: rename to Category:Combined authorities and combined county authorities. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 11:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Combined authorities to Category:Combined authorities and combined county authorities

Nominator's rationale: The article Combined authorities and combined county authorities has been amended to include combined county authorities as they are similar to combined authorities. Other articles have been amended to reflect this change. The category should reflect this in the same manner, as it currently includes pages linked to it which are CCAs but appear in this category as CAs. TheBishopAndHolyPrince ( talk) 13:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Ok, but add "in England" (or is it UK?) for clarity. Johnbod ( talk) 14:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The main article does not include "in England". The template Template:Combined authorities and combined county authorities does not either. I would therefore propose to leave out "in England" so that it matches with the template, the article and the other text on the category page. 15:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC) TheBishopAndHolyPrince ( talk) 15:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Categories often need clearer names than articles, as here. Johnbod ( talk) 04:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Probably better the other way round as the article is confusing attempting to cover 2 separate things, the article needs splitting not the categories merging. Keith D ( talk) 22:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Comment I don't think it ne_eds to affect this discussion but the nominator has been indefinitely blocked so don't expect any response to questions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Yes, I didn't think he'd last. Johnbod ( talk) 04:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A concrete, updated proposal would be very much appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 19:25, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Rename to match the main article. I don't see why "in England" is necessary. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:59, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply
• Follow article, in this case rename category as nominated. If the article is split, per User:Keith D, then by all means follow that too. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC) reply
• Use England as this will collect various authorities that have been variously combined -- 65.92.247.66 ( talk) 05:12, 23 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Rename to match the main article. The article should not be split as other similar articles like Police and crime commissioner also includes police, fire and crime commissioners, as well as Directly elected mayors in England which is also in England, but not in such an organised way as the Combined authorities and combined county authorities article is. UnicornSherbert ( talk) 18:35, 25 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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 18:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Culture by city in China to Category:Culture by city in the People's Republic of China
  • Re-parent from Category:Chinese culture to Category:People's Republic of China culture ( Category:Culture of the People's Republic of China)

Nominator's rationale: This category excludes all cities in Taiwan, which has a separate category: Category:Culture by city in Taiwan. Therefore, it's not all of 'China', but the PRC specifically. It should therefore also be re-parented from Category:Chinese culture to Category:People's Republic of China culture (now nommed for speedy renaming to Category:Culture of the People's Republic of China per C2D main article Culture of the People's Republic of China). Compare how the parent of Category:Culture by city in Taiwan is Category:Culture of Taiwan, not Category:Chinese culture. NLeeuw ( talk) 09:41, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• China after 1949 is considered to be synonymous with the People's Republic. This would require a much broader discussion than just about culture, but I doubt the discussion would lead somewhere. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

  We don't have to. Our category trees and main articles are quite clear:

  • Chinese culture > Category:Chinese culture (has nothing to do with countries, but with Chinese 'civilisation')
  • Culture of Taiwan > Category:Culture of Taiwan (the Republic of China)
  • Culture of the People's Republic of China > Category:People's Republic of China culture (the PRC)

  If we re-parent it as I proposed, it all makes sense. NLeeuw ( talk) 10:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

  • • It leaves the problem that "by city in the People's Republic of China" is considered to be equivalent to "by city in China" even without renaming. Category:Cities in China does not contain cities in Taiwan. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:54, 10 March 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) 19:08, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment: Those who voted for the China–PRC merger never bothered to figure out what to do with topics as such. Topics associated with culture of the PRC, e.g., should certainly be fed to a category similarly named but such scenarios have simply been ignored. 188.211.233.131 ( talk) 07:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC) reply

There are topical subcategories for the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Serbia and Montenegro, the United Provinces of the Netherlands (the Dutch Republic), the Orange Free State, the Transvaal Republic, the United Province of Canada, the Kingdom of Great Britain, the Confederate State of America, Pakistan, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, and so on and so forth. Why can't there be subcategories for the PRC? 188.211.233.131 ( talk) 16:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• This is completely beside the point. The correct analogy would be that we do not have a Category:Culture by city in the Soviet Union either. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:19, 20 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• What about Indian foo and Foo of the Republic of India, for instance? The former may according to contexts covers Pakistan and/or Bangladesh and that the latter is a subset of the former. 188.211.233.131 ( talk) 08:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• We do not have a Category:Culture by city in the Republic of India either. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Update proposed parent Category:People's Republic of China culture has been moved to Category:Culture of the People's Republic of China. I should add that I was honestly not aware that on English Wikipedia, People's Republic of China has been a redirect to China since 2011. I've been accustomed to the situation on Dutch Wikipedia where the PRC article is titled nl:Volksrepubliek China, and "China" is a DP. That does put my nomination in a different light as @ Marcocapelle mentioned. Given that the other parent is Category:Cities in China with main article List of cities in China, I think the rest of the nomination stands no chance. I think I'll be content with the re-parenting, and accept that the catname stays as it is. NLeeuw ( talk) 06:30, 21 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• From when on would it be right to equate the Soviet Union with Russia, or Malaya with Malaysia, or England or Great Britain with the United Kingdom, for the purpose of categorisation on Wikipedia? 188.211.233.131 ( talk) 08:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Rename and re-parent per nom. 121.202.28.169 ( talk) 11:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

  Comment: To the closer: the IPs are all are probably the same IP (see: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:185.104.63.112_reported_by_User:Smasongarrison_(Result:_Blocked), and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/185.104.63.112) Mason ( talk) 23:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:50, 25 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: upmerge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 20:27, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose splitting Category:Roman villas in Germany to Category:Roman villa and Category:Villas in Germany

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Only one villa in here, which is unhelpful for navigation. Mason ( talk) 03:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep: Seems useful in connection with Category:Roman villas by country.-- Ipigott ( talk) 06:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Triple merge, per nom, but also to Category:Ancient Roman buildings and structures in Germany. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep as part of a wider scheme Category:Roman villas by country. Plus others may well be added over time. Johnbod ( talk) 14:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

The category can be recreated when there are more pages to add. I really tried to find anything that could be added, and turned up nothing. Mason ( talk) 16:57, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will note that WP:SMALLCAT has been deprecated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 19:08, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:49, 25 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. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 20:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Personifications in mythology and religion to Category:Personifications
• Propose deleting Category:Personifications in Greek mythology
• Propose deleting Category:Personifications in Mandaeism
• Propose deleting Category:Personifications in Norse mythology
• Propose deleting Category:Personifications in Roman mythology

Nominator's rationale: merge/delete, it happens so often that deities of these ancient and medieval mythologies are personifications of something that it does not differentiate them at all. Put it more precisely, it is not defining that they are the personification of something, it is only defining what they personify, and Category:Deities by association suffices for the latter purpose. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Support, if only because most if not all polytheistic deities are personifications of various concepts, and I agree that Category:Deities by association serves that purpose better. AHI-3000 ( talk) 22:32, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Keep, these well-populated categories, per nom that "it happens so often that deities of these ancient and medieval mythologies are personifications of something" seems to be a fact and observation in favor of keeping the pages instead of a negative blow to their existence. Personifications are a "thing", not an abstract thought or whim. Randy Kryn ( talk) 11:04, 15 March 2024 (UTC) reply
• Keep: those categories are sufficiently and clearly defined within their contexts in mythology and folklore, since all of them were/are considered to be inseparable from the things they personify. Personifications have been a thing since a very long time, and are easily recognised and differentiated. Moreover, all those categories have enough pages that merging them would do the opposite of cleaning up. Deiadameian ( talk) 10:11, 17 March 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, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Keep per keepers, with the exception of Category:Personifications in Mandaeism where the figures don't seem to be3 personifications. Johnbod ( talk) 14:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC) reply
• Opposers seem to think that the nomination would entirely abolish personifications. That is not the case and not the intention. Personifications are still kept in place in Category:Deities by association. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Keep: The issue may be the misunderstanding and misuse of the category. Most deities in Greek and Roman myths are not personifications; they embody or possess certain powers (and "associations"), but they are both cultivated as deities and treated as superhuman figures who play roles in narratives (myths). Personifications, however, are properly single-focus divinities such as Virtus or Fides (deity) who embody abstractions such as virtues or ideas; these are not actually "mythological" figures because they have no myths (no stories). They have temples, for example, or serve as icons, as on coins. In that sense they are part of Roman religion, not Roman mythology. I don't know what the nominator means in the phrase "something that it does not differentiate them at all." Medieval personification is also not the same as ancient, since personifications are allegorical or mystical aspects within a monotheistic tradition; they are not deities but are part of what we might neutrally call Christian mythology in a technical sense of narratives that explore universal truths. "Lady Liberty," by contrast, is an example of a secular (or secularized) personification. Cynwolfe ( talk) 14:33, 31 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• This would very strongly reduce the content of these categories. It is (in quantitative sense) much closer to delete than to keep. I just wonder if it would be maintainable like that. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:43, 31 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: merge to Category:Social groups of Tamil Nadu. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 23:53, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Tamil clans to Category:Social groups of Tamil Nadu

Nominator's rationale: New category outside existing hierarchies, with only one member page. Category:Clans includes Gurjar clans, Rajput clans and Vellalar clans, but I believe those are the only other categories for "clans" within Category:Social groups of India. – Fayenatic London 17:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• The category was created by an account that has since been blocked. – Fayenatic London 17:39, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply
• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:36, 25 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: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 17:14, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Funerals in Pakistan to Category:Ceremonies in Pakistan, Category:Historical events in Pakistan and Category:Death in Pakistan

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary layer now that all contents are in a "State funerals" subcat. – Fayenatic London 16:50, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:43, 25 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. No prejudice against a fresh nomination with analysis of what terms reliable sources use. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 23:53, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Apostles (LDS Church) to Category:Apostles (The Church of Jesus Christ)
• Propose renaming Category:Presidents of the Church (LDS Church) to Category:Presidents of the Church (The Church of Jesus Christ)
• Propose renaming Category:Presidents of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (LDS Church) to Category:Presidents of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (The Church of Jesus Christ)

Nominator's rationale: According to the official style guide for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, When a shortened reference is needed, the terms “the Church” or the “Church of Jesus Christ” are encouraged. The “restored Church of Jesus Christ” is also accurate and encouraged. DarthTanner421 ( talk) 16:34, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• This is not a convincing argument. You need to make a case that reliable sources commonly use the expression "The Church of Jesus Christ". Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

  I second Marco on this. Unless you can demonstrate that this is standard practice or in numerous non-affiliated credible style guides, I oppose this rename. Mason ( talk) 23:59, 28 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 ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 17:14, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Rob Gronkowski ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Contains only Super Bowl LIII and Super Bowl LV, insufficient content for WP:EPONCAT. – Fayenatic London 16:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars ^{Talk to me} 04:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete: Per nom. Hey man im josh ( talk) 18:33, 27 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: withdrawn. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 14:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Private space missions to Category:Private spaceflight

Nominator's rationale: Merge and redirect. Space mission redirects to Spaceflight#Terminology. – Fayenatic London 15:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge for now as it is a very small category. Hypothetically this could become a set category while Category:Private spaceflight would serve as a topic category. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply
• Keep it is merely not being populated. All the missions currently in Category:New Shepard missions would qualify for this category (though not necessarily all of them in the future, if a government charters a spaceflight); as would most of the missions in Category:SpaceShipTwo except the one chartered by the Italian Space Agency and the ones that did not reach space; as would all the missions in Category:Axiom Space; and all the space missions in Category:SpaceShipOne not including the ones that did not reach space. There's also the Russian movie filmed on the ISS, which would be its own space mission, in addition to riding with people on other missions. -- 65.92.247.66 ( talk) 21:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Feel free to add articles to the category as appropriate. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply
  • @ Marcocapelle and Fayenatic london: do you still support merging? House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 23:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• @ HouseBlaster: with 20 articles now in the category the nomination has become moot. Marcocapelle ( talk) 03:15, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Withdraw – even though the category creator had no objection. [1] There is a category hierarchy Category:Space missions but the creator had not added this as a parent. I have added it now and, given this and the added population, the category now looks a lot more useful. – Fayenatic London 11:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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. No prejudice against a nomination of the entire tree. (non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 11:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Diocesan Girls' School to Category:Alumnae of Diocesan Girls' School

Nominator's rationale: Typo. Diocesan Girls' School is a girls' school and the word "alumnae" should be used instead. Prince of Erebor（ The Book of Mazarbul） 10:40, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Oppose. We don't use the female version for alumni for categories. Mason ( talk) 23:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Rename per nom. Remarks: This isn't probably the case of DGS, but there are women's education institutions which are having or had at some point male students, or vice versa, e.g. YWGS, SSGC, or SJA, especially when there were matriculation classes for the A-levels (SJA went on to become coeducational). 61.244.93.97 ( talk) 05:58, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply
• I have seen Mason's argument before. It would be useful for the progress of the discussion if someone would provide examples of other girls' schools. I do not have an opinion myself, except let's just follow convention. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply

  I'm looking through categories here to see what the examples are: Category:Girls'_schools_by_country. @ Marcocapelle:. Mason ( talk) 23:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC) reply

  Category:St. Raphael's Convent Girls High School alumni‎

  Category:People educated at Manor House School, Raheny‎

  Category:People educated at Bury Grammar School (Girls)‎

  Category:People educated at the Hollies Convent Grammar School‎

  Category:People educated at Stand Grammar School‎

  Category:Sacred Heart Academy (Louisville) alumni‎

  Category:Assumption High School (Kentucky) alumni‎

  Category:Garrison Forest School people‎

  Category:Bryn Mawr School people‎

My impression is that all the names follow the convention for co-ed schools. Mason ( talk) 23:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Oppose per Mason's survey. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:39, 29 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: merge ( non-admin closure) House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 17:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Russian comedians by city to Category:Russian comedians and Category:Comedians by city
• Propose merging Category:New Zealand comedians by city to Category:New Zealand comedians and Category:Comedians by city
• Propose merging Category:Japanese comedians by city to Category:Japanese comedians and Category:Comedians by city
• Propose merging Category:Malian businesspeople by city to Category:Malian businesspeople and Category:Businesspeople by city

Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge for now. There's only one city in each of these categories, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason ( talk) 01:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:00, 25 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.